<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Managing Product Development &#187; project team</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.jrothman.com/blog/mpd/category/project-team/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.jrothman.com/blog/mpd</link>
	<description>Management, especially good management, is hard to do. This blog is for people who want to think about how they manage people, projects, and risk.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 13:28:53 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>A Rant on People, Resources, Men and Women</title>
		<link>http://www.jrothman.com/blog/mpd/2009/12/a-rant-on-people-resources-men-and-women.html</link>
		<comments>http://www.jrothman.com/blog/mpd/2009/12/a-rant-on-people-resources-men-and-women.html#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Dec 2009 16:46:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Johanna</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[project team]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[capacity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[team]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jrothman.com/blog/mpd/?p=8961</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Rant on. There&#8217;s a flame-fest on the scrumdevelopment list about the use of &#8220;resources&#8221; or &#8220;people&#8221; to describe the human beings on projects. I like &#8220;humans&#8221; or &#8220;human beings&#8221; or &#8220;people.&#8221; And, I actually prefer &#8220;resources&#8221; to &#8220;man-hours.&#8221; I can &#8230; <a href="http://www.jrothman.com/blog/mpd/2009/12/a-rant-on-people-resources-men-and-women.html">Continue reading <span class="meta-nav">&#8594;</span></a>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rant on.</p>
<p>There&#8217;s a flame-fest on the scrumdevelopment list about the use of &#8220;resources&#8221; or &#8220;people&#8221; to describe the human beings on projects.</p>
<p>I like &#8220;humans&#8221; or &#8220;human beings&#8221; or &#8220;people.&#8221; And, I actually <strong>prefer</strong> &#8220;resources&#8221; to &#8220;man-hours.&#8221; I can live with &#8220;people-hours,&#8221; and prefer that to &#8220;resource.&#8221;</p>
<p>I bet you&#8217;re a little surprised. I&#8217;ve written that <a href="http://jrothman.com/blog/mpd/2003/07/people-are-not-ftes.html" target="_blank">People are NOT FTEs</a>. And, in <a href="http://jrothman.com/blog/mpd/2008/01/a-funny-story-about-manage-it.html" target="_blank">A Funny Story About Manage It!</a>, I said that I didn&#8217;t refer to people as resources.</p>
<p>So why would I prefer to be a resource than repository of man-hours? Because it doesn&#8217;t matter how many hours <strong>I</strong> work, dammit. I am never going to be a man. (We can all be thankful for that!) I don&#8217;t count in man-hours. And, man-hours assumes that we can tell how long a task takes. Ha! Not a new task, which are the most interesting tasks. Fuggetaboutit.</p>
<p>I like calling people &#8220;people&#8221; and talking about what they as a team can accomplish. People are rarely fungible. (I&#8217;ve never seen true fungibility, but I haven&#8217;t seen everything.) Resources, to me, mean machines and other hard equipment. Every so often, I think of resource as the on dictionary.com:</p>
<blockquote><p>a source of supply, support, or aid, esp. one that can be readily drawn upon when needed.</p></blockquote>
<p>That resource <strong>might</strong> be a human who is not a part of our team. Maybe that&#8217;s a slip and it makes me more human.</p>
<p>I grew up looking for jobs in high school when the classifieds were split into &#8220;men wanted&#8221; and &#8220;women wanted.&#8221; The men&#8217;s section was always at least five times larger than the women&#8217;s section, and had the interesting jobs. I thought I was over it, but I guess not. I&#8217;m still rankled by the difference. At least &#8220;resource&#8221; treats us all the same way.</p>
<p>A project team is composed of people. Those people, working together as a team, have a certain capacity. Let&#8217;s keep that in mind, ok? I don&#8217;t care if those people are red, white, blue, black, brown, purple, men, women, something else. I care about how well they get along and what they, as a team, can do. Team capacity, that&#8217;s the key.</p>
<p>Resource is a backwards way of attempting to define team capacity. So, our HR departments (I much preferred when they were called &#8220;Personnel&#8221; btw, which they were when I started to work back in the age of the dinosaurs) don&#8217;t get it. HR doesn&#8217;t get much, except how to keep the company out of court. (See <a href="http://jrothman.com/blog/htp/2005/08/i-dont-hate-hr.html" target="_blank">I Don&#8217;t Hate HR</a>.) We, the technical leaders, will lead HR in how to hire people, in how to manage people, and in how to compensate people who work in tight-knit teams.</p>
<p>In some ways, I think of HR and their policies as a resource to me, as a manager or leader. But I certainly don&#8217;t think of the people with whom I work as resources. Sometimes I call them project staff when they are a group of people. Sometimes I call them a project team, when they work as an interdependent team.</p>
<p>They are people. Just like me.</p>
<p>Rant off.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.jrothman.com/blog/mpd/2009/12/a-rant-on-people-resources-men-and-women.html/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>17</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

