Menu

Posts tagged “product management”

No running in airports

Every time I travel, just before I leave the house, I do a weird thing. I stop at the front door of our house, look myself in the mirror, and say out loud: “Remember, no running in airports today”. Travel is inherently stressful and I’ve found that once it boils over into having to run to catch a flight, I lose my ability to deal with things well. So I try to remind myself to keep calm and walk on.

Of course, there are a lot of variables in the “no running in airports” equation that are out of my control. A delay might cause a tight connection. A messed up security line could take longer than expected. I could miss a gate reassignment and try to board the wrong flight (yes, that happened). And yet, that statement helps to ground me in the two most important things I can do to stay in control of my travel day: be prepared (know when to go where, renew my Flighty subscription, etc.), and pay attention to detail (um, just, you know… read the gate assignment right).

I was thinking about this as I was getting ready to head into another workweek. There seems to be a lot of “running in airports” going on in the tech world right now, and it sometimes feels like it gets too much to handle. So what would it mean in a work context to look in the mirror on Monday morning and say out loud: “Remember, no running in airports today”? Yes, lots of variables are out of our control, but how could we be prepared and pay attention to detail in a way that reduces some of the likelihood of that happening?

For me? I could be prepared by looking ahead at my calendar and making sure I am spending my time in the right meetings—and that I go into them knowing exactly what is expected of me and what we expect to get out of them. I could try to anticipate “delayed flights”—those unexpected wrenches in projects—and what I could do to get things back on track if that happens.

I could pay attention to detail by listening intently when people speak, by hearing the meanings and feelings underneath the words in meetings where things seem a little wobbly. By noticing when “a gate assignment changed” (no, I’ll never stop being embarrassed about that one) and preemptively figuring out how and why it happened and what I can do about it.

There are, of course, no guarantees. But I still firmly believe that teams make better products in calm environments. Just like in travel, we can’t really create calm. The planes are going to do what they do. But we can remind ourselves that the goal is not to run, and that we have some agency over that.

Here’s to not running in airports this week.

Why using a Now/Next/Later roadmap might be right for you

I was recently asked by a colleague to write up our team’s reasoning for using a Now/Next/Later roadmap to plan our work (instead of quarterly/annual roadmaps with dates). If you already use Now/Next/Later nothing in here will be new to you, but I thought I’d share what I wrote for this internal document in case it’s useful to anyone hoping to make this shift as well.

We use an adapted version of a Now/Next/Later roadmap to plan our work. You can read more about this approach in Introduction to Lean Roadmapping by its creator, Janna Bastow. In short, here are the guiding principles for using this roadmap and why it is effective:

  • Deadline-driven development is fraught with issues that make it a fairly ineffective way to plan delivery work. This includes:
    • Long-term priorities frequently change based on new data and developments, so any planning past a few months out is mostly fiction and rarely happens as planned.
    • Deadlines are often set without input from the delivery teams who are building the product, which makes estimates inaccurate and difficult to attain.
    • Because deadlines are often arbitrary, delivery teams have to make quality tradeoffs to meet the dates, which introduces unnecessary technical debt into the system.
  • Using a Now/Next/Later approach helps delivery teams know what is most important to work on, and what is coming down the road.
    • “Now” means Now–it is literally the work that is in flight. This work should be limited to 1–2 projects per team to ensure effective delivery.
      • Changes to “Now” should only happen in the rarest of occasions so as not to interrupt work in flight.
    • “Next” means anything from 2–8 weeks from now. This is work that is planned and ready to go as soon as a team becomes available. It has been spec’d and scoped, and everyone agrees it’s the next important thing. We limit not only Work In Progress (Now), but also Work in Next, so that there are not too many priorities vying for attention.
      • Changes to “Next” should happen infrequently since the work is planned and the team will be ready to go at any moment.
    • “Later” means anything from 2–6 months from now. This is work we believe is important to be prioritized, but it hasn’t been fully spec’d and scoped yet.
      • Changes to “Later” can–and often does–happen whenever new data becomes available that makes us shift priorities. This is expected and encouraged, until the project moves to “Next” where it gets locked in and fully spec’d.
    • We cheated and added “Much Later”, which lists things that we think will be 6–12 months out. The likelihood of these projects changing are high, but it is good to have a long-term view on what we believe, with the current information we have, will be important for the business and our customers to work one.

We do acknowledge and recognize that delivery dates are important. We prefer to work with high-integrity commitments, which are dates that delivery teams commit to once they have had a chance to properly scope out a project (which sometimes means getting started without a completion date set).

The teams are accountable to these dates because they have been involved in setting them, and though they can change based on unknowns, these changes should be infrequent.

Fix The System Problem, Not The People Problem

I love Paul Taylor’s perspective in Fix The System Problem, Not The People Problem. He points out that many managers look first at the people structure of an organization when it is struggling:

People often resort to blaming individuals rather than acknowledging systemic issues due to a psychological inclination for self-preservation. Additionally, societal and organizational cultures may emphasize individual accountability, discouraging a systemic analysis. Almost ALL of the leadership BS our organizations are clothed in focuses on individual accountability, the way we measure performance, the way we conduct performance reviews. It’s all down to you.

The point is—don’t resort to a re-org just because it seems too hard to figure out what the systemic issues are:

The next time you see a proposal for a restructure, ask if there’s been any attempt to tackle the underlying causes of the problem. Look for any changes to the actual system. If you can’t see any—it is doomed to fail.

This Is the Person Selling Your Product

It took me many years to rid myself of the commonly-held belief that Sales is the “enemy” of Product. Here’s a good reminder that (good) Sales teams are our allies:

Contrary to stereotypes, only part of sales actually involves convincing a customer to buy your product. The person selling your product spends a very large amount of time helping customers successfully navigate their own complex organizations, and purchase a product that they already want (yours).

Feature/Product Fit

I like this framing by Casey Winters on how to evaluate Feature/Product Fit when you release something new:

Feature/Product Fit has a third requirement that is a bit different: the feature has to improve retention, engagement, and/or monetization for the core product. This last part can be a bit confusing for product teams to understand. Not only do the products they are building need to be used regularly and attract their own usage to be successful, they also need to make the whole of the product experience better.

Any new feature is part of the larger product system, and our success metrics should take that into account.

The Johari Window: A Guide for Leaders

The Johari Window: A Guide for Leaders by Sheril Mathews is a very helpful post for leaders about a model I wasn’t familiar with:

The Johari Window is a 2x2 matrix that captures how we communicate based on self-knowledge and how others see us. It’s a disclosure-feedback model of awareness based on principles of feedback and learning. It can be used for increasing levels of openness, self-awareness, and self-understanding. This makes the Johari Window a particularly relevant tool for leaders and managers.

Sheril goes on to explain the model in detail, and how to increase the size of the top left corner of the matrix, called “The Arena”:

This is the public space. It’s the part of ourselves—behaviors and feelings—that we’re aware of, and so are others. All information is known to all parties. We move freely within this space and it fosters open communication.

Johari Window

The Power Shift: Mastering Reverse Interviews and Interim Roles

This is a great hiring post on “reverse interviews”—or how to make interviews less one-sided and make sure you get the information you need to make a decision about a company. I like this question in particular:

Ask your direct manager for examples of promotions and attritions they have managed. Request stories about individuals they’ve managed in the past who have gone on to achieve significant success. Ask about the frequency of their meetings with direct reports, their perspective on their role in your work, their preferred communication styles, and their approach to staying informed. Also, clarify who makes which types of decisions.

How To Ship Fast

This is a highly opinionated piece (nothing wrong with that!) and I think there’s some nuance needed, but in general I like these principles from How To Ship Fast. This one is definitely a hot take, but in a dream world where everything is perfect I would agree:

Time spent on prioritization is the canary in the coal mine for not being close enough to your customers. The discrete task of prioritization should take almost no time. Only work on Important things. Sort those Important things into “Do now” and “Do next”. If you are only working on Important things, the order does not matter too much (and don’t spend time debating it). If what’s Important is not obvious you are not close enough to your customers.

Alternatives To Product Managers

In his characteristic spicy way Marty Cagan says that if you want to replace product managers that’s fine—but be careful:

If you’re a CEO or GM, you might be thinking that instead of trying to recruit and develop strong, true product managers, maybe you’ll just do like Apple and skip the product managers, and you’ll just take responsibility for value and viability yourself?

If so, it’s critical to understand that the Apple product model depends on exceptionally strong product leaders. Many of Apple’s product leaders have 10–25 years of experience building world-class products at Apple.

Lessons from going freemium: a decision that broke our business

In Lessons from going freemium: a decision that broke our business, Bobby Pinero (CEO of Equals) makes some interesting points about what they’ve learned about freemium pricing models. This point about how user friction is not always a bad thing stood out to me:

In all of our pursuit of getting people into the product, the thing we forgot is that the goal of onboarding is not for people to complete onboarding. It’s not to just get people into the product. The goal of onboarding is for people to get their first moments of value from your product. To get “activated.” And removing friction is actually detached from this goal.

Just like everything in product, this all depends. Every business is different. But it’s nice to see things from another perspective