Menu

Posts tagged “product management”

“Healthy tension” between Product and Engineering? No thanks, I’d prefer alignment.

I’ve always been adamant that Product and Engineering are in a partnership, not a “healthy tension” relationship. So I very much agree with this post:

The problem is in the assumption that Product and Engineering teams inherently have different goals. They don’t. Both teams are responsible for the growth and stability of the company, for revenue and scalability. Neither can succeed without the other. When we assume otherwise, we sell each side short.

How to Scale Yourself Down

How to Scale Yourself Down has some really interesting advice on how to go from leading a team at a bigger company to rolling up your sleeves at a startup. A couple of my favorite quotes:

Avoid process out of practice. Leaders who are successful in a startup are the ones who naturally reinvent their own toolboxes, and question what the process is trying to accomplish before establishing something that might be too heavyweight.

However, process is a double-sided coin. “There’s often an overcorrection when leaders move from big companies to small startups. Folks want to shake off that big company feeling and run hard in the other direction. And while the idea of no process sounds fantastic, issues emerge if you don’t start adding at least a little bit of it early on,” he says.

And:

To me, a well-made decision is one that you can explain how and why it was made. Ingraining this in the culture early on will support transparency as the company grows, promote consistency, and reduce politics. In essence, ‘don’t blame me, blame the framework’.

Improving work relationships using the lens of “The 9x Effect”

There’s a concept in UX design that I’ve been thinking about a lot in the context of interpersonal work relationships. It’s called “The 9x Effect” and I wrote about it… checks watch… 10 years ago. In short (and heavily simplified), customers value their existing solution/product 3x more than any new “innovation”, and companies overvalue their innovative new product by 3x of what’s currently in the market. So you end up with a 9x mismatch between what companies build and what people believe they need.

There’s another adage that when someone cuts you off in traffic they’re a jerk, but if you cut someone off you had a good reason. We tend to rationalize our own actions while not giving others the benefit of the doubt.

So I’ve been thinking about this in the context of competence at work. I wonder if we sometimes overvalue our own competencies by 3x, and undervalue others’ skills by 3x[1]. And I wonder how that affects the efficiency and health of organizations. We all have a tendency—especially in large organizations—to disagree with strategy, or at the more extreme end of the spectrum, view leadership as “inept” or “clueless”. And I wonder if it’s because of the 9x effect, and if we can all just divide our own opinions by 3 things would get a lot better.

What might happen if as employees we go “well maybe the way I think it should be done is only ⅓ of the answer”. And what if, in turn, leaders go “maybe the way I think things should be done is only a ⅓ of the answer.” Would we be able to come together in the middle and make better decisions together, and in doing so massively improve a company’s culture, autonomy, and efficiency? Sorry, I don’t mean to be a vague question-talker with this post, but I am genuinely curious about this.

A little more critique of ourselves, a little more grace for others… I think I’d like to try that.


  1. Yes, I’m very familiar with the Dunning-Kruger effect. What I’m talking about here is a bit broader and through a different lens.  ↩

In Defense of Strategy

I didn’t realize that there’s a strategy backlash going on in some corners of the internet, but Packy McCormick has a good defense of the importance of having a good strategy:

Execution without strategy is wasteful and tragic. Just as “Companies that have the best products, most talented people, and fastest growth are precisely the ones for which moats are most important,” companies that are the best at execution are precisely the ones for which strategy is most important. They’re the only ones that have a shot. The better you are at execution, the faster you can run in any direction. A good strategy helps you run fast in the right direction.

He also provides a good summary definition of what strategy is, based on the (must-read!) book Good Strategy Bad Strategy: The Difference and Why It Matters:

A strategy is a high-level plan to achieve one or more goals under conditions of uncertainty, designed through recognizing the challenge (diagnosis), setting a direction to overcome it (guiding policy), and detailing steps to implement the policy (coherent actions).

The biggest problem I’ve seen in organizations that struggle with good strategy is that everyone wants a strategy but it’s very hard to figure out how to get started with its creation. It is such a lofty, nebulous concept, and everyone has a different idea of how to go about it. So it’s really important to define what it is and what it’s for, and get broad agreement on that, before starting to create a strategy. To put it another way, make sure you define the black hole words.

For more on this, check out my (very long) case study on Collaborative Product Strategy Development.

Product quality as differentiator

I fully agree with Chris Coyier’s main point in Other People’s Busted Software is an Opportunity:

If you make software that does work reliably, you’ve got a leg up. Even if your customers don’t tell you “I like your software because it always works”, they’ll feel it and make choices around knowing it.

It feels like so many teams prioritize “innovation” over quality, so we end up getting stuck with products that have an overwhelming number of features but they all barely work—or the whole thing is slow and cumbersome. At some point we seem to have forgotten that product quality is not optional, and that it should be built in from the start.

Not only that, but in a “project” mindset teams just continue to move on to the next feature without taking the time to learn and improve what they shipped, as Marty Cagan points out in From Projects to Products:

Most efforts lose all hope of providing real value, and just try to get something shipped. Then as soon as they do finally ship, it’s not like they can iterate to improve the product. Instead, the people usually scatter off to their next assignments; nobody owning the outcome, and any important learnings from the effort likely lost.

This seems almost silly to point out, but a feature is not going to help your business if (1) it doesn’t add value and/or (2) it doesn’t work well. And yet somehow lots of teams put validation and quality on the backburner while they rush to get more features out. So Chris is right in his post: focusing on product quality is a huge differentiator in today’s software market.

The Product Culture Shift

Here’s a great post by Camille Fournier about The Product Culture Shift, and how every part of an engineering culture needs to change when product managers are added to traditional software infrastructure organizations.

To start, let’s be clear about one thing: as tempting as it might be, just hiring product managers won’t fix this problem. Even if you could find enough good product managers who want this type of job, which you can’t, product managers are only useful when they are paired with willing engineering teams. If the engineering teams don’t feel a sense of ownership for delivering a great product to their customers, product managers are unlikely to close that gap, and they will more likely turn into glorified backlog groomers than true product leaders.

Manage the What, Not the How

Molly Graham makes a key distinction about good management in the post Manage the What, Not the How:

The key to exceptional management is to get great at defining the “what”. As a leader, you need to know how to create alignment, how to clarify what you expect, and how to communicate all of it. 

She goes on to explain that a big mistake she sees some managers make is to focus too much on how work is done. And when you do have to get involved in the “how”, do it through coaching:

When you intervene, you intervene with coaching. You can say, “That email you sent seemed abrupt,” or “You missed these two points that were important.” You can share examples to learn from. You’re giving feedback and then letting them try it again, not jumping in to micromanage.

How Process Impacts Your Culture

Josephine Conneely has some excellent thoughts on the feared P-word in How Process Impacts Your Culture. I especially like going back to the purpose of adding process when evaluating what you have in place:

The aim of process in its purest form is to:

  • Facilitate ease of doing work: Design methods for teams to effectively work together, make decisions, and achieve their goals.
  • Reduce risk: Ensure company doesn’t fall foul of legal & compliance obligations or go bankrupt.
  • Ensure consistency and fairness: Aim for all customers and employees to have a similar experience in their interactions with an organisation.

The Product-Led Growth Trap

Oliver Jay wrote a 3-part essay about what he calls “The PLG Trap”, where product-led growth companies grow to a certain point and then suddenly sees that growth slow with no obvious ways through the slowdown. From the introduction to the essays, Oliver says this usually happens after an initial (and initially successful!) expansion into the enterprise market:

Quite simply, despite the complex security and administrative features you’ve launched, your product has not evolved to becoming broadly “enterprise-ready” for the majority of your enterprise prospects.

At this point, you may feel trapped–the PLG Trap. You’ve set growth expectations externally and internally based on how revenue (in particular, from the upmarket segments) has grown in the past few years.

However, what drove revenue in the past, in terms of your product offering as well as your sales and marketing motions, is unsustainable. There is no more bottoms-up, low-hanging fruit to feed the larger sales and marketing engine you’ve built. To pursue sustained revenue growth, you must tolerate a lower efficiency…only to now be punished by the public markets in what appears to be the beginning of a recession.

The essays go through several reasons why companies fall into this trap, and also how to avoid it by making smarter decision about sales, marketing, and product roadmaps early on.

Life beyond OKRs: Tools for goal-setting

Ok, here’s the thing. I didn’t share this talk I’m doing on Thursday when it was announced because as much as I tried, I just didn’t feel like the story was coming together. Writing this talk was much harder than some others that I’ve done, but I think I finally got there last night. So with only a few hours to spare, here you go…

In Life beyond OKRs: Tools for goal-setting I’m going to talk about our team’s foundation (principles & values), how we set goals, and how we plan and execute. If that’s your thing, come join us!