Working in IT, I have learned that a lot of meetings are by people who gain “respect and notoriety” by having large meetings. It doesn’t matter who shows up, it’s the number, that makes them seem popular. “Get the engineers in here, this is serious business!” You begin to learn which PMs do this, and can respond (or not) accordingly. If they ping you “where are you?” you can say, “I am in an [client] audit call. I cannot leave this call while the audit is taking place.” Or whatever your industry equivalent is. YMMV, some toxic environments I have been in, this was not possible.
I remember one PM was frozen in indecision. I had to tell him, “I can fix the problem, or having a meeting about it. Pick one.”
“Well, both–”
“No. I can fix the problem, or having a meeting about it. Pick one or the other.”
“I need you in this meeting!”
“When we explain to the customer that the fix was delayed by an hour, I can use YOUR name, as having a meeting about it instead of fixing it, correct?”
“The meeting is to be about fixing it!”
“No. I can fix the problem, or having a meeting about it. Pick one or the other.”
This is why every project should have at least one of those rare engineers who can actually concisely explain a problem and solution in layman’s terms to the PM. Asking the PM to just trust your solution on faith is a bigger ask than you realize.
This is also why you shouldn’t have PMs who have zero technical knowledge of what the actual project they’re managing is. PMs need to be smart enough to understand the basic idea of what the engineers are telling them. A really good PM will spend time learning at least the basics of the field their engineers work in.
“Decline.”
Working in IT, I have learned that a lot of meetings are by people who gain “respect and notoriety” by having large meetings. It doesn’t matter who shows up, it’s the number, that makes them seem popular. “Get the engineers in here, this is serious business!” You begin to learn which PMs do this, and can respond (or not) accordingly. If they ping you “where are you?” you can say, “I am in an [client] audit call. I cannot leave this call while the audit is taking place.” Or whatever your industry equivalent is. YMMV, some toxic environments I have been in, this was not possible.
I remember one PM was frozen in indecision. I had to tell him, “I can fix the problem, or having a meeting about it. Pick one.”
“Well, both–”
“No. I can fix the problem, or having a meeting about it. Pick one or the other.”
“I need you in this meeting!”
“When we explain to the customer that the fix was delayed by an hour, I can use YOUR name, as having a meeting about it instead of fixing it, correct?”
“The meeting is to be about fixing it!”
“No. I can fix the problem, or having a meeting about it. Pick one or the other.”
“… we can have the meeting in your office, then.”
Eventually, my boss shooed him away.
This is why every project should have at least one of those rare engineers who can actually concisely explain a problem and solution in layman’s terms to the PM. Asking the PM to just trust your solution on faith is a bigger ask than you realize.
This is also why you shouldn’t have PMs who have zero technical knowledge of what the actual project they’re managing is. PMs need to be smart enough to understand the basic idea of what the engineers are telling them. A really good PM will spend time learning at least the basics of the field their engineers work in.
I’ve been in this scenario a few times lol. Spot on.
deleted by creator
This shits me off so hard. engineers can work or can respond to questions.