I often find myself experimenting with new tactics to increase my learning, be more productive, or save myself time (so I can focus on more ‘valuable’ things). Notice, I don’t call them habits. They are deliberately experiments. Only if they prove effective would I continue to focus on them, ultimately with the goal to make them habits. Continue reading “coach.me”→
Speed wins. Startup dogma. Silicon Valley platitude. Dangerous concept that is often misinterpreted.
People hear this and think of the mythological developer who just cranks things out at lightning speed. Working all night, crushing Red Bulls, typing furiously on their laptop. There are many flaws with that mythology that I won’t go into here, but why does that mythology exist in the first place? Business executives are the reason. Continue reading “Speed Wins”→
Education is a tough market to crack. One of the big reasons that it is such a difficult market is the unbundled consumer.
Typically, a consumer does one of three things. They decide to buy something, they then buy that thing, and they then consume that thing. Many things go into each one of those steps, but they are pretty universal. A customer will take them, in whatever form, and the result will drive a business forward.
Not in education. The consumer is unbundled.
In the example of textbooks, in particular. The professor decides what is bought. Financial aid (i.e. the government) or parents then pay for the book. Finally, the student is the one who consumes the book.
This is one of the big reasons why trade books have reached majority market share, while textbooks have lagged dramatically in the transition. Tech savvy entrepreneurs have pursued lots of the digital efforts, but all have ended in a resounding thud (at least so far), in large part because they have not understood this unique characteristic of the higher ed market. They generally targeted ‘consumers,’ not making the nuanced distinction to target just the decision making part of the ‘consumer.’
Maybe this is arrogance of technologists who believe that technology will ultimately rule the day and win in all markets. I don’t disagree with that notion, but it will take a lot more time in higher ed given the inertia of the sector and the unbundling of the decision making, payment, and consumption of the product.
I hate weasel words. So many words get bastardized and misrepresented, especially in business, but it happens in politics, science, and other fields too. They become trendy. They become buzzwords. Companies feel they need to use these words or else they look like dummies. Guess what, most of the time when you use the terms incorrectly, you look like a complete dumbass.
Some of my favorites from the software / startup world…
“Platform” – your website is not a platform. It’s a website. Or maybe it’s an app. Unless other people can independently build whatever they want on top of your software, you are NOT a platform. Stop it.
“Disruptive” – everyone thinks they are disrupting things nowadays. Really? Giving people a new filter to put over their picture of dinner is not fucking disruptive. Poor Clay Christensen. I’m sure he had the best of intentions, but the jackals hijacked his concept. Now it’s meaningless.
The one I’m going to deep dive on today is “MVP.”
Thanks to Eric Ries and Steve Blank, everyone’s talking about MVP nowadays. However, in my observations, people are using it as an excuse to put crappy shit out there. MVP doesn’t mean it’s OK to be crappy. Your product still needs to be good. Most of all, it still needs to be valuable and meet whatever goal your user is trying to achieve. Otherwise, all you have done is spent money to “test” and make someone’s day worse. They’ll never get that time back from trying your sloppy product. Don’t do that to them. There is enough anguish in the world.
A better term would have been Minimal VALUABLE Product. I think that re-frames the context in the right way. What is the simplest, most straightforward way to create value for your user? Reframing the question in that way puts it all in perspective.
The team at Spotify has nailed this. Below is from a presentation given by XX that illustrates what an MVP really is.
It’s simple, but powerful. If your user’s goal is to go somewhere more quickly, you should maniacally focus on that. Even if you are the next Steve Jobs and can dream up the most badass sports car to serve that need, you have to start somewhere. You’re a lunatic if you think it’s best to spend 5 years building the dream of that sports car. Then you’re in waterfall hell with no shot at actually delivering the car on time, let alone managing the risk that what you dreamt up might not be what your user in 5 years may want.
Instead focus on the goal. Get somewhere more quickly. How would you do that. You wouldn’t start by giving them a tire. They can’t do anything with a tire, even if it might be a part of the end product. Reframing leads you to think about the most straightforward way to get your user somewhere more quickly. So you build them a simple skateboard.
BOOM. You deliver value immediately and your user is delighted. They can get somewhere faster. Then you talk to the user and ask him what’s challenging him now. Oh, you hare a hard time balancing? Why don’t we add a little steering column. More value. Build, Test, Gather Feedback, Hypothesize, Repeat.
In five years you end up with a sports car. But now you have a user who is a huge advocate because they’ve been benefitting from your awesomeness for five whole years. Isn’t that awesome? I think so.
So, take off your black turtleneck and stop building sports cars. Reframe your problem around your user’s goals. Then think really hard about how you can meet that goal in the simplest, most straightforward way.
Other great articles on this topic can be found here, here and here
The “Line of Chaos” is a concept that good product managers will not just understand, but will embrace with vigor.
First, let’s start with what it is. It is an imaginary line that serves to illustrate the interface between business and technology. Why does that interface matter? It matters because business people and engineers are fundamentally different.
Recall the post by Paul Graham about Makers vs. Managers. Business people, especially sales people, thrive on selling, meetings, making clients happy, reacting to the client or market, the (not so) occasional fire-drill, and often just raw activity. They are interrupt-driven. How many times have you heard someone say, “I’m so busy! Look at all the meetings I have on my calendar.” They frequently switch context. They lie in the now. It is often fluid, reactive, and, well, chaotic.
Engineers (I’d include designers in this too) thrive on long blocks of deep thinking to solve problems. Output should be the measure of productivity for engineers, not the activity or the lines of code. In fact, time to think, not code, may result in the best output (a scalable design or elegant feature, for instance).
None of this is controversial. The thing that isn’t mentioned in the PG article is how those two different worlds can work together to great effect. This is where product managers step in. They are responsible for defending the engineers from the chaos. In some ways, they are responsible for saving the business people from their own chaos (even if they might not know it at the time). PMs are the keepers of the Line. Good PMs will fight to the death to ensure that the Line does not penetrate the engineering team.
The keeping of the Line of Chaos takes many forms for a PM. Prioritization. Stakeholder management. Feature benefit analysis. MVPs. Product strategy. At the end of the day, these and other common principles of product management are just tools to fight back the Line of Chaos.
This is not to say that the Chaos does not serve a purpose. It does. Great ideas often emerge from the chaos. But, even then, the idea is going to need some help to get presented to the engineers in a way that puts them in a position to be successful.
Great product managers are hard to find. There aren’t a lot of people who can both operate in the chaos, while simultaneously fighting it.
No! Not financially, but productivity-wise. People have a tendency to hoard things. Emails are the worst, but there are other things people hoard – especially in professional settings. Files. Old presentations. Spreadsheets. Ideas.
Admit it. You probably have some crazy folder structure that is maybe half relevant to what you do, but was based on some idea you had a couple years ago. Now you don’t even remember what’s eight layers deep in that hierarchy. So you just use omni search on your Mac to find what you’re looking for (if you don’t do that already, you should start).
I see this a lot with tickets, user stories, bugs, and a bunch of other things. People place irrational value in having all of those sorts of things ‘tracked.’ The reality is that they probably have not looked at any of those items in months, if not years. But, there’s a huge list of things. It’s intimidating to look at that list because it seems like you are just totally swamped and will never get out from under it. It clutters your thoughts when you need clarity.
But you can. And when you do, you will feel liberated.
The only thing you can do is declare bankruptcy and delete it all.
Yes, that’s right.
You may black-out when you hit the button from the anxiety, but a funny thing happens once you make the leap and black back in — nothing.
The sky is still blue. The world is still there. There is still important work to do. If you’re too scared to delete, you can always just archive. Storage is cheap nowadays and search is pretty good with most stuff.
Now, the only difference from before is that you have now de-cluttered. You have freed yourself from the tyranny of all those things you were never going to do anyways. Now focus on the important stuff that matters.
As a product manager, you should NOT be in the business of tracking what everyone in the company thinks we should maybe do one day. You should be laser-focused on what is in front of your business in the next 90 days max. That’s six two-week sprints. That is so much time.
In fact, by keeping it somewhere a stakeholder can see it, you are setting an implicit message that it will get done at some point, regardless if it ever will. It validates the idea. You’ve now set yourself up for conflict down the road. That is bad and will waste your time.
It’s just not logical (a nice way of saying crazy) to think that if something isn’t important today that it will miraculously become a priority if it stays on some random list for long enough. Or maybe the thought is that you’ll do all that other important work first and then have some time to do unimportant stuff – again crazy. What’s more, if those things you deleted are important, it will come up again. I promise. You won’t be able to ignore it.
It feels great. It does.
I discovered this when we moved from an old ticket system to Trello (highly recommended). We just moved systems and started fresh. No import, not translation. Nothing. Just a fresh Trello board and the path forward. It felt amazing. I now do it with email, my to-do list, and a few other things I do to manage my productivity.
Fight the clutter, declare bankruptcy, make the leap, and delete it!
Then the hard work of keeping things de-cluttered so you don’t need to declare bankruptcy again any time soon.
Communication is the lifeblood of a business. Without it, there is confusion, misalignment, wasted effort, missed opportunities, poor performance, and failure. Email revolutionized communications. Email reduced the time to communicate AND increased information density at the same time. The ROI on those simultaneous improvements to communication was incomparable. Rapid adoption ensued and everyone became glued to their email.
As with most technologies, and the innovations that disrupt them, email reached (a long time ago) a mature state. We are now entering a post-email age. New forms of communication are emerging that push the boundaries to an even more efficient frontier.
Email suffers from some significant shortcomings that are no longer justified in the face of new solutions. There are now solutions, from Trello to Slack to Basecamp, that better optimize both variables of the ROI.
What does this mean for you?
Try to move all your communications off of email. That might sound crazy, but just try it. Especially if you are a PM.
Encourage face to face interactions when there is a need for synchronous information exchanges. Face to face will always will be the best form of communication. Use new tools when there is a need for asynchronous information exchanges.
We are currently experimenting with some new processes where email is not allowed. The early results are positive. Stakeholders are more active participants. They are providing better information, faster. They have more clarity of thought.
But, why is that?
My hypothesis is that email has become a crutch. Response time often comes at the expense of a thoughtful response. By changing the medium, it forces people to take a bit more time and organize their thoughts. The end result is that the communication is more information rich and actionable. The information is more dense, but the amount of time it took to communicate (using the new tools) is equal to that of email. Thus, the ROI is better on that new form of communication, when compared to email.
Plus, no longer being a slave to your inbox is amazing. At first, you are anxious because you don’t have a ton of email – but then you realize – that’s the point. You and your team will be more productive. Stakeholders are better equipped with the info they need. And you can finally start doing all that work that has piled up because you had been spending so much time responding to emails!
What do you think? Give it a shot and let me know how it goes.