Extending Domain Knowledge

Hi Sergio, thank you for the link!

I’m in full agreement that a PM should/must not be a subject matter expert. However, I view the “line in the sand” like this, “A PM should/must not perform in the role of a SME.” It’s inevitable that a PM who is Talent Triangle focused and who practices in specific domains, will eventually be viewed as a subject matter expert in those domains over time.

So, as long as a PM does not perform in the role of a SME, we are safe from the accountability issues that could occur if the line was crossed. In my opinion, we should encourage PM’s to seek extended domain knowledge, but also make sure they understand where the line is, in the sand.

Kiron, over the last year and a half, your written wisdom has provided me a form of virtual mentorship – thank you!

You are welcome. The Talent Triangle is not about to be a SME. The only domain a PM must be a SME is in project management field. The problem is not the Talent Triangle. The problem is some organizations, thanks God less year to year, are searching for somebody that perform the role of PM plus the role of technical people to perform activities inside the project. That´s is a classic in domains like software field. I am not agains that. I have faced this lot of times including today. But if we want to hierarchising the role then is neede to stablish the line. No matter that, myself and lot of others take the opportunity to work in multiple domains along the years. For me, it has no sense to debate this type of things. PMs live the same when they are assigned to an initiative inside the organization they are working for. Think about it. Are you the SME in the business function the initiative try to automatize, for example? Of course not, perhaps in one opportunity but not in others. Then, is the same. What people forget is one organization has multiple business defined into it then each business is a new domain.

The Talent Triangle uses the phrasing “strategic and business management expertise” to describe that which PM’s should seek after (along with the other two legs of the Triangle) if they wish to remain relevant and competitive in the marketplace.

I agree that the Triangle is not asking PM’s to become SME’s. My point is two-fold, [1] that the “line in the sand” on the accountability concern is that a PM should not “perform” in the role of a subject matter expert on their projects, and [2], that a PM who seeks after “strategic and business management expertise” is likely (over time) to become an expert in domains that they specialize in.

That said, do you believe that a PM can appropriately manage a project wherein they are recognized as a domain expert – as long as they do not perform in the role of SME, or is this an absolute conflict of interests?

The Talent Triangle uses the phrasing “strategic and business management expertise” to describe that which PM’s should seek after (along with the other two legs of the Triangle) if they wish to remain relevant and competitive in the marketplace.

I agree that the Triangle is not asking PM’s to become SME’s. My point is two-fold, [1] that the “line in the sand” on the accountability concern is that a PM should not “perform” in the role of a subject matter expert on their projects, and [2], that a PM who seeks after “strategic and business management expertise” is likely (over time) to become an expert in domains that they specialize in.

That said, do you believe that a PM can appropriately manage a project wherein they are recognized as a domain expert – as long as they do not perform in the role of SME, or is this an absolute conflict of interests?

That was well stated Luis, thank you!

@Thomas and @Sergio,

I greatly respect both of your thoughts on this subject, and I agree with them (as stated above) in the context of “a PM should not perform in the role of a Subject Matter Expert on a project they are managing.” However, both of you are casting a much wider context to this concern that I can’t logically or practically resolve, meaning that I would not feel comfortable espousing the breadth of your statement/principle to others, at least, as stated.

If I accept the scale of your principle, then it portrays to me that I must recuse myself from any opportunity wherein others (meaning project team members or stakeholders) would consider me an expert in the domain of operation – this would be a “bitter pill” to accept. I sincerely want to reconcile your statements as it challenges some of my foundational principles in the areas of architectural awareness and emotional intelligence. With that said, please consider the following implications that have crossed my mind – this principle:

- Logically implies that a PM should “cease their consumption of domain knowledge” at the point where others could consider them an expert. This runs paradoxically to the pursuit principles of the Talent Triangle and would not be stated explicitly as it would contradict developmental practices we espouse.

- States that a PM is not capable of regulating their actions. For instance, because I’m recognized as an expert, I will inevitably resign my principles and “get into the weeds” or “micromanage” thereby creating a conflict of interest or an accountability concern that adds unforeseen risk to the project.

- Conflicts with the natural progression of a project manager who has been employed in a large enterprise for a substantial “period of time” and who cannot help but become recognized as an expert for the simple fact that they have successfully delivered multiple projects in a given domain.

- Conflicts with a PM who has chosen a “portfolio career,” where acting as a subject matter expert is the value proposition and the goal. This type of PM based career can be consultancy based or an employed position within a large enterprise.

The establishment of the “Talent Triangle” to me was a wake-up call to our profession that some of our mindsets needed to change if we expected to remain competitive and relevant as a profession. I recognize that the pursuit of domain knowledge (under the triangle) isn’t purposed to make you an expert, but this pursuit over time is likely to have you recognized as an expert (whether you want it to or not). With this being a likely fact, doesn’t it necessitate an adjustment in the principle you stated?

I look forward to your responses and those of other experts.

@Thomas and @Sergio,

I greatly respect both of your thoughts on this subject, and I agree with them (as stated above) in the context of “a PM should not perform in the role of a Subject Matter Expert on a project they are managing.” However, both of you are casting a much wider context to this concern that I can’t logically or practically resolve, meaning that I would not feel comfortable espousing the breadth of your statement/principle to others, at least, as stated.

If I accept the scale of your principle, then it portrays to me that I must recuse myself from any opportunity wherein others (meaning project team members or stakeholders) would consider me an expert in the domain of operation – this would be a “bitter pill” to accept. I sincerely want to reconcile your statements as it challenges some of my foundational principles in the areas of architectural awareness and emotional intelligence. With that said, please consider the following implications that have crossed my mind – this principle:

- Logically implies that a PM should “cease their consumption of domain knowledge” at the point where others could consider them an expert. This runs paradoxically to the pursuit principles of the Talent Triangle and would not be stated explicitly as it would contradict developmental practices we espouse.

- States that a PM is not capable of regulating their actions. For instance, because I’m recognized as an expert, I will inevitably resign my principles and “get into the weeds” or “micromanage” thereby creating a conflict of interest or an accountability concern that adds unforeseen risk to the project.

- Conflicts with the natural progression of a project manager who has been employed in a large enterprise for a substantial “period of time” and who cannot help but become recognized as an expert for the simple fact that they have successfully delivered multiple projects in a given domain.

- Conflicts with a PM who has chosen a “portfolio career,” where acting as a subject matter expert is the value proposition and the goal. This type of PM based career can be consultancy based or an employed position within a large enterprise.

The establishment of the “Talent Triangle” to me was a wake-up call to our profession that some of our mindsets needed to change if we expected to remain competitive and relevant as a profession. I recognize that the pursuit of domain knowledge (under the triangle) isn’t purposed to make you an expert, but this pursuit over time is likely to have you recognized as an expert (whether you want it to or not). With this being a likely fact, doesn’t it necessitate an adjustment in the principle you stated?

I look forward to your responses and those of other experts.