职业与工作方法okbjgm.weebly.com
剧集主管的法则（2016）[PDF]
Laws of Showrunning (2016) [pdf]
2019 — 2024，它一次次回到首页
黑点是上首页（≥ 50 分）的那次投稿，空心点是没冲上去的投稿，点越大分数越高。
导读
这是资深电视剧剧集主管（showrunner）Javier Grillo-Marxuach 写的一份 25 页经验法则清单，讲的是作为剧集主管如何掌舵一部剧：如何定义问题、如何做决定、如何给团队下指令、如何在固定预算和死线之下把创意落地。作者还有一份 48 页的完整版，这份是被精简过的"温和版"，去掉了较多好莱坞内部语境，更适合圈外人阅读。
为什么经久不衰：它表面在讲电视制作，实际上是一份关于领导力、产品决策和项目管理的硬核手册，所以能被工程师、创业者反复翻出来读。
HN 评论精选
指出存在 48 页完整版，并说明 25 页版更适合圈外读者。
这篇文章 25 页，还自称是"温和版"。作者另有一份 48 页的版本，我猜那版就没这么温和了。读下来，长版本更聚焦好莱坞内部，25 页这版对好莱坞之外的人反而提炼得更好。
CalChris查看英文原文
This article is 25 pages and calls itself the NICE VERSION. The author also has a 48 page version and so I'll assume that it isn't so nice. http://okbjgm.weebly.com/uploads/3/1/5/0/31506003/11_laws_of_showrunning.pdf Reading it, the un-nice version is more Hollywood centric. The 25 page version distills what the author has to say better for people outside of Hollywood.
"我看到就知道了"是推卸创作责任，产品负责人必须事先讲清愿景与判断标准。
"有七个字，任何称职的剧集主管都不该说出口：'我看到就知道了。'" 说这句话等于放弃了创作中最难的那部分工作，却把判定好坏的权力攥在手里。这是极好的产品领导力建议：要听用户，但在任何时刻你都得清楚自己的愿景是什么、功能如何服务于战略。第 6 页讲如何定义问题、第 7 页讲决策回避的部分也很好。
awinter-py查看英文原文
> there are seven words no competent showrunner should ever say: "I'll know it when I see it." > To say "I'll know it when I see it" is to abdicate the hard work of creation while hoarding the authority to declare what is or isn't good. critical product leadership advice. listen to users yes, but at any given point you have to know what your vision is and how features speak to strategy stuff on p6 about defining problems and decision aversion on 7 also very good.
剧集主管的处境和带一个百人初创团队高度相似，因此对工程师和创始人同样有用。
这篇文章是我最喜欢的关于工程管理和创业的写作之一，尽管它名义上根本不是讲这些的。想想当剧集主管意味着什么：你花好几年推销一个点子，它被预订了……然后你突然就要管一个上百人的初创公司，预算固定、死线不可动、投资人还极其爱插手。而且你还得亲自写这一季的第一集和最后一集。
simonw查看英文原文
This article is one of my all-time favourite pieces of writing about engineering management and startup founding, despite supposedly not being about that at all. Think about what it takes to be a showrunner of a TV show. You spend years pitching an idea. It gets picked up... and suddenly you're in charge of a 100+ person startup, with a fixed budget, an immovable deadline and extremely activist investors. And you're still expected to write the first and last episode of the season!
剧集主管是"编剧掌权"的独特角色，与电影由导演主导形成对比。
这篇论文作为项目管理的一个视角很有意思。在美国，剧集主管首先身份是编剧，不是导演也不是经理——导演和经理为他们工作。首要工作是创意概念（以剧本形式表达），次要工作才是把它落地。这在电视圈之外很少见。有意思的是：电视里编剧掌权，电影里导演掌权，这源自舞台剧传统。
Animats查看英文原文
That paper is interesting as a perspective on project management. Some points: - Showrunners, at least in the US, are primarily writers. Not directors. Not managers. The directors and managers work for them. Their primary job is the creative concept, expressed in writing as a script. Their secondary job is to make it all happen. Outside of TV, this is rare in industry. It was once the case in aircraft design, where one person did the original drawings, and others filled in the details. Many great aircraft resulted. Plus many duds. It's interesting that, in TV, writers are in charge. In film, directors are in charge. This comes from stage productions, where the director uses the actors as a debug tool. A normal part of getting a new play working involves the actors on stage in practice clothes, the director in the front row of the auditorium, and running through each scene of the play with repeated changes. Film directors who came from the theater tended to require too many takes to get a scene right. That's what resulted in "pre-visualization", where the movie is made twice, once in a skeletal low-budget form, then for real. That comes from cartoons, where a basic tool was a board with a card and a sketch for each scene. The cartoon emerged as incremental improvement from the storyboard. It's a basic tool of effects-heavy films today. (As someone said of a Star Wars movie, "Three years of pre-production, three months of principal photography, three years of post-production") The fundamental question here is, how and when do you debug the user experience? The earlier in the process you can do that, the cheaper it is to fix. - The section on showrunners spending too much time tweaking post-production is apt. It can be even worse for films, where the time schedule isn't so tight. I once heard someone involved with "Space Jam" (1996, not the sequel) describe trying to get right the animation sequence where the players' "talent" is sucked out. Each morning, there was a screening, and the execs would critique that scene ("The slime needs to be thicker, and it needs more purple".) The animators would spend the rest of the day fixing that. Second shift did rendering and output to film. Third shift did film development and printing. Next morning, the cycle would repeat. That went on for a month. Today you can cycle that faster, but it's still "I'll know it when I see it".
历次讨论
同类还值得读
用十年时间自学编程（1998）
Teach Yourself Programming in Ten Years (1998)
Peter Norvig 1998 年的经典文章，回应“21天/24小时学会编程”一类速成书，主张真正精通编程需要约十年持续、有意识的练习。
职业与工作方法上首页 11 次 · 2007–2025norvig.com编辑精选如何成为一名程序员：简短、全面而个人的总结
How to be a Programmer: A Short, Comprehensive, and Personal Summary
一篇广为流传的程序员成长指南，作者以个人经验系统总结了成为优秀程序员所需的各项技能——从调试、测试、沟通到团队协作与身心健康。
职业与工作方法上首页 6 次 · 2008–2015samizdat.mines.edu编辑精选不要自称程序员
Don't Call Yourself a Programmer
经典职业建议文章劝软件工程师不要把自己局限在“程序员”这个标签上，而要从公司业务角度说明自己创造的价值；文中讨论了成本中心与利润中心、头衔、求职与职业选择，也顺带批评了学术界的价…
职业与工作方法上首页 5 次 · 2011–2021kalzumeus.com编辑精选创作者的日程与经理的日程
Maker's Schedule, Manager's Schedule (2009)
Paul Graham 在这篇文章里把时间表分成两类：管理者的日程以小时为单位，会议可以填满一天；创作者（程序员、写作者等）的日程则以半天为单位，需要长时间不被打断的连续块。
职业与工作方法上首页 5 次 · 2009–2021paulgraham.com编辑精选为什么程序员的薪酬不与生产力成正比
Why programmers are not paid in proportion to their productivity
讨论为什么程序员的薪酬往往不随其生产力成比例增长：生产力难以客观量化，薪酬更多受组织预算、岗位定价和个人议价能力影响。
职业与工作方法上首页 5 次 · 2009–2022johndcook.com