Product Roadmap Quotes

For example, if overwork is due to (in)stability of the production systems, it’s your job as the manager to slow down the product roadmap in order to focus on stability for a while. Make clear measures of alerts, downtime, and incidents, and strive to reduce them. My advice is to dedicate 20% of your time in every planning session to system sustainability work (“sustainability” instead of the more common “technical debt”).

A well-crafted agenda serves as the roadmap for a productive board meeting.

Finally, it's all about solving problems, not implementing features. Conventional product roadmaps are all about output. Strong teams know it's not only about implementing a solution. They must ensure that solution solves the underlying problem. It's about business results.

Trying to please everyone would not only be challenging but would also result in a feature-rich product that might not satisfy anyone. Note

Buy & hold stock in companies where you love the product roadmap, sell where you don’t." 11/18/2020

You can't take your old organization based on feature teams, roadmaps, and passive managers, then overlay a technique from a radically different culture and expect that will work or change anything.

Product requirements conversations must then be grounded in business outcomes: what are we trying to achieve by building this product? This rule holds true for design decisions as well. Success criteria must be redefined and roadmaps must be done away with. In their place, teams build backlogs of hypotheses they’d like to test and prioritize them based on risk, feasibility, and potential success.

There are no tiny features when you’re doing things properly. This is why as a product manager you need a good understanding of what it takes to implement a feature before you nod your head and add it to the roadmap.

The appropriate milestones measuring a startup’s progress answer these questions: How well do we understand what problems customers have? How much will they pay to solve those problems? Do our product features solve these problems? Do we understand our customers’ business? Do we understand the hierarchy of customer needs? Have we found visionary customers, ones who will buy our product early? Is our product a must-have for these customers? Do we understand the sales roadmap well enough to consistently sell the product? Do we understand what we need to be profitable? Are the sales and business plans realistic, scalable, and achievable? What do we do if our model turns out to be wrong?

At a time when the current and two former US presidents have admittedly indulged, as have politicians of all stripes from Al Gore to Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin and over 50% of the adult US population, the credibility tipping point of the War on Drugs propaganda has long been passed. All that appears to be missing is the political courage to admit failure and move on to more realistic and efficient policies. What will it take for decision makers to display the wisdom and garner the courage to end the disastrous War on Drugs and responsibly take charge of drug production and trade instead of leaving it in the hands of extremely dangerous and powerful international criminal organizations?

There was little effort to conceal this method of doing business. It was common knowledge, from senior managers and heads of research and development to the people responsible for formulation and the clinical people. Essentially, Ranbaxy’s manufacturing standards boiled down to whatever the company could get away with. As Thakur knew from his years of training, a well-made drug is not one that passes its final test. Its quality must be assessed at each step of production and lies in all the data that accompanies it. Each of those test results, recorded along the way, helps to create an essential roadmap of quality. But because Ranbaxy was fixated on results, regulations and requirements were viewed with indifference. Good manufacturing practices were stop signs and inconvenient detours. So Ranbaxy was driving any way it chose to arrive at favorable results, then moving around road signs, rearranging traffic lights, and adjusting mileage after the fact. As the company’s head of analytical research would later tell an auditor: “It is not in Indian culture to record the data while we conduct our experiments.

The product strategy describes how the long-term goal is attained; it includes the product’s value proposition, market, key features, and business goals. The product roadmap shows how the product strategy is put into action by stating specific releases with dates, goals, and features.

Requirements for a Roadmap Relaunch ​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​As we outlined in the preface, the product people we’ve talked to are looking for certain things from a roadmap. A product roadmap should: Put the organization’s plans in a strategic context Focus on delivering value to customers and the organization Embrace learning as part of a successful product development process Rally the organization around a single set of priorities Get customers excited about the product’s direction ​​​​​​​​​​​​​At the same time, a product roadmap should not: Make promises product teams aren’t confident they will deliver on Require a wasteful process of up-front design and estimation Be conflated with a project plan or a release plan (we cannot stress this enough)

Your product roadmap should slot right in between your company vision and your more detailed development, release, and operational plans.

Your product roadmap is the prototype for your strategy.

Remarkably, in the vast majority of companies (not the ones that are good at product), the actual product teams don't do much ideation themselves. This is because what's really going on is that the ideas are already handed to the product teams in the form of prioritized features on product roadmaps, where most of the items on those roadmaps are coming either from requests from big customers (or prospective customers), or from company stakeholders or execs. Unfortunately, these are rarely the quality of ideas we're looking for.

An effective vision has four qualities: it is big, shared, inspiring, and concise.

When we become an autonomous organization, we will be one of the largest unadulterated digital security organizations on the planet,” he told the annual Intel Security Focus meeting in Las Vegas. “Not only will we be one of the greatest, however, we will not rest until we achieve our goal of being the best,” said Young. This is the main focus since Intel reported on agreements to deactivate its security business as a free organization in association with the venture company TPG, five years after the acquisition of McAfee. Young focused on his vision of the new company, his roadmap to achieve that, the need for rapid innovation and the importance of collaboration between industries. “One of the things I love about this conference is that we all come together to find ways to win, to work together,” he said. First, Young highlighted the publication of the book The Second Economy: the race for trust, treasure and time in the war of cybersecurity. The main objective of the book is to help the information security officers (CISO) to communicate the battles that everyone faces in front of others in the c-suite. “So we can recruit them into our fight, we need to recruit others on our journey if we want to be successful,” he said. Challenging assumptions The book is also aimed at encouraging information security professionals to challenge their own assumptions. “I plan to send two copies of this book to the winner of the US presidential election, because cybersecurity is going to be one of the most important issues they could face,” said Young. “The book is about giving more people a vision of the dynamism of what we face in cybersecurity, which is why we have to continually challenge our assumptions,” he said. “That’s why we challenge our assumptions in the book, as well as our assumptions about what we do every day.” Young said Intel Security had asked thousands of customers to challenge the company’s assumptions in the last 18 months so that it could improve. “This week, we are going to bring many of those comments to life in delivering a lot of innovation throughout our portfolio,” he said. Then, Young used a video to underscore the message that the McAfee brand is based on the belief that there is power to work together, and that no person, product or organization can provide total security. By allowing protection, detection and correction to work together, the company believes it can react to cyber threats more quickly. By linking products from different suppliers to work together, the company believes that network security improves. By bringing together companies to share intelligence on threats, you can find better ways to protect each other. The company said that cyber crime is the biggest challenge of the digital era, and this can only be overcome by working together. Revealed a new slogan: “Together is power”. The video also revealed the logo of the new independent company, which Young called a symbol of its new beginning and a visual representation of what is essential to the company’s strategy. “The shield means defense, and the two intertwined components are a symbol of the union that we are in the industry,” he said. “The color red is a callback to our legacy in the industry.” Three main reasons for independence According to Young, there are three main reasons behind the decision to become an independent company. First of all, it should focus entirely on enterprise-level cybersecurity, solve customers ‘cybersecurity problems and address clients’ cybersecurity challenges. The second is innovation. “Because we are committed and dedicated to cybersecurity only at the company level, our innovation is focused on that,” said Young. Third is growth. “Our industry is moving faster than any other IT sub-segment, we have t

Eliminating the right features requires a solid understanding of your target group and the problem your product solves—as well as a good portion of courage. It’s always easier to create a me-too product than to create something different. As Steve Jobs once said: “Innovation is not about saying yes to everything. It’s about saying no to all but the most crucial features.

If you don’t get any negative feedback, if your ideas are never invalidated, then you won’t learn enough.

This is because what's really going on is that the ideas are already handed to the product teams in the form of prioritized features on product roadmaps, where most of the items on those roadmaps are coming either from requests from big customers (or prospective customers), or from company stakeholders or execs. Unfortunately, these are rarely the quality of ideas we're looking for. In general, if the product team is given actual business problems to solve rather than solutions, and the product team does their job and interacts directly and frequently with actual users and customers, then getting a sufficient quantity and quality of product ideas is not really a problem.

But the way most companies do them at this stage to come up with a prioritized roadmap is truly ridiculous and here's why. Remember those two key inputs to every business case? How much money you'll make, and how much it will cost?

In the case of Trunk Club, they led with a simple polarizing message related to how their target customers generally feel about shopping. By saying “men want to dress well, but they hate to shop,” they intentionally called out shopping as the enemy of their service. And if you are a man who hates to shop, you will rapidly align with their message without much thought. The beauty of this approach is that it has the opposite effect for clients who are a poor fit for your solution. For example, if you’re a man who loves to shop, you may be immediately turned off by Trunk Club’s value proposition. While being excited about customers not liking your solution may seem counterintuitive, it’s actually a good thing! Bad-fit customers who buy your product are more likely to become dissatisfied and hurt your brand. They may also provide errant feedback that can quickly derail your product or company roadmap if you decide to follow it. In short, polarizing messages can serve double duty by keeping the good-fit customers in and helping the bad ones self-select out. In the case of Trunk Club, this approach worked: they were acquired by US luxury retailer Nordstrom in 2014 for $350 million.

Roadmap Companies generally collect their product plans into a roadmap. A roadmap is a document that shows what the company/product is doing now, what the company/product plans to do over the next N months, what the company/product plans to do later, roughly how much effort each high-level task will take, what products the company will create, and what features they will have, etc.

Base Camp With “tough tech” ventures—in which product development demands a vast amount of leading-edge science and engineering work—entrepreneurs often consider creating ancillary businesses before launching their primary business. These pared-down versions serve as the first application for the technologies they’re developing. Samir Kaul and his partners at Khosla Ventures have likened these ancillary businesses to a base camp, where mountaineers pause to organize their provisions and get acclimated to low oxygen levels before their final push to the summit.

Unlike ventures that are caught in a Speed Trap, with the Help Wanted pattern, a startup sustains product-market fit as it grows but cannot mobilize the resources needed to continue expanding.

An alternative to targeting multiple segments with a single product is creating separate versions of the product, each with different features and branding. This solution takes care of positioning problems but boosts costs and complexity.

How Much Innovation? When designing their first product, founders must decide how much to innovate. Some entrepreneurs believe that more innovation is always better, but as we’ll see, that mindset can get them in trouble.

Looking back, Wallace concluded that instead of raising funds from VC firms, Quincy could have sought financial backing from a clothing factory. That would have solved two problems: A factory with an equity stake in Quincy would have expedited orders and worked harder to correct production problems, and factory owners with deep industry experience would have known how to set an optimal pace for the growth of a new apparel line—in contrast to Quincy’s VCs, who pressured the founders to grow at full tilt.

the complexity posed another problem: There is no way to run a lean experiment to prove, in advance, that a planned production process will work. You must fully develop the process and then run it in order to demonstrate its effectiveness. Producing apparel in sample quantities, which Quincy’s founders did successfully after their trunk show tests, is a completely different ball game compared to manufacturing it in volume.

Nagaraj and his new team were heading for a False Start—a failure pattern common to many early-stage ventures. A false start occurs when a startup rushes to launch its first product before conducting enough customer research—only to find that the opportunities they’ve identified are rife with problems. By giving short shrift to early and accurate customer feedback and by neglecting to test their assumptions with MVPs, they simply run out of time to fix all the flaws, thus turning Lean Startup’s “Fail Fast” mantra into a self-fulfilling prophecy.

But Triangulate’s team, like many entrepreneurs, neglected yet another Lean Startup precept: complete “customer discovery”—a thorough round of interviews with prospective customers—before designing and developing a minimum viable product. In Nagaraj’s postmortem analysis of Triangulate’s failure, he acknowledged skipping this crucial early step: “In retrospect, I should have spent a few months talking to as many customers as possible before we started to code.

Iteration should stop only when you’re confident you have formulated a compelling customer value proposition—also known as a positioning statement—that includes answers to all of the blanks listed below: For [INSERT: target customer segments] dissatisfied with [INSERT: existing solution] due to [INSERT: unmet needs], [INSERT: venture name] offers a [INSERT: product category] that provides [INSERT: key benefits of your defensible, differentiated solution].

The best way to synthesize all of this convergent thinking is to develop personas—fictional examples of archetypal customers used to focus product designs and craft marketing messages. Personas often have memorable names—say, “Picky Paula,” for a hard-to-satisfy dater—along with imagined photos, specific demographic and behavioral attributes

It’s generally best to create three to five personas, with one or two being “primary,” that is, representative of your target customer segments. Having too many primary personas can result in a product that tries to be all things to all people.

MVP Testing. Prototyping and prototype testing should proceed in iterative loops until a dominant design emerges. Based on test feedback, designers should reject some prototypes and refine others, producing higher-fidelity versions. Once they converge on a single, favored solution, it’s time for minimum viable product testing. An MVP is a prototype—a facsimile of the future product. What distinguishes an MVP from other prototypes is how it is tested. Rather than sitting across a table, getting verbal feedback from a reviewer, you put a prototype that seems like a real product in the hands of real customers in a real-world context. The goal is to quickly but rigorously test assumptions about the demand for your solution—and gain what Eric Ries calls “validated learning”—with as little wasted effort as possible.

In general, your website, your sales and marketing materials, your pricing and even your immediate product roadmap will be designed to serve customers, and therefore should reflect your customer positioning not your investor positioning. Investors will understand that and will also understand that the story in your investor pitch deck may look dramatically different from the story in your sales deck.

Convenience sampling—testing the waters with friends and family—often leads to false positive results because loved ones tend to adore your idea no matter what. Crowdfunding campaigns—like the one Jibo ran on Indiegogo—pose a similar hazard. Individuals who back such campaigns are often product category enthusiasts looking for bright, shiny new things and are eager to be first to sample them. Crowdfunding campaigns can demonstrate a product’s appeal to such zealots, but they don’t provide data on mass-market demand.

Things have changed and product roadmaps haven’t caught up. They haven’t adapted to a world of lean and agile (some would even say post-agile) organizations. But there is still a need (even a hunger) for the vision, direction, and rallying cry that a good roadmap provides. To meet this need, roadmaps need a refresh — a relaunch, so to speak.

Chapter Summary: Fastlane Distinctions ✓- Wealth is a formula, not an ingredient. ✓- Process makes millionaires. Events are residual by-products of process. ✓- To seek a “wealth chauffeur” is to seek a surrogate for process. Process cannot be outsourced, because process dawns wisdom, personal growth, strength, and ultimately, events. CHAPTER 4 THE ROADMAPS TO WEALTH If you don’t know where you are going, any road will get you there.

Entrepreneurs who lead late-stage startups must maintain balance while pursuing opportunity, which requires them to set goals for speed and scope that are sufficiently ambitious yet achievable. By “speed,” I mean the pace of expansion of the venture’s core business—that is, its original product offered solely in its home market. “Scope” is a broader concept that encompasses four dimensions. The first three—geographic reach, product line breadth, and innovation—collectively define the range of the startup’s product market: How many additional customer segments will be targeted, and which of their needs will be addressed? The fourth dimension, vertical integration, refers to the range of activities that the startup will perform in-house rather than outsourcing to third parties.

Of the four opportunity elements, an early-stage startup’s customer value proposition is without question the most important. To survive, a new venture absolutely must offer a sustainably differentiated solution for strong, unmet customer needs. This point bears repeating: Needs must be strong. If an unknown startup’s product doesn’t address an acute pain point, customers aren’t likely to buy it. Likewise, differentiation is crucial: If the venture’s offering is not superior in meaningful ways to existing solutions, again, no one will buy it. Finally, sustaining this differentiation is important. Without barriers to imitation, the venture is vulnerable to copycats.

But what if you build it and no one comes? VC Marc Andreessen commented on this possibility: “The number one reason that we pass on entrepreneurs we’d otherwise like to back is focusing on product to the exclusion of everything else. We tend to cultivate and glorify this mentality in the Valley. But the dark side is that it gives entrepreneurs excuses not to do the hard stuff of sales and marketing. Many entrepreneurs who build great products simply don’t have a good distribution strategy. Even worse is when they insist that they don’t need one or call no distribution strategy a ‘viral marketing strategy.

An entrepreneur doesn’t really make decisions about her profit formula. Rather, the choices she makes about the other three elements of the venture’s opportunity—its Customer Value Proposition, Technology & Operations, and Marketing—dictate revenue and costs. These decisions collectively determine who the venture will serve and in what numbers, how it will price its product, how it will attract new customers, whether it will employ a “high-touch” service approach and incur commensurate costs, and so forth.

There are a few product teams out there that have modified their product roadmaps so that each item is stated as a business problem to solve rather than the feature or project that may or may not solve it. These are called outcome‐based roadmaps.

Give them the environment they need.” What does “environment” mean? Alex King describes an aspect of an environment that attracts and retains talent. He encourages leaders to ensure that the team has a clear long-term goal for what outcome they want to achieve. Not necessarily the specific product, but a good pulse on what problem they are solving. Having at stable 6-month or 1-year roadmap greatly benefits your team.

Weak teams just plod through the roadmap they've been assigned, month after month. And, when something doesn't work—which is often—first they blame it on the stakeholder that requested/demanded the feature and then they try to schedule another iteration on the roadmap, or they suggest a redesign or a different set of features that this time they hope will solve the problem.

At Google, a newly hired software engineer gets access to almost all of our code on the first day. Our intranet includes product roadmaps, launch plans, and employee snippets (weekly status reports) alongside employee and team quarterly goals (called OKRs, for “Objectives and Key Results”… I’ll talk more about them in chapter 7), so that everyone can see what everyone else is working on. A few weeks into every quarter, our executive chairman, Eric Schmidt, walks the company through the same presentation that the board of directors saw just days before. We share everything, and trust Googlers to keep the information confidential.

engineering organizations are typically designed to focus on building a product right, rather than building the right product. It’s easy for the product management team to be consumed in the details and pressures of producing detailed specs rather than looking at the market opportunity and discovering a winning product strategy and roadmap.

Instead, a disruptive innovation typically solves a customer problem in a better, more convenient, or cheaper way than existing alternatives. A disruptive product also creates a new market by addressing nonconsumption: it attracts people who did not take advantage of similar products. But

Once you understand what jobs people are striving to do, it becomes easier to predict what products or services they will take up and which will fall flat. While

FIGURE 34: A Simple Kanban Board for Strategy Testing

Good fortune is what happens when opportunity meets with planning. Thomas Edison

Here is why the wellbeing economy comes at the right time. At the international level there have been some openings, which can be exploited to turn the wellbeing economy into a political roadmap. The first was the ratification of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015. The SDGs are a loose list of 17 goals, ranging from good health and personal wellbeing to sustainable cities and communities as well as responsible production and consumption. They are a bit scattered and inconsistent, like most outcomes of international negotiations, but they at least open up space for policy reforms. For the first time in more than a century, the international community has accepted that the simple pursuit of growth presents serious problems. Even when it comes at high speed, its quality is often debatable, producing social inequalities, lack of decent work, environmental destruction, climate change and conflict. Through the SDGs, the UN is calling for a different approach to progress and prosperity. This was made clear in a 2012 speech by Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, who explicitly connected the three pillars of sustainable development: ‘Social, economic and environmental wellbeing are indivisible.’82 Unlike in the previous century, we now have a host of instruments and indicators that can help politicians devise different policies and monitor results and impacts throughout society. Even in South Africa, a country still plagued by centuries of oppression, colonialism, extractive economic systems and rampant inequality, the debate is shifting. The country’s new National Development Plan has been widely criticised because of the neoliberal character of the main chapters on economic development. Like the SDGs, it was the outcome of negotiations and bargaining, which resulted in inconsistencies and vagueness. Yet, its opening ‘vision statement’ is inspired by a radical approach to transformation. What should South Africa look like in 2030? The language is uplifting: We feel loved, respected and cared for at home, in community and the public institutions we have created. We feel understood. We feel needed. We feel trustful … We learn together. We talk to each other. We share our work … I have a space that I can call my own. This space I share. This space I cherish with others. I maintain it with others. I am not self-sufficient alone. We are self-sufficient in community … We are studious. We are gardeners. We feel a call to serve. We make things. Out of our homes we create objects of value … We are connected by the sounds we hear, the sights we see, the scents we smell, the objects we touch, the food we eat, the liquids we drink, the thoughts we think, the emotions we feel, the dreams we imagine. We are a web of relationships, fashioned in a web of histories, the stories of our lives inescapably shaped by stories of others … The welfare of each of us is the welfare of all … Our land is our home. We sweep and keep clean our yard. We travel through it. We enjoy its varied climate, landscape, and vegetation … We live and work in it, on it with care, preserving it for future generations. We discover it all the time. As it gives life to us, we honour the life in it.83 I could have not found better words to describe the wellbeing economy: caring, sharing, compassion, love for place, human relationships and a profound appreciation of what nature does for us every day. This statement gives us an idea of sufficiency that is not about individualism, but integration; an approach to prosperity that is founded on collaboration rather than competition. Nowhere does the text mention growth. There’s no reference to scale; no pompous images of imposing infrastructure, bridges, stadiums, skyscrapers and multi-lane highways. We make the things we need. We, as people, become producers of our own destiny. The future is not about wealth accumulation, massive

A great story about a big company’s ability to do this comes from one of the world’s biggest businesses, General Electric. I learned about Doug Dietz a few years ago when I saw him speak to a group of executives. Doug leads the design and development of award-winning medical imaging systems at GE Healthcare. He was at a hospital one day when he witnessed a little girl crying and shaking from fear as she was preparing to have an MRI — in a big, noisy, hot machine that Dietz had designed. Deeply shaken, he started asking the nurses if her reaction was common. He learned that 80 percent of pediatric patients had to be sedated during MRIs because they were too scared to lie still. He immediately decided he needed to change how the machines were designed. He flew to California for a weeklong design course at Stanford’s d.school. There he learned about a human-centric approach to design, collaborated with other designers, talked to healthcare professionals, and finally observed and talked to children in hospitals. The results were stunning. His humandriven redesigns wrapped MRI machines in fanciful themes like pirate ships and space adventures and included technicians who role-play. When Dietz’s redesigns hit children’s hospitals, patient satisfaction scores soared and the number of kids who needed sedation plummeted. Doug was teary-eyed as he told the story, and so were many of the senior executives in the audience. Products should be designed for people. Businesses should be run in a responsive, human-centric way. It is time to return to those basics. Let TRM be your roadmap and turn back to putting people first. It worked for our grandparents. It can work for you.

An even bigger issue is what comes next, which is when companies get really excited about their product roadmaps. I've seen countless roadmaps over the years, and the vast majority of them are essentially prioritized lists of features and projects. Marketing needs this feature for a campaign. Sales needs this feature for a new customer. Someone wants a PayPal integration. You get the idea.

Prioritizing Your Email Roadmap Chances are you’ll need a Hail Mary. And a Net Promoter Score survey email. And a newsletter. And… And… And… If you are getting started with your email program, the list of emails you’ll need will probably be very long. Do you need to do everything at once? Definitely not. In fact, it’s best to start your program by aligning with business priorities and getting results before thinking about expanding. What areas are most troublesome in your business right now? What metric are you expected to move with email? Is it: Engagement? Retention? Conversion? Revenue? Signups? If none of those stick out above the rest, start from the top. Welcome and onboarding emails set the tone for product usage. Better onboarding and value communication lead to reductions in churn and disengagement down the road. Welcome and onboarding emails are also sent to most, if not all, of your users, thus they have a greater potential to influence user behaviors. At Highlights, for example, we set up a welcome email, five onboarding emails, and an upsell email the week before we launched the product. The goal was to maximize the number of people in a position to convert. It also allowed us to start getting some data to optimize performance. In general, you’ll want to prioritize emails that: send a lot (large volume of sends); send consistently (every day, or every week at least); and have the potential to have a big impact on a key business goal. In the beginning especially, you want to make sure that you have a clear goal or metric to monitor with the aim of evaluating performance with user data. Start implementing a first sequence, test, gather data, and move on to the next sequence.

The first truth is that at least half of our ideas are just not going to work. There are many reasons for an idea to not work out. The most common is that customers just aren't as excited about this idea as we are. So, they choose not to use it. Sometimes they want to use it and they try it out, but the product is so complicated that it's simply more trouble than it's worth, so users again choose not to use it. Sometimes the issue is that customers would love it, but it turns out to be much more involved to build than we thought, and we decide we simply can't afford the time and money required to deliver it. So, I promise you that at least half the ideas on your roadmap are not going to deliver what you hope. (By the way, the really good teams assume that at least three quarters of the ideas won't perform like they hope.)

Now, suppose that in your process of experimentation, you end up creating a cake that is actually quite small. It’s so small you could sell it as a self-contained, single-serving cake, so you put a little wrapper around it. You realize that you’ve actually made supreme chocolate muffins instead of better chocolate cake. At first it might not seem like this is much of a change. The product hasn’t changed much — it’s the same batter— but almost everything else about your business has. Why? Because we changed the mental frame of reference around the product from “cake” to “muffin.” That change in context changes everything about the business: Target buyers and where you sell. Unlike cakes, muffins are sold at coffee shops and diners. Competitive alternatives. You are now competing with donuts, Danishes and bagels. Pricing and margin. Muffins sell for a buck or two, and you will be looking to sell a lot of them. Key product features and roadmap. You are now fighting for the hearts and minds of a noble class of people who eat chocolate for breakfast. They’re likely not worried about gluten or the origin of the salt in your caramel. They might like your muffin larger or with more caramel or maybe they want it deep-fried like a hash brown (you might be laughing, but deep down I think you want to try one of those).

Happiness is a by-product of what you do. If you are passionate about what you are doing, working toward fulfilling your life’s purpose, then happiness will have a much bigger meaning, and the satisfaction that you will derive will be immense.

crucial to know how the needs of early adopters and mainstream customers differ before commencing product development.

Good teams are skilled in the many techniques to rapidly try out product ideas to determine which ones are truly worth building. Bad teams hold meetings to generate prioritized roadmaps. Good teams love to have brainstorming discussions with smart thought leaders from across the company. Bad teams get offended when someone outside their team dares to suggest they do something. Good teams have product, design, and engineering sit side by side, and they embrace the give and take between the functionality, the user experience, and the enabling technology. Bad teams sit in their respective silos, and ask that others make requests for their services in the form of documents and scheduling meetings. Good teams are constantly trying out new ideas to innovate, but doing so in ways that protect the revenue and protect the brand. Bad teams are still waiting for permission to run a test. Good teams insist they have the skill sets on their team, such as strong product design, necessary to create winning products. Bad teams don't even know what product designers are. Good teams ensure that their engineers have time to try out the prototypes in discovery every day so that they can contribute their thoughts on how to make the product

Good teams engage directly with end users and customers every week, to better understand their customers, and to see the customer's response to their latest ideas. Bad teams think they are the customer. Good teams know that many of their favorite ideas won't end up working for customers, and even the ones that could will need several iterations to get to the point where they provide the desired outcome. Bad teams just build what's on the roadmap, and are satisfied with meeting dates and ensuring quality. Good teams understand the need for speed and how rapid iteration is the key to innovation, and they understand this speed comes from the right techniques and not forced labor. Bad teams complain they are slow because their colleagues are not working hard enough. Good teams make high‐integrity commitments after they've evaluated the request and ensured they have a viable solution that will work for the customer and the business. Bad teams complain about being a sales‐driven company. Good teams instrument their work so they can immediately understand how their product is being used and make adjustments based on the data. Bad teams consider analytics and reporting a nice to have.

In today’s interconnected world, we can get customer feedback in parallel with product development. This has led to a product development world where we can have deeper confidence that what we’re building today will resonate with customers but with much less fidelity on what exactly we may be building two quarters from now. And that’s okay. For some reason, our roadmapping process today still tends to be more of a waterfall-looking document, but it doesn’t have to be. Rather than defining arbitrary things we hope to ship two quarters from now, we can define what we hope to learn two quarters from now—what’s really important to know about our business in the future—and how we plan to learn it.

the product roadmap should be updated constantly, especially at the team levels. This is why, at Produx Labs, we call them Living Roadmaps.

They were designed to appease the folks who had just yelled at us, and while my confidence was shaky, I knew it was time to say no again—to them and to the executive team that wanted a quick turnaround. “No, we’re not going for mediocre. No, no one wants us to do me-too design. And, no, we’re not done with this roadmap until it’s something that inspires everyone in the room.” Now, the difference between me standing up in my office and giving a speech on inspirational product roadmaps and a manager who’s flirting with Crazy Town because of an executive beat-down is slim, but therein lies the art. Saying no is saying “stop,” and in a valley full of people who thrive on endless movement, the ability to strategically choose when it’s time to stop is the sign of a manager willing to defy convention.

There are essentially three ways for a product manager to work, and I argue only one of them leads to success: The product manager can escalate every issue and decision up to the CEO. In this model, the product manager is really a backlog administrator. Lots of CEOs tell me this is the model they find themselves in, and it's not scaling. If you think the product manager job is what's described in a Certified Scrum Product Owner class, you almost certainly fall into this category. The product manager can call a meeting with all the stakeholders in the room and then let them fight it out. This is design by committee, and it rarely yields anything beyond mediocrity. In this model, very common in large companies, the product manager is really a roadmap administrator. The product manager can do his or her job. The honest truth is that the product manager needs to be among the strongest talent in the company. My intention in this book is to convince you of this third way of working. It will take me the entire book to describe how the strong product manager does his or her job, but let me just say for now that this is a very demanding job and requires a strong set of skills and strengths.

Should you find yourself in a chronically leaking boat, energy devoted to changing vessels is likely to be more productive than energy devoted to patching leaks. Warren Buffet

The next billion-dollar startup will only have three employees.” The culture of that startup would be “AI first,” and it would use autonomous AI agents to get work done. All marketing and sales would be automated via AI bots, and the three employees would be: The CEO, who would handle vision and purpose and lead public-facing marketing. She would also code and be involved in engineering. The Product Lead, who would interface with customers and team to manage the product roadmap and drive development The Operations Lead, who would be responsible for the outcome of the AI bots and handle finance and legal and smooth operations. We

groups of executives and other stakeholders all too often come up with the quarterly “roadmap” of features and projects and then pass them down to the product teams, essentially telling them how to solve the underlying business problems. The teams are just there to flesh out the details, code and test, with little understanding of the bigger context, and even less belief that these are in fact the right solutions. Teams today are all too often feature factories, with little regard for whether or not the features actually solve the underlying business problems. Progress is measured by output and not outcome.

A fixed roadmap communicates false certainty. It says we know these are the right features to build, even though we know from experience their impact will likely fall short. An outcome communicates uncertainty. It says, We know we need this problem solved, but we don’t know the best way to solve it. It gives the product trio the latitude they need to explore and pivot when needed.

A roadmap has been called a prototype of your strategy, and allowing customers to view your roadmap allows them to offer feedback on and buy into your direction.

What types of products enjoy strong network effects? Foremost among them would be marketplaces that connect parties with very specific requirements (the “demand side”) with partners who have highly differentiated offerings (the “supply side”).

Net Promoter Scores. An NPS survey asks, on a scale of 0 to 10, how likely a customer is to refer the product to a friend or colleague. The score is calculated as the percentage of all customers who are “promoters” (scoring 9 or 10), minus the percentage who are “detractors” (scoring 0–6). NPS scores over 50 are considered excellent. A declining NPS can serve as an early warning sign of problems and can allow managers to take corrective actions before severe damage is done.

Given these dynamics, high switching costs can spur a race in which first-time customers are the prize. First-time customers are new to a product category and they don’t yet have an affiliation with any provider. Consequently, compared to stealing a rival’s customers, first-time buyers will be much cheaper to acquire. They won’t incur any switching costs upon purchasing, so they don’t require a subsidy. Lower CAC means that first-time customers are more profitable to serve, and they also broaden the startup’s total addressable market. Specifically, with lower CAC, the startup can afford to acquire first-time buyers who have lower LTV, while still keeping their LTV/CAC ratio within an acceptable range.

first-mover advantages can be especially strong in new markets where customers face high switching costs. The first mover in a new product category has a chance to acquire first-time buyers before any rivals enter the market. But this advantage disappears once the second entrant arrives; then, the race is on.

A learning curve—measured as the percentage unit cost reduction realized with each doubling of cumulative production volume—is typically steepest when labor and machinery add significant value in the production process, as with aircraft assembly or semiconductor manufacturing. Value-added refers to the difference between a product’s final cost and the cost of raw material inputs; this difference consists mostly of labor and equipment costs. Learning-by-doing—for example, finding a way to cut setup times for a new production run—often yields labor and equipment cost savings.

Market research professionals routinely assume that survey respondents will overstate their purchase intent relative to their true plans, and researchers have elaborate ways to adjust projections downward to compensate for this bias. But these methods are much less effective with radical new products, since respondents find it difficult to express preferences regarding products with which they’ve had no direct experience. A quote attributed to Henry Ford makes the risk clear: “If I had asked people what they want, they would have said faster horses.

Estructura del Story Mapping: Objetivos > Actividades > Tareas > Historias de Usuario

Están compuestos por la descripción del Contexto, Evento y Consecuencia.

Debemos entender a los usuarios, a su contexto y a su problema y observarlos allí donde estén. Cómo se están comportando hoy predice cómo lo harán mañana. Debemos conocer las restricciones que afectan a sus decisiones, que les frustra o que les motiva

To put it differently, with the right data you have a chance to successfully argue against the opinion and views of powerful stakeholders; without data, it may be difficult, and the HiPPO—the highest-paid person’s opinion—may win.

As the person in charge of the product, you should lead the strategy-validation work. Don’t shy away from difficult conversations, have the courage to make a decision if people can’t agree, and use data to test ideas and back up decisions, as I describe in the next section.

Roadmaps solve for the company not the customer. What solves for the customer is non-stop testing and a continuous improvement.

high‐integrity commitments and deliverables should be the exception and not the rule. Otherwise, it is a slippery slope and pretty soon your objectives become nothing more than a list of deliverables and dates, which is little more than a reformatted roadmap.

Fortunately, there are also some good ways to set priorities, and some core underlying principles to prioritization that you can adapt to your needs. Here we've described a few that we've found useful, including critical path analysis; Kano; desirability, feasibility, viability; and (Bruce's favorite) the ROI scorecard.

In the Internet Century, a product manager’s job is to work together with the people who design, engineer, and develop things to make great products. Some of this entails the traditional administrative work around owning the product life cycle, defining the product roadmap, representing the voice of the consumer, and communicating all that to the team and management. Mostly, though, smart-creative product managers need to find the technical insights that make products better. These derive from knowing how people use the products (and how those patterns will change as technology progresses), from understanding and analyzing data, and from looking at technology trends and anticipating how they will affect their industry. To do this well, product managers need to work, eat, and live with their engineers (or chemists, biologists, designers, or whichever other types of smart creatives the company employs to design and develop its products).

as marketing, sales, finance, and support. The roadmap is a critical — and frequently missed — opportunity to articulate why you are doing this product, why it’s important, and why the things on it are absolutely vital to success.

One analysis, the Princeton Project on National Security, succinctly described the situation: “While the Bush administration’s 2002 National Security Strategy did articulate a set of U.S. national goals and objectives, it was not the product of a serious attempt at strategic planning.… The articulation of a national vision that describes America’s purpose in the post–September 11th world is useful—indeed, it is vital—but describing a destination is no substitute for developing a comprehensive roadmap for how the country will achieve its stated goals.”2

The point of this team is not to dictate how the members of a team work together to build the product but, instead, to create the criteria for inputs and outputs of the work. For example, they are not creating the product roadmap for the teams. They are creating a system and template for teams to input their goals, themes, progress, and details that can then be shared around the organization. They are not dictating whether a team can talk to users. They are creating systems that help teams figure out which users to target for their experimentation.

The team API should explicitly consider usability by other teams: Will other teams find it easy and straightforward to interact with us, or will it be difficult and confusing? How easy will it be for a new team to get on board with our code and working practices? How do we respond to pull requests and other suggestions from other teams? Is our team backlog and product roadmap easily visible and understandable by other teams?

Your action plan is your roadmap. It helps you get the wheels in motion, and it steers you toward long-term success: consistent, intentional practice. This is your path to creating and sustaining healthy habits that fuel you to keep going.

Doubt kills more dreams than failure ever will.