Should I take this product manager job?
August 26, 2008 8:39 PM Subscribe
A small software company has offered me a position as a product manager. Should I take it?
I don't have a product management background, or a background in marketing, but from what I understand of the position, I have a lot of transferable skills (I specialize in survey design, research, and analysis, and have strong written communications skills; I also have considerable soft skills such as consensus building and relationship management; I'm also an information junky).I'm a good fit with the company (one hundred employees), and I like and respect the manager (one tier down - but a peer of the CEO - from the leadership).
In my work at an industry I've also set up and run a product manager SIG (but I set up a number of SIG's) and I understand what the job basically is, but what exactly *is* a product manager? What kind of person is a product manager? I understand that product management is "market research + strategic marketing + change management", but who are product managers?
I have the feeling that product managers can be pretty cerebral, and that if you are too cerebral (that is, you value theory over sales instinct) you will be out of a job. I also understand that product managers can often cause problems for the people that have to engineer solutions.
Product managers also seem to be kind of a luxury, and are often discarded following an acquisition or an economic downturn. Is this assumption correct?
And I'm wondering where all of this would eventually lead. I'm in government now (doing a mix of change management, relationship management, business development, communications, event planning, program development and project management) and I like my position, but since changing careers about four years ago from being a teacher, I've always wanted to work in industry.
However, if I take this job based on my skillset, my intelligence, and my knowledge of the software platform and its market environment, but the job doesn't work out, I'm wondering if other companies in town would hire me as a product manager.
For those people familiar with product management, what do you think?
I don't have a product management background, or a background in marketing, but from what I understand of the position, I have a lot of transferable skills (I specialize in survey design, research, and analysis, and have strong written communications skills; I also have considerable soft skills such as consensus building and relationship management; I'm also an information junky).I'm a good fit with the company (one hundred employees), and I like and respect the manager (one tier down - but a peer of the CEO - from the leadership).
In my work at an industry I've also set up and run a product manager SIG (but I set up a number of SIG's) and I understand what the job basically is, but what exactly *is* a product manager? What kind of person is a product manager? I understand that product management is "market research + strategic marketing + change management", but who are product managers?
I have the feeling that product managers can be pretty cerebral, and that if you are too cerebral (that is, you value theory over sales instinct) you will be out of a job. I also understand that product managers can often cause problems for the people that have to engineer solutions.
Product managers also seem to be kind of a luxury, and are often discarded following an acquisition or an economic downturn. Is this assumption correct?
And I'm wondering where all of this would eventually lead. I'm in government now (doing a mix of change management, relationship management, business development, communications, event planning, program development and project management) and I like my position, but since changing careers about four years ago from being a teacher, I've always wanted to work in industry.
However, if I take this job based on my skillset, my intelligence, and my knowledge of the software platform and its market environment, but the job doesn't work out, I'm wondering if other companies in town would hire me as a product manager.
For those people familiar with product management, what do you think?
Best answer: Engineering builds the product.
Marketing (aka Marketing Communications aka MarCom) sells the product to many people at once and/or generates sales leads.
Sales sells the product to one person at a time and/or closes leads.
Executive Managment ensures that everyone is doing their jobs and is the right for for their position.
Support answers the phones.
(etc etc)
But who decides what features should be in the product?
That's the job of Product Management. It's where customer needs meets corporate capabilities.
I also understand that product managers can often cause problems for the people that have to engineer solutions.
Only in that engineers often want to build products no one wants to buy.
Product managers also seem to be kind of a luxury, and are often discarded following an acquisition or an economic downturn. Is this assumption correct?
Every software company > 100 employees (possibly > 50) needs a Product Manager. It's not really a luxury. Sometimes there is a Product Manager who has a different job title (maybe even CTO) but there's always a Product Manager.
The issue of layoffs following acquisitions is separate - acquisitions always have multiple layoffs across the board. I have seen Product Managers go both up and down/out following acquisitions.
I'm wondering if other companies in town would hire me as a product manager.
Well, really, there's no way to know, but I have seen Product Managers move between companies pretty well once they have a solid understanding of their role in the company.
I've done software product management for years at a number of small companies. Feel free to email me.
posted by GuyZero at 10:21 PM on August 26, 2008 [2 favorites]
Marketing (aka Marketing Communications aka MarCom) sells the product to many people at once and/or generates sales leads.
Sales sells the product to one person at a time and/or closes leads.
Executive Managment ensures that everyone is doing their jobs and is the right for for their position.
Support answers the phones.
(etc etc)
But who decides what features should be in the product?
That's the job of Product Management. It's where customer needs meets corporate capabilities.
I also understand that product managers can often cause problems for the people that have to engineer solutions.
Only in that engineers often want to build products no one wants to buy.
Product managers also seem to be kind of a luxury, and are often discarded following an acquisition or an economic downturn. Is this assumption correct?
Every software company > 100 employees (possibly > 50) needs a Product Manager. It's not really a luxury. Sometimes there is a Product Manager who has a different job title (maybe even CTO) but there's always a Product Manager.
The issue of layoffs following acquisitions is separate - acquisitions always have multiple layoffs across the board. I have seen Product Managers go both up and down/out following acquisitions.
I'm wondering if other companies in town would hire me as a product manager.
Well, really, there's no way to know, but I have seen Product Managers move between companies pretty well once they have a solid understanding of their role in the company.
I've done software product management for years at a number of small companies. Feel free to email me.
posted by GuyZero at 10:21 PM on August 26, 2008 [2 favorites]
It's up to the engineers and program managers to push back if it's not feasible or in conflict with the engineers' vision of the product.
The engineers' vision of the product? How many copies of the product are they buying? None?
Their vision is to build what paying customers will use.
posted by GuyZero at 10:23 PM on August 26, 2008
The engineers' vision of the product? How many copies of the product are they buying? None?
Their vision is to build what paying customers will use.
posted by GuyZero at 10:23 PM on August 26, 2008
The engineers' vision of the product? How many copies of the product are they buying? None?
BTW, this is the kind of attitude you don't want to have as a product manager.
posted by ignignokt at 10:30 PM on August 26, 2008
BTW, this is the kind of attitude you don't want to have as a product manager.
posted by ignignokt at 10:30 PM on August 26, 2008
Response by poster: Then my assumptions about the dynamic that exists between engineers and product managers is correct. But I'm sure working in upper-mid-tier government will have prepared me for this.
posted by KokuRyu at 10:40 PM on August 26, 2008
posted by KokuRyu at 10:40 PM on August 26, 2008
Their vision is to build what paying customers will use.
Engineers are not housepainters, and a product manager worth his salt knows that. The "vision" or role of the engineer in this relationship is to communicate back to the product manager when meeting the full spec of the requested product will in some way compromise the product as a whole. For example, if your product manager has determined through marketing etc that customers want a car with 20 cylinders and 8 wheels, the engineers need to say "sorry, product manager, that leaves no room for the seats" and then the compromise between marketing ideal and engineering reality is brokered by the product manager.
The engineer and the product manager aren't and shouldn't be enemies, but imperious BS like that (and if I'm reading tone into your sentence that isn't there I aplogize and retract) is a reason that many engineering depts don't like product managers.
posted by thedaniel at 11:13 PM on August 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
Engineers are not housepainters, and a product manager worth his salt knows that. The "vision" or role of the engineer in this relationship is to communicate back to the product manager when meeting the full spec of the requested product will in some way compromise the product as a whole. For example, if your product manager has determined through marketing etc that customers want a car with 20 cylinders and 8 wheels, the engineers need to say "sorry, product manager, that leaves no room for the seats" and then the compromise between marketing ideal and engineering reality is brokered by the product manager.
The engineer and the product manager aren't and shouldn't be enemies, but imperious BS like that (and if I'm reading tone into your sentence that isn't there I aplogize and retract) is a reason that many engineering depts don't like product managers.
posted by thedaniel at 11:13 PM on August 26, 2008 [1 favorite]
Best answer: Do you understand the product, the market, the competitive landscape? Can you translate that understanding into features that customers will purchase? Do you understand what it takes to go from a concept to a deployment.
If the answers are yes, yes, and yes, then you're ready for the job.
posted by 26.2 at 11:40 PM on August 26, 2008
If the answers are yes, yes, and yes, then you're ready for the job.
posted by 26.2 at 11:40 PM on August 26, 2008
What, a small software company in your neck of the woods? Hell, no. You have a steady job now; keep it. You wouldn't be moving into That Great Dream Job, and you have a family. It would be a foolish risk.
posted by ten pounds of inedita at 12:42 AM on August 27, 2008
posted by ten pounds of inedita at 12:42 AM on August 27, 2008
I've worked for a lot of small software companies, and here's what I want to find out before I sign on (among other things):
How stable is the software company?
How fast are they growing?
Have they had layoffs recently (in the last couple of years or so)?
Are they dependent on venture capital funding to survive, or do they have a stable base of actual customers?
If you like the answers to these questions, you might consider jumping. But small software companies are not secure places to work. If you have a family, and want to ensure a stable income, this isn't the best choice for you.
posted by davetill at 5:05 AM on August 27, 2008 [1 favorite]
How stable is the software company?
How fast are they growing?
Have they had layoffs recently (in the last couple of years or so)?
Are they dependent on venture capital funding to survive, or do they have a stable base of actual customers?
If you like the answers to these questions, you might consider jumping. But small software companies are not secure places to work. If you have a family, and want to ensure a stable income, this isn't the best choice for you.
posted by davetill at 5:05 AM on August 27, 2008 [1 favorite]
Response by poster: I can't really answer the questions about the company without identifying the company (someone could easily find out in what geographic region I live, and anyone familiar with the tech industry would, based on even a general description, know which company it is), but I will say that the company has 120 employees, which is small by American standards, and doesn't raise any of davetill's red flags. Besides, I work for government, and, as a manager, am excluded from the collective agreement. Job stability is non-existent (but I'm fine with that).
The most serious question I have is with their product itself, and that's one area where I have to do more research.
posted by KokuRyu at 6:47 AM on August 27, 2008
The most serious question I have is with their product itself, and that's one area where I have to do more research.
posted by KokuRyu at 6:47 AM on August 27, 2008
A Product Manger that has experience on the engineering or software development side is a god send, because they can do the preliminary thinking on what exactly is feasible and what is fantasy on their own, thus saving a lot of eye rolling from the actual engineers/developers. Sounds like you have both sides of the equation and would probably be extremely successful.
posted by spicynuts at 6:48 AM on August 27, 2008
posted by spicynuts at 6:48 AM on August 27, 2008
How fast are they growing?
Also..do they have a tested and internally accepted process? If they are small and growing too fast, there might not be good processes in place for efficient project management or communication between Product Mgrs and developers.
posted by spicynuts at 6:49 AM on August 27, 2008
Also..do they have a tested and internally accepted process? If they are small and growing too fast, there might not be good processes in place for efficient project management or communication between Product Mgrs and developers.
posted by spicynuts at 6:49 AM on August 27, 2008
Response by poster: davetill asks the obvious questions, and I'm pretty sure that the company will train me on what I don't know (how this makes the engineering side of the equation feel, I don't know). But say the company folds in two or three years and I need to find a new job, I wonder if any other tech companies in town will hire me as a product manager (I don't have a BComm or any formal training)...
posted by KokuRyu at 7:08 AM on August 27, 2008
posted by KokuRyu at 7:08 AM on August 27, 2008
At one firm I worked at, Product Management's job was effectively to take stuff they saw in RFPs alone with input from what people told sales and prioritize them. This pretty much meant sales owned dev's time, instead of Products owning it.
You could also make the argument that part of a Product Manager's job is to specify functionality that looks good in a demo.
posted by charlesv at 8:06 AM on August 27, 2008
You could also make the argument that part of a Product Manager's job is to specify functionality that looks good in a demo.
posted by charlesv at 8:06 AM on August 27, 2008
but imperious BS like that (and if I'm reading tone into your sentence that isn't there I aplogize and retract) is a reason that many engineering depts don't like product managers.
So I should back peddle a bit here I suppose. There are bad engineering teams that get too fixated on making changes to products that have no impact to the customer. There are bad product managers that are full of BS and add no value to the product development process. I have worked with a number of good teams but never a perfect team - every team has some flavour and degree of dysfunction. As a PM I tend to fixate on the dev dysfunction but I would be naive to say that PM is always perfect. There are certainly good developers that add a lot of value in translating customer needs into features. But depending on the product domain the developers may have little to no idea how users actually use the product.
And, I should note, the PM's opinion is no more important to determining product features than the dev team's is. Product development is about research and data, not about opinions and the PM's job is to gather and analyze the data which is why he gets to make the final decision. But I don't think that the PM has special magical powers of feature selection. And feature prioritization is always done in conjunction with dev. It's just not possible for any one party do do feature prioritization on their own.
I'm pretty sure that the company will train me on what I don't know
There's a very good and well-known course run by Pragmatic Marketing on Product Management. It's not a perfect course, but it is a very good overview of the PM role. You should absolutely take it if you take the job.
(I don't have a BComm or any formal training)
I have personally known career product managers without technical degrees. One had an english degree. One guy had a background in tech writing (and and undergrad in physics - is that technical?) A MBA or an engineering degree might help but they're by no means a requirement for being a successful Product Manager. All of them have navigated between multiple companies as PMs with success.
posted by GuyZero at 9:03 AM on August 27, 2008
So I should back peddle a bit here I suppose. There are bad engineering teams that get too fixated on making changes to products that have no impact to the customer. There are bad product managers that are full of BS and add no value to the product development process. I have worked with a number of good teams but never a perfect team - every team has some flavour and degree of dysfunction. As a PM I tend to fixate on the dev dysfunction but I would be naive to say that PM is always perfect. There are certainly good developers that add a lot of value in translating customer needs into features. But depending on the product domain the developers may have little to no idea how users actually use the product.
And, I should note, the PM's opinion is no more important to determining product features than the dev team's is. Product development is about research and data, not about opinions and the PM's job is to gather and analyze the data which is why he gets to make the final decision. But I don't think that the PM has special magical powers of feature selection. And feature prioritization is always done in conjunction with dev. It's just not possible for any one party do do feature prioritization on their own.
I'm pretty sure that the company will train me on what I don't know
There's a very good and well-known course run by Pragmatic Marketing on Product Management. It's not a perfect course, but it is a very good overview of the PM role. You should absolutely take it if you take the job.
(I don't have a BComm or any formal training)
I have personally known career product managers without technical degrees. One had an english degree. One guy had a background in tech writing (and and undergrad in physics - is that technical?) A MBA or an engineering degree might help but they're by no means a requirement for being a successful Product Manager. All of them have navigated between multiple companies as PMs with success.
posted by GuyZero at 9:03 AM on August 27, 2008
Response by poster: There's a very good and well-known course run by Pragmatic Marketing on Product Management.
The hiring manager does not have a formal product manager background, but swears by pragmatic marketing...
posted by KokuRyu at 12:32 PM on August 27, 2008
The hiring manager does not have a formal product manager background, but swears by pragmatic marketing...
posted by KokuRyu at 12:32 PM on August 27, 2008
At the very large software company where I worked in Australia for a few years -- basically running a team incubating a next-gen product/service for the client base from conception to taking it to market -- product managers were the folks who were the interface between corporate planning, clients, development, Q&A, sales and marketing, and, you know, pretty much everyone else. The successful ones were very sales-y and client-service focussed, to my mind, but I think this was in part because a lot of their job at this particular company was managing client perceptions during a very slow and overdue transition to new technologies for a suite of software products/services we provided. These products were absolutely mission critical stuff to our clients, and 100% reliability was a fundamental requirement. As a result, change was glacially slow, and even circa 2000, at that time, much of the interface was still green-screeny text-based stuff.
It all went to hell because of extremely poor decisions in terms of the technology transition to GUI versions of the products (and a decision to outsource core development of the flagship products to India, which was a MASSIVE FAIL), amongst other reasons, but it was a case study of sorts.
The product managers who had a more technical bent were the ones who actually knew what was going wrong, and to my mind were more capable, but they were the ones who jumped ship once it was clear that things were going to go kablooie, and probably hurt for it, despite the fact that they were not the ones who made the poor upper-level decisions, for the most part. The fast-talkers and gladhanders, well, they made it through, mostly because they could duck responsibility. It was a pretty clear reversal of what should have happened, which is so often the case when sales and marketing trumps engineering at software houses. See also: Symantec.
Oh man, what a time that was.
My team's game-changing product got shitcanned just as we were ready to take it to market, for political reasons, just as the tech crunch was gaining steam in mid 2001. Sigh.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 12:05 AM on August 28, 2008 [1 favorite]
It all went to hell because of extremely poor decisions in terms of the technology transition to GUI versions of the products (and a decision to outsource core development of the flagship products to India, which was a MASSIVE FAIL), amongst other reasons, but it was a case study of sorts.
The product managers who had a more technical bent were the ones who actually knew what was going wrong, and to my mind were more capable, but they were the ones who jumped ship once it was clear that things were going to go kablooie, and probably hurt for it, despite the fact that they were not the ones who made the poor upper-level decisions, for the most part. The fast-talkers and gladhanders, well, they made it through, mostly because they could duck responsibility. It was a pretty clear reversal of what should have happened, which is so often the case when sales and marketing trumps engineering at software houses. See also: Symantec.
Oh man, what a time that was.
My team's game-changing product got shitcanned just as we were ready to take it to market, for political reasons, just as the tech crunch was gaining steam in mid 2001. Sigh.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 12:05 AM on August 28, 2008 [1 favorite]
Response by poster: They ended up hiring someone else with 20+ years of industry experience
posted by KokuRyu at 4:34 PM on February 4, 2009
posted by KokuRyu at 4:34 PM on February 4, 2009
This thread is closed to new comments.
In short, they figure out what changes to the product or what new products would bring in the most money, then push for them.
I've never met a cerebral product manager, although one was at least usually thoughtful, but I think everyone would love to work with a cerebral product manager. Really, that could be said of almost any position, however.
posted by ignignokt at 9:40 PM on August 26, 2008