There’s one question that still sparks real debate: If you have project managers, do you really need change managers?

This week’s throwback episode of the PM Debate Podcast dives straight into it.

🗣️ I argued for the motion:

“Organizations that employ project managers have no need of change managers.”

🎙️ Mary Elizabeth took the other side, challenging that idea from the perspective of change maturity, people dynamics, and organizational readiness.

Why this debate still matters:

In one corner: The argument that project management = change management– Every PM is a change agent by default– Most of the job is stakeholder engagement, expectation-setting, and alignment– Adding a change manager risks duplicating roles or undermining authority

In the other corner: The argument that change management is its own discipline– Not all change is formally “a project”– Change managers focus on the people side of change– When organizations lack maturity, change managers bridge critical gaps

Questions we explore:

* Is “change management” just another name for good project management?

* Should every PM also be a change expert, or is that unrealistic?

* What happens in orgs where no one owns the people side of transformation?

* Is change management leadership, or is it a role?

Whether you’re leading a transformation or building a PMO from scratch, this episode challenges how we think about who is really responsible for making change stick.

🎧 Listen to the full episode and join the debate📍 Let me know in the comments where do you stand on this one?

Thanks for reading Project Management Matters! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit philipdiab.substack.com