I think the PM role is largely one of communication, of signals, and of confidence. A large issue that seems to continually crop up is that PMs are insecure in one form or fashion, and overcompensate (see: Jargon Jockey, Steve Jobs, Hero, Overachiever, and Martyr) for those in a not merely just unproductive, but sometimes even directly detrimental fashion. PMs are fundamentally bureaucrats in the traditional Weberian sense, but bureaucracy is sometimes necessary to get things done, especially in larger organizations. An effective bureaucrat is a boon, and an ineffective one is a rent-seeker who knows it. Hence the insecurities and overcompensation.
I also drew parallels between Product Managers (ultimately responsible for the outcomes of the product, even if they’re not involved in day-to-day ops) and Product Owners (responsible for such day-to-day ops) as the notional divide, drawing again upon my military experience, as the dynamic of the Platoon Leader (PL) and the Platoon Sergeant (PS). PLs are often freshly appointed Lieutenants with minimal actual experience or relationship to the enlisted members of the platoon, while the PS has been with the enlisted for a while. The PS is responsible for the day-to-day execution, and the PL is nominally responsible for everything the platoon does, especially when they fuck up. Most people don’t respect new PLs unless they earn it, and bad PLs often compensate by doing too much.
That’s to say that the first chapter was extremely helpful in laying out exactly what a PM does — which is to say, everything the team might need. No job is too small, and no responsibility is too large.
