←back to thread

A PM's Guide to AI Agent Architecture

(www.productcurious.com)
205 points umangsehgal93 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
cyberpunk[dead post] ◴[] No.45131345[source]
[flagged]
tene80i ◴[] No.45131480[source]
There are bad PMs and good PMs, and bad engineers and good engineers. If you treat an entire profession with disdain, don’t be surprised if you get treated like that too.
replies(2): >>45131830 #>>45134320 #
mattmanser ◴[] No.45131830[source]
I know you probably feel you're being fair, but you're not.

There's a dichotomy in development where bad PMs can prosper in a way bad engineers can't.

There's no skill test for PMs, unlike engineers. Bad PMs can look like good PMs to senior management simply because they hold tons of meetings, kiss ass, over promise or steal credit. Any of those bad traits can fool senior management. But those are bad PMs.

On top of that, when you have a bad PM, there's a good chance the Devs themselves will step into the role and still deliver a product.

The bad PM will still take credit, obviously. A bad PM is often circumvented instead of exposed.

Conversely the opposite doesn't work, a good PM + bad Devs turns into never ending dev cycles. The PM looks bad even though there's nothing he can really do, unless he can fire/hire. The good PM cannot circumvent bad engineers.

And in the end, to find bad engineers you can just look at their code. If you don't have the skill to do that, or don't employ someone you know that can, you probably shouldn't be in the software development business.

replies(3): >>45131907 #>>45131928 #>>45133005 #
tene80i ◴[] No.45131928[source]
Well sure, I never said they were equivalent in all respects. Just that you can have good and bad versions of both. For sure the failure modes are different.

I challenge the idea that there is no skill test for PMs, though - take a PM interview at a serious product company some day.

And the PM role is of course more than just delivery. If they dropped dead the product would still get shipped. But then what? Someone would need to talk to customers, dig into data and figure out the roadmap. Other people can do it, but in a sufficiently complex company you might as well get people who are good at it and want to devote their time to it.

I understand why some engineers don’t like PMs. But it is exactly the same reason as why some PMs (and C-suites) view engineers as fungible resources who waste time on abstractions instead of shipping, and pad estimates and refuse to discuss practical tradeoffs to move quicker - it’s an unfair generalisation based on bad experiences.

I just think more respect all around wouldn’t hurt.

replies(2): >>45132060 #>>45136220 #
mattmanser ◴[] No.45136220{3}[source]
That's not a skill test, or you'd point to the "test" instead of telling me to interview for a job role. That's a skilled judgement.

It is a generalization, but it's not unfair. That's the mistake you're making. Is it "unfair" to call the British people Roast Beef, or calling French people Froggies. Those are generalizations but are fair (or were at least). British people genuinely eat a disproportionate amount of Roast Beef and French people genuinely eat Frogs legs.

And there are genuinely more bad PMs than good ones and lots of developers have experience "managing" their PM and trying to ensure they don't do too much harm, like the GP that started this discussion.

Don't worry, most engineers will quickly realize when a PM is good and let them do their job without "managing" them. In fact, it's a delight working with one as they do genuinely make the dev process so much better.

replies(1): >>45136446 #
tene80i ◴[] No.45136446{4}[source]
I’m really not sure what you’re arguing. You want a precise test for being a good PM, that can be marked like an examination with correct and incorrect answers? It’s not engineering - it’s a role largely to do with learning and measuring and facilitating streams of work across multiple different (highly opinionated!) types of professionals - user researchers, engineers, designers, marketers, copywriters, data scientists - all of whose expertise is needed to ensure good outcomes. The fact that it can’t be measured as a multiple choice test doesn’t mean it isn’t skill. But if you really want to go down that route, then you’d ask a PM to explain some ways of proving the value of a potential feature, or the different ways to prioritise a roadmap, or how to manage challenging stakeholders, or indeed how to get good outcomes from colleagues who insist that only they are the people with any kind of skill…

Don’t worry, PMs are also used to working with engineers who view their profession as the only special one. Managing that is part of how to get good outcomes.

If you’ve mainly encountered bad PMs, then hey I’m sorry for you. Find somewhere to work with better colleagues?

But you’ll not convince me that one profession is just inherently better than another. That’s silly, and speaks to a lack of empathy that is, if you’re still looking for a checkbox test for the role, the type of thing that would cause you to fail it immediately.

replies(2): >>45148208 #>>45158319 #
1. bazmattaz ◴[] No.45148208{5}[source]
Here here. Well said