After graduated from my university major " planning and project management " i now work as a PMO Head officer in a software organization, My obsession in project management made me thirsty to learn everything about it and i like that alot, The only obstacle i am facing right now is the lack of understanding the business environment of an IT technical background knowledge by its functional means and systematics, My query is should i gain actual knowledge in the IT Field related to software development so i can understand this particular industry that i'm working on by assuming that i would be an IT project manager in the future.If yes, what kind of certifications i can get ? and is it a requirement for the project manager (or any related positions to project management; such as project coordinator, PMO, etc) gain that knowledge ? Saving Changes...
I hate the term "experts", and honestly, throughout my 30 year career as an engineer involved with project management I can say I have met only a handful of people I would classify as experts. As such, it is my opinion, to dramatically increase the odds of success in a project, the PM must have extensive experience in that domain. This is just simple common sense. Would you want a PM to manage a ship building project with no ship building experience? Would you want a PM to manage a dam building project with no such experience?
I would suggest reading "The Path Between the Seas" by David McCullough for insight as to what happens when one has no such experience.
I think the level of knowledge is relative to the specific position. If you are building a dam, do you have to be an expert in hydro electric generator design, road construction, structural engineering, environmental impact studies, financing, legal issues, etc., or do you as the PM rely on the specialists for the details, and focus on the system level where Team A impacts Team B, and how the various technical risks can impact the entire project?
...
2 replies by Adrian Carlogea and Steve Ratkaj
Nov 18, 2019 12:44 PM
Steve Ratkaj
...
No you do not have to be "the" expert in areas of generator design, etc., etc., but having experience in that domain (mega construction) is a must IMHO. I'm sure if you were in control of hiring the PM, you would most definitely hire someone with similar experience as opposed to a "newbie".
Check out the link below, there are many reasons why this "dam" project is a abject failure, but there is a major technical flaw in the design that was raised, but ignored. It is a real tragedy for the taxpayers in Newfoundland, as they will bear the brunt in terms of the cost overruns.
As a PM you should have working experience in one of the project's relevant lines of work. Just one line of work not all of them. If you are a specialist in a line of work and you work on a project with specialists from other related lines of work you would learn at a high level what they are doing and would get some experience even in those lines of work.
A PM with no working experience in any line of work relevant to the project can still manage the project but he/she would be more or less confined to purely administrative work and would not be involved in any technical decision.
If you are managing an engineering project but you are not an engineer with a relevant specialization for the project or worse you are not an engineer at all you would never be able to gain enough knowledge to lead the project team. Still even in this situation you can manage the project by dealing with the issues that are not technical in nature (resourcing, finance, reporting, escalating, etc).
A PM with relevant domain knowledge would still rely on specialists from other lines of work but he would be able to make pertinent decisions regarding the work that has to be done and obviously would be able to manage risks better.
I hate the term "experts", and honestly, throughout my 30 year career as an engineer involved with project management I can say I have met only a handful of people I would classify as experts. As such, it is my opinion, to dramatically increase the odds of success in a project, the PM must have extensive experience in that domain. This is just simple common sense. Would you want a PM to manage a ship building project with no ship building experience? Would you want a PM to manage a dam building project with no such experience?
I would suggest reading "The Path Between the Seas" by David McCullough for insight as to what happens when one has no such experience.
How about "knowledgeable persons". Saving Changes...
I think the level of knowledge is relative to the specific position. If you are building a dam, do you have to be an expert in hydro electric generator design, road construction, structural engineering, environmental impact studies, financing, legal issues, etc., or do you as the PM rely on the specialists for the details, and focus on the system level where Team A impacts Team B, and how the various technical risks can impact the entire project?
No you do not have to be "the" expert in areas of generator design, etc., etc., but having experience in that domain (mega construction) is a must IMHO. I'm sure if you were in control of hiring the PM, you would most definitely hire someone with similar experience as opposed to a "newbie".
Check out the link below, there are many reasons why this "dam" project is a abject failure, but there is a major technical flaw in the design that was raised, but ignored. It is a real tragedy for the taxpayers in Newfoundland, as they will bear the brunt in terms of the cost overruns.
I think the level of knowledge is relative to the specific position. If you are building a dam, do you have to be an expert in hydro electric generator design, road construction, structural engineering, environmental impact studies, financing, legal issues, etc., or do you as the PM rely on the specialists for the details, and focus on the system level where Team A impacts Team B, and how the various technical risks can impact the entire project?
As a PM you should have working experience in one of the project's relevant lines of work. Just one line of work not all of them. If you are a specialist in a line of work and you work on a project with specialists from other related lines of work you would learn at a high level what they are doing and would get some experience even in those lines of work.
A PM with no working experience in any line of work relevant to the project can still manage the project but he/she would be more or less confined to purely administrative work and would not be involved in any technical decision.
If you are managing an engineering project but you are not an engineer with a relevant specialization for the project or worse you are not an engineer at all you would never be able to gain enough knowledge to lead the project team. Still even in this situation you can manage the project by dealing with the issues that are not technical in nature (resourcing, finance, reporting, escalating, etc).
A PM with relevant domain knowledge would still rely on specialists from other lines of work but he would be able to make pertinent decisions regarding the work that has to be done and obviously would be able to manage risks better. Saving Changes...
I won't argue for a minute that you can be an effective PM without having any domain knowledge, but I do see that sometimes people think they must be a technical expert. In some cases, that is true. With most of our detail level designs (which can be quite complex in their own right) the lead engineer or another technical SME serves as the PM.
On projects that involve many technical disciplines, the PM must rely more on the Systems Engineer, Chief Engineer, System Architect, or whatever the title of the person with primary responsibility for product development. Both roles have to be quite clear on what the other does, but there is too much for one to do. The technical lead defines the solution, the PM facilitates that work happening.
When I look at case studies of failures like the Muskrat Falls dam, I am struck by the question, "Who actually reviewed your plan?" When I deal with big projects where the PM doesn't know all the details, one of the questions asked is who all reviewed this from the technical disciplines and did you involve all the right people. My job is to know enough to involve the right people.
I don't even trust my own work until I've had knowledgeable people review it. You can get too close to your own work, develop blind spots, have confirmation biases, and what may seem perfectly clear in my own head doesn't make sense to others.
I like George's term "Architectural Awareness" in this regard. It enables identifying and bringing the right people together who can form a consensus on difficult decisions, rather than the PM must be the one who calls all the shots. Saving Changes...
Unless the PM has more knowledge than an expert, then he/she is bound to still make mistakes. A good approach is to include a very clear assumption that some decisions are made based on the advice and recommendations of the experts. I understand the argument about PM's having domain knowledge; I'm all for it. But if experts who invariably have more knowledge than the PM are available, and with the assumption I mentioned above in place, then the PM is a lot safer.
"[...] that some decisions are made based on the advice and recommendations of the experts"
When the PM has no domain knowledge the decisions are not made at the recommendations of the experts but they are made by the experts period.
If you are not an expert in a certain field how can you decide if the "recommendations" made by the experts in that field are good or not?
In real life PMs with no domain knowledge would not even think to question the decisions of the specialists. In fact it is not even their duty to do so. They just have to ensure that there are specialists on the project and that they have taken over the work and have made the decisions that are needed to complete the work.
When the PM has working experience in a relevant line of work he can question the specialists and raise issues about their plans.
...
1 reply by Keith Novak
Nov 18, 2019 7:34 PM
Keith Novak
...
How much of the technical decision making needs to be the responsibility of the PM? In many places, the PM works closely with some technical principal. That is delegated authority based the capabilities of the individual given the authority.
I found if fascinating wen involved in distributed computing systems, how the algorithms they use to pass data efficiently and control the actions of the whole system work like project management at a molecular level.
Some systems require a central controller to make all decisions. The system is limited by how fast that controller can process data, and raises the issue of what happens when the controller fails, or the PM gets hit by a bus?
Some systems generate consensus between a subset of the nodes, despite that not all of them agree. That has some limitations too like all nodes don't know what all is going on in every other node.
The Google File Systems is one of the fastest and most reliable in the world. That uses a central controller, but it only uses metadata so it is a lot less of a bottleneck for the rest of the system. The central controller has a backup for when it goes down.
I believe if you want to be an efficient PM, sometimes you need to be like the GFS, or you are the weak link on the team.
"[...] that some decisions are made based on the advice and recommendations of the experts"
When the PM has no domain knowledge the decisions are not made at the recommendations of the experts but they are made by the experts period.
If you are not an expert in a certain field how can you decide if the "recommendations" made by the experts in that field are good or not?
In real life PMs with no domain knowledge would not even think to question the decisions of the specialists. In fact it is not even their duty to do so. They just have to ensure that there are specialists on the project and that they have taken over the work and have made the decisions that are needed to complete the work.
When the PM has working experience in a relevant line of work he can question the specialists and raise issues about their plans.
How much of the technical decision making needs to be the responsibility of the PM? In many places, the PM works closely with some technical principal. That is delegated authority based the capabilities of the individual given the authority.
I found if fascinating wen involved in distributed computing systems, how the algorithms they use to pass data efficiently and control the actions of the whole system work like project management at a molecular level.
Some systems require a central controller to make all decisions. The system is limited by how fast that controller can process data, and raises the issue of what happens when the controller fails, or the PM gets hit by a bus?
Some systems generate consensus between a subset of the nodes, despite that not all of them agree. That has some limitations too like all nodes don't know what all is going on in every other node.
The Google File Systems is one of the fastest and most reliable in the world. That uses a central controller, but it only uses metadata so it is a lot less of a bottleneck for the rest of the system. The central controller has a backup for when it goes down.
I believe if you want to be an efficient PM, sometimes you need to be like the GFS, or you are the weak link on the team.
...
1 reply by Adrian Carlogea
Nov 18, 2019 9:37 PM
Adrian Carlogea
...
"How much of the technical decision making needs to be the responsibility of the PM? In many "
Obviously this depends on the technical background of the PM. If your PM has limited or no technical knowledge in the project's domain (very common in IT) then it is common sense that you can't give him any such responsibility. So zero responsibility in this case. :)
" In many places, the PM works closely with some technical principal. That is delegated authority based the capabilities of the individual given the authority. "
Obviously when you can't manage a team because you lack the domain knowledge you need someone that can do this.
However there is no delegation here. Delegation is when you have the ability to do something but you choose not to do it and ask someone else to do it on your behalf. You can't delegate something you can't do yourself.
A PM with no technical background can't make technical decisions and and as such he can't delegate something that he is unable to do himself.
The "Principal" does not need any delegation from the PM or from someones else to do his job. His knowledge and the simple fact that he was assigned to the project for his knowledge authorize him to make the decisions in his area of responsibility.
Delegation is about choice but in such a case the PM has no choice. The "Principal" would make the technical decision no matter what the PM thinks about this. At most the PM can try to replace the principal without someone else, of course if he was delegate such an authority from the sponsor. :) If not he can just take notes on what the principal is doing. :P
Saving Changes...
Khai Ng.IT PMO | IT Project Manager| TTGROUPHanoi, Viet Nam
@Zaid
Gaining actual knowledge in the field where you manage your projects definitely help. For the field of software engineering, google "SWEBOK Certificate Program" to learn about it.
...
1 reply by Zaid .B
Nov 20, 2019 4:45 AM
Zaid .B
...
But don't you think that the SWEBOK a bit detailed which it is designed for high level experienced software engineers ?
How much of the technical decision making needs to be the responsibility of the PM? In many places, the PM works closely with some technical principal. That is delegated authority based the capabilities of the individual given the authority.
I found if fascinating wen involved in distributed computing systems, how the algorithms they use to pass data efficiently and control the actions of the whole system work like project management at a molecular level.
Some systems require a central controller to make all decisions. The system is limited by how fast that controller can process data, and raises the issue of what happens when the controller fails, or the PM gets hit by a bus?
Some systems generate consensus between a subset of the nodes, despite that not all of them agree. That has some limitations too like all nodes don't know what all is going on in every other node.
The Google File Systems is one of the fastest and most reliable in the world. That uses a central controller, but it only uses metadata so it is a lot less of a bottleneck for the rest of the system. The central controller has a backup for when it goes down.
I believe if you want to be an efficient PM, sometimes you need to be like the GFS, or you are the weak link on the team.
"How much of the technical decision making needs to be the responsibility of the PM? In many "
Obviously this depends on the technical background of the PM. If your PM has limited or no technical knowledge in the project's domain (very common in IT) then it is common sense that you can't give him any such responsibility. So zero responsibility in this case. :)
" In many places, the PM works closely with some technical principal. That is delegated authority based the capabilities of the individual given the authority. "
Obviously when you can't manage a team because you lack the domain knowledge you need someone that can do this.
However there is no delegation here. Delegation is when you have the ability to do something but you choose not to do it and ask someone else to do it on your behalf. You can't delegate something you can't do yourself.
A PM with no technical background can't make technical decisions and and as such he can't delegate something that he is unable to do himself.
The "Principal" does not need any delegation from the PM or from someones else to do his job. His knowledge and the simple fact that he was assigned to the project for his knowledge authorize him to make the decisions in his area of responsibility.
Delegation is about choice but in such a case the PM has no choice. The "Principal" would make the technical decision no matter what the PM thinks about this. At most the PM can try to replace the principal without someone else, of course if he was delegate such an authority from the sponsor. :) If not he can just take notes on what the principal is doing. :P
...
1 reply by Zaid .B
Nov 20, 2019 3:55 AM
Zaid .B
...
in this case we have to remove the word '' PM '' because he/she in this situation not a project manager at all :(
I think it is a fundamentally flawed assumption that the PM’s technical knowledge is the sole determining factor for how much they must the decide on the technical issues, and that having both a PM and a SE/BA/Chief Engineer/Chief Scientist/Acronym-de jour assumes the PM is not technically capable to do both. Many times the PM and tech leader are fully capable of switching jobs, and we fill in for each other when needed.
When bodies like the PMI and INCOSE divide responsibilities between the PM and some technical leader, it has nothing to do with competency. It is simply a WBS division. There is often enough work under each responsibility that it takes a team, not just one person to execute each role. We need our deputies or we become the bottleneck. The resource level required for the PM is something we need to plan as part of the SOW development. Additionally, when someone has to flip back and forth between tasks like technical reviews and schedule scenarios, that multi-tasking causes an efficiency drop. Projects can often be led more efficiency by dividing responsibilities by technical vs. business, focusing on individual areas, and collaborating closely to manage the integrated plan.
To divide the responsibility requires trust, not just competency. Much of how much can be delegated is not the technical competency of the PM, but their ability to trust the team. Some of that is dictated by the competency of the technical team. An engineer with 30 years of experience and who always performs at a high level and has led their teams for decades requires less oversight than a new-hire with little work experience. If the PM believes they cannot trust anyone to make decisions independently, then perhaps there is a systemic problem that the company does not hire competent people, or the PM lacks the ability to determine who to trust.
Often when dealing with very large projects and many layers of management, the review of design decisions is not a deep dive of every technical aspect. That should have occurred already at the working level. It tends to be more about how the decisions were made, and who was involved as the scope of decisions becomes larger. We don’t need to rehash every decision, but we need confidence in the process for how they were made. Even if the PM was highly skilled in all involved knowledge areas, they lack the time to review all the lower level details, so they focus on whether those who made the decision considered all the angles important to the project.
...
1 reply by Rami Kaibni
Nov 19, 2019 2:30 PM
Rami Kaibni
...
Keith
You raise an interesting fact that is always subject to lots of debate so I would like to share my humble and personal opinion on this matter:
I understand your point of view but I agree more with Adrian and Steve. I have a structural engineering degree and I worked in the construction industry for years. In this specific industry, if you do not have enough knowledge about the domain both technically and practically, you will never be able to lead your projects effectively and efficiently as a project manager.
I am not saying you have to be a technical expert but you must have the minimum knowledge and experience to be able to make sense of the schedule, estimates, budgets, change orders, communication strategy, mitigation plans, risk assessment and many other plans. Even within the domain of construction, you have to have domain and technical knowledge in certain categories like Road Construction, Bridges, High Rises, Dams, Commercial, Residential, and the list goes on. What I mean is, if your experience in construction has been in High Rise construction, and you were asked to manage a the construction of a bridge project, then can you ? Yes you can but you won't be as effective and efficient because you lack the domain and technical experience in Bridges Construction and I am saying this out of experience.
A good example for what I am saying are the job postings in the construction industry. Whenever there is a posting for a Project Manager position, they ask for experience in a specific domain, not in construction in general. (Example: A Project Manager with 10 years of experience in Roads Construction).
This is just the reality and I understand that it can differ from one industry to another.
