Recently I have taken a particular dislike to Project Managers and their peculiar lexicon. The thing is I’m one of more than 100,000 employees in a huge global organisation and EVERY project I am asked to participate in has typically say 15/20 people working on it at any one time one of whom is a PM.
Now ALL the PMs work in the Global Transformation team but everyone else comes from the business and are all typically Subject Matter Experts (SMEs for the uninitiated - yes it is a WANKY term).
The PMs seem to use language that is purely relevant to them that literally no one else ever gets to grips with, understands or needs to yet they absolutely INSIST on still using it despite everyone else in every call/meeting needing things to be clarified EVERY time.
Words like tollgate, initiation, creepage and critical phase analysis are used for what I and plenty of others have come to believe are there purely for self aggrandisement and role justification purposes - what a load of bellcheesery right there....
(Cue TONNES OF PMs coming out and pillorying me from this thread...)
Yes, this sounds like every PM I've had to work with. I don't think I've come across one who hasn't sent emails at 1am to make it clear that they're working all hours to keep the project on track. Of course it actually means they're a bit shit at doing their job during the working day.
What amazes me is when I hear just how much some of these PMs get paid, especially when they're contracting. I always assumed they'd get less than the people who are actually doing the work on the project, but that rarely seems to be the case.
I'm currently working on a project without a PM. The team managers have meetings to decide what work needs to be done and we just get on with it. It makes me wonder whether most PMs are completely unnecessary.