back with a “5 minute Friday” audio edition key concepts I cover in this snippet: outputs over outcomes is a well-known org dysfunction launches vs landings is another framing / phrasing of that what a launch vs land mindset looks like in practice and why that matters given the evolving definition of product
@ibscribe - this is great, and resonates! One of the problems I see that maybe contributing to this is the high turnover rates in many modern tech companies (folks get promoted, change jobs, change teams... in 1-2 year cycles). This often limits their own ability to see their products play out over the long-term, and adapt to a more holistic "landing" mindset.
To be clear, I'm not necessarily saying PMs can't land things meaningfully in 1-2 years. My point is that the compound benefit (or downside) of decisions you make initially is often seen over a much longer time horizon than the original build phase. And it pays dividends to see this through. The actual timescales will vary company to company.
it’s actually a vicious cycle because the short-term focus of many companies disincentives PMs from orchestrating long-term bets, which in turn reduces the odds of success, which contributes to turnover
I’ve been in positions where I’ve both benefited from and been burned by the choices of my predecessors, and gotten a disproportionate share of credit / blame that I didn’t deserve
Love it! The reason this particularly resonates is that the language of "launch, launch, launch" is used liberally in product orgs and is considered a good thing to do (vs. "output" and points are often derided). One way I've seen work to get a focus on "landings" is to have a ritual around the analysis of what happened after the launch (could be after two days or possibly 6 months after the launch depending on whether it's a new social app A/B test feature that was launched or a new platform for a new customer segment).
@ibscribe - this is great, and resonates! One of the problems I see that maybe contributing to this is the high turnover rates in many modern tech companies (folks get promoted, change jobs, change teams... in 1-2 year cycles). This often limits their own ability to see their products play out over the long-term, and adapt to a more holistic "landing" mindset.
To be clear, I'm not necessarily saying PMs can't land things meaningfully in 1-2 years. My point is that the compound benefit (or downside) of decisions you make initially is often seen over a much longer time horizon than the original build phase. And it pays dividends to see this through. The actual timescales will vary company to company.
it’s actually a vicious cycle because the short-term focus of many companies disincentives PMs from orchestrating long-term bets, which in turn reduces the odds of success, which contributes to turnover
I’ve been in positions where I’ve both benefited from and been burned by the choices of my predecessors, and gotten a disproportionate share of credit / blame that I didn’t deserve
Love it! The reason this particularly resonates is that the language of "launch, launch, launch" is used liberally in product orgs and is considered a good thing to do (vs. "output" and points are often derided). One way I've seen work to get a focus on "landings" is to have a ritual around the analysis of what happened after the launch (could be after two days or possibly 6 months after the launch depending on whether it's a new social app A/B test feature that was launched or a new platform for a new customer segment).