I'm a member of the GV team, and one of those who helps run the workshop series. In many cases, workshops are available only to employees of the portfolio because it supports more open and candid conversations.
In the case of our security videos, we've restricted them because there were discussions about particular companies' security needs that aren't appropriate to share publicly. It's unlikely the talk would have been as beneficial to our portfolio companies if people felt the need to hold back knowing the details would be made public.
As casca mentioned, we've opened many of our videos to the public and we'll continue to do so when the workshop leader and audience participants agree: https://www.youtube.com/user/GoogleVentures/videos
At GV our mission first and foremost is to serve the employees of our portfolio companies. Google as a whole is of course dedicated to improving internet security and the company dedicates tons of people and resources to that.
Funny that within two posts we've gone from "Why isn't GV more transparent" to "Why is GV so transparent".
I agree that from a UX standpoint it isn't great, but I think it achieves two things:
1. gives a hint at what you receive when you're a GV-funded company. Something for potential companies to think about.
2. stops any conspiracy theories about the "Secret Training Videos Google Won't Let You See".
Indeed. I had originally left off the ending, but a few people who previewed the essay told me they showed it to others (who don't know me), and they said they weren't sure if I was joking or serious.
It wasn't officially recorded, although audience members might have captured some of it. I wish it had been: I can only really give this talk once.
As an aside, if you're not familiar with the Ignite format it's great. You have 20 slides, and each slide auto-advances after 15 sec. So I really had to practice the timing.
(Author here.) I've long wanted to write a follow-up piece addressing exactly these questions, but haven't gotten around to it.
First, find a PM to talk to, especially one you admire who's made the switch. Everybody's situation is different, and having someone to mentor you through it is invaluable.
Second, make sure you have the right motivations. A friend of mine says "run to product management, not from engineering." If you want to switch because your current manager is a jerk, you hate the project you're working on, or (gasp!) your PM is an idiot, you might be doing it for the wrong reasons.
You could test it out with a small project at first. Stepping up and saying "I'd love to take on more of a PM role on this feature/bug/release" will often be positively received by a healthy organization.
Startups are ideal places to make the switch (that's where I did it.) Everyone is used to wearing many hats and the "all hands on deck" attitude is much more welcoming of someone raising their hand and volunteering to be a PM. Smart, bigger companies (like Google or Facebook) often have formal programs for moving into PM. At Google, for example, we even have a six-month rotation program that lets you try it on for size.
And if you're convinced you want to do it and your current company discourages you, find a new one.
I first wanted to say thanks for putting up this essay on product management. I don't think quality pieces on the subject are easy to come by, and I think you give a lot of valuable and tangible insight on it.
Second, it looks like you favor past experience as a PM --- but what about college grads? Do you think it's usually a better idea for someone just beginning their career in the "real world" to start out as an engineer first? Maybe this sounds obvious as I've stated it, but I have a few friends that started their careers as PMs and have been successful. Interviewing a college grad might be a little trickier, no?
Lastly, I definitely agree that a big part of being a good PM, or maybe a good manager in general, is making good, or even just reasonable, decisions on a regular basis. There are seemingly endless small choices that need to be made that add up to a lot, and many of these choices (I've found) aren't going to be dead obvious. A decision, however, needs to be made and it's important that to make a decent one without dedicating too much time to it based off of your understanding of the goals of the project, your experience, and your gut instinct.
I'd love to read such a follow-up post. I'm doing exactly what you describe, and for the right reason, with this essay as something of a guide, so thanks for the help and validation!
No brain teasers. Good analytical questions are open-ended, fuzzy, and don't have "right" or "trick" answers. I want to test problem-solving abilities, not interview research and memorization skills :-)
Well I'm happy your child is healthy but your attitude is exactly the problem. The question isn't what your child's life is worth the question is could that doctor have done the same thing for less money. Because if we could've paid him $500,000 instead of $1 million we'd have $500,000 more dollars to save the other children's lives. Don't get me wrong, if the doctor can make 1 million elsewhere then we should pay him 1 million. But if he can't we shouldn't pay him 1 million simply because government officials don't mind spending other People's Money.
I seriously apologize - I mis-clicked and accidentally voted this down... Any surgeon who has the power and does save any child's life deserves a good salary - they are miracle workers on so many levels.
Me. I came in 4+ years ago by way of an acquisition. Note that "never applied" doesn't equate with "never interviewed" - we all had to go through the same interview process as regular candidates.
Plenty of times later in life when I saw some cryptic message in a dialog box I suspected that he'd found new employment, but based on the high frequency of such instances it's hard to believe they're all related to him ;)
I also recommend A.K. Dewdney's The Planiverse, published in 1984. It tells the story of computer science students who communicate with denizens of a 2D world. The diagrams and graphics are delightful.
I read it when it came out (I was 13) and it's one of the reasons I entered computing.
In the case of our security videos, we've restricted them because there were discussions about particular companies' security needs that aren't appropriate to share publicly. It's unlikely the talk would have been as beneficial to our portfolio companies if people felt the need to hold back knowing the details would be made public.
As casca mentioned, we've opened many of our videos to the public and we'll continue to do so when the workshop leader and audience participants agree: https://www.youtube.com/user/GoogleVentures/videos
At GV our mission first and foremost is to serve the employees of our portfolio companies. Google as a whole is of course dedicated to improving internet security and the company dedicates tons of people and resources to that.