Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!bloom-beacon!usc!apple!bionet!ames!amdahl!rtech!markh
From: markh@rtech.rtech.com (Mark Hanner)
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: Information Systems is an Engineering Discipline
Summary: View from a techie MBA...
Message-ID: <3674@rtech.rtech.com>
Date: 21 Sep 89 19:05:11 GMT
References: <6429@hubcap.clemson.edu> <10835@riks.csl.sony.co.jp> <12686@athertn.Atherton.COM>
Reply-To: markh@rtech.UUCP (Mark Hanner)
Organization: Relational Technology Inc, Alameda CA
Lines: 28

I definitely agree with the view that managers who micro-manage their product
development cycle are doomed to failure. We follow the basic "producer"/
"director" model here where I (the product marketing manager) specify only
the basic product requirements, and leave it to the project managers to 
design and build the product. There DOES need to be negotiation on the 
design spec, since I'm the one who spends the time to talk with customers
follow market trends, and have insights into how the product should behave
externally. To extend the analogy, the producer often has to go back to the
director and say "you have to cut 20 minutes out of the final cut, or we'll
only be able to show the picture twice a day, and won't make as much money."
I don't think I should tell the director what to cut, just that something
has to be cut (don't read too much into this as the analogy gets strained).
Francis Coppola lucked out with "Apocalypse Now," but the fact that no 
producer has been able to rein him in has contributed to his failure to 
create another hit (IMHO).

In defense of MBA's, sure there are a few "duds" floating around, but I've
seen alot of startups fail because they had no non-techies and got so caught
up in building "neat" or "theoretically correct" products that they forgot
to make sure they knew where (and how much) their income was coming from.

cheers,
mark

-- 
markh@rtech.COM
"Crass generalizations may be justified by admitting 10 exceptions."
			-- marnie applegate