Meade Rubinstein started interesting discussion under my posting about great performances in failed projects. We came to a dilemma. Would you prefer to hire project manager with history of successful projects or rather someone with history of great management?
Meade tends to value more projects track record stressing we always find excuses for failure whenever we need it and comes with success factor as the primary and most important measure for project managers.
I, on the other hand, lean towards treating effort as more important than goal itself. I believe there are situations when even best PM won’t help and the only method to avoid scar on personal track record is to keep away from them. Avoiding risk isn’t an attribute PM should have, is it?
Consider you have two candidates. Jim succeeded in many past projects. He knows all the theory and pretty much practice. He gets thing done his way. Unfortunately you consider him as a kind of asshole and you’re afraid he can harm team chemistry. Jane fails more often. Maybe she’s a bit too mild. However she’s very competent and has a lot of experience from difficult projects. She led teams to achieve as much as possible, even when it still wasn’t enough.
Your choice. Jim or Jane? Why?