Invisible makes it sound intangible. If you can't quantify the value you're adding to an organization, are you adding any at all?
Making sure "the right people are talking", "decisions are made", etc. do sound like things that can be tracked to confirm if a PM is indeed adding value.
>>If you can't quantify the value you're adding to an organization, are you adding any at all?
At some point in time recurring wins can look like a perpetual machine. The problem is when you get there, people think like, Now that we got what we want why do we need this person?
It's only after the person goes and a few months down the lane you begin to see things falling apart. Of course by then things just become the new normal.
> If you can't quantify the value you're adding to an organization, are you adding any at all?
The problem with that line of thought is that it's not at all easy (or even possible) to quantifiably measure performance on an individual basis. This is especially true for roles like PM's whose job is to enable the labor and talent of others.
Many roles are difficult to quantifiably measure. The same is true for software engineers-- suppose two developers are shipping code, but one writes 2x as many lines of code. Do we say they're twice as productive, or delivering twice as much business value? Not necessarily.
But there should be something that can be measured, even if it's imprecise, to at least show that something's being done. How do you measure the success criteria for the role of a PM? It's challenging. But it should be done.
Measure and "quantifiably measure" are two different things. I agree that performance can and should be evaluated, however, for many jobs that is an intrinsically subjective task.
There's nothing wrong with that. It's just the nature of such roles.
You still evaluate, you just don't boil it down to one "score".
On a similar thought the IT department of organizations in the past was neglected. After all, they don't add any value, they are only needed to shuffle around dead hardware for new hardware.
Similarly a good manager provides auxiliary value; it doesn't directly add value to the organization but if it's not there then the overall value decreases.
Not everything in an organization is immediate positive effect.
Making sure "the right people are talking", "decisions are made", etc. do sound like things that can be tracked to confirm if a PM is indeed adding value.