Good product growth requires figuring out and homing in on the magical overlap between desirability, feasibility, and viability—the place innovation lives. Product managers are always within the place of getting to defend the steadiness amongst these domains, countering the forces that compete to drag a product too far in a single course on the expense of the others. This implies saying no—many occasions and to many individuals—over the course of the product growth journey.
Earlier in my profession, I labored on a mission within the automotive area, creating an app that used machine studying knowledgeable by environmental knowledge and person conduct to supply sensible strategies to drivers. On the time I joined the group, the app was poised for launch and administration was desperate to launch it, however I quickly realized that it was removed from prepared for manufacturing.
Whereas the app was visually interesting, a few of the most elementary design questions had been ignored, equivalent to “What drawback are we fixing, and for whom?” and “How determined are individuals to have this drawback solved?”
The app boasted a characteristic that will show the climate on the driver’s vacation spot. From person habits and visitors knowledge, the algorithm might infer the place a driver is likely to be headed and the way lengthy it might take to get there, and a easy climate API integration confirmed the climate forecast for the vacation spot on the time of arrival. This appeared like a pleasant use case, however in actuality, nobody cared. After I carried out my very own person analysis, together with a paid survey of European drivers, the response was a powerful “Meh.” That’s arguably the worst suggestions you will get: It means your product solved an irrelevant drawback and signifies that the desirability dimension is extraordinarily low. Viability is then a misplaced trigger: It’s unimaginable to construct a viable enterprise with a product nobody desires. We needed to scrap the entire thing.
How might this have occurred? The reply is difficult, but it surely boils right down to the truth that a crucial phrase wasn’t uttered when it ought to have been: No.
The corporate’s core competency and belongings had been machine-learning inference engines and extremely scalable structure design. The top of information science was a robust stakeholder who wished to see his inference engines put to good use in a buyer utility. His affect, partially, had resulted in a product that was utterly tech-centric. Improvement had been pushed by what was possible technologically as a substitute of what prospects desired.
It appeared that no one had advised this stakeholder no, and if that they had tried, it hadn’t been efficient.
Product Technique Means Saying No
Saying no is difficult. Individuals don’t all the time like listening to the phrase, and there’s typically a concern that saying it is going to injury necessary relationships. As product managers, relationships are central to our position, however so is making certain that our merchandise are profitable and stay in steadiness.
So, how do you reject somebody’s request whereas retaining the connection intact? I like to recommend these practices:
- Set your self up for achievement.
- Don’t say no too shortly.
- Reframe the request.
- Encourage a local weather of contribution.
Set Your self Up for Success
On the outset of a mission, it’s important that everybody agree on a shared imaginative and prescient for the product’s success (“Why are we doing this?”) and on a set of metrics that can be used to measure progress (“How will we all know if we’re doing it nicely?”). In case you don’t agree on what success appears like, it’s solely a matter of time earlier than conflicts come up.
It’s useful to make use of a framework to doc objectives and map them to one thing measurable. I like to make use of a free model of Google’s HEART framework, which organizes person expertise into classes for Happiness, Engagement, Adoption, Retention, and Activity Success, after which articulates objectives, alerts, and metrics for every of these classes. Objectives handle what you are attempting to attain, alerts break down every aim into person actions, and metrics monitor these actions to gauge the way you’re doing in a approach that’s quantifiable.
On one latest shopper app mission, I wished to conduct a restricted pilot to find out if customers discovered our prototype helpful and wished to maintain interacting with it; I used to be centered totally on the Engagement class of the HEART framework. I then needed to determine alerts and metrics to trace progress towards that aim:
- Purpose: Customers wish to work together with the app and proceed utilizing it.
- Sign: Customers open the app regularly.
- Metric: Share of customers who open the app at the very least twice per day.
This technique of figuring out and aligning on objectives might seem easy, but it surely’s not simple. On this case, it concerned calls with the consumer and our gross sales group, unbiased analysis, and a number of group workshops. Based mostly on the data I gathered from this discovery, I used to be capable of current the finished HEART framework through the kickoff assembly with the consumer. We went by way of all of the gadgets and tailored the place wanted.
Guaranteeing that each one stakeholders are concerned within the goal-setting course of is crucial, and getting everybody to agree on what alerts and metrics have to be tracked eliminates the necessity to say no repeatedly as a mission progresses. It additionally offers you knowledge to level to if somebody approaches you with a request that falls outdoors the parameters of the plan.
Don’t Say No Too Shortly
Even when key stakeholders agree on what success appears like and the street forward appears clear, one factor is for certain: Somebody, someplace, will method you with an unexpected ask.
When that occurs, don’t say no too shortly. Even in the event you’re sure the request is unreasonable, rejecting it outright shuts down dialog and will injury the connection. It additionally undermines the product discovery course of. As product managers, we have to see the total image, and listening to individuals who disagree with us reduces our blind spots.
You possibly can nonetheless say no, after all, however you could keep away from knee-jerk responses. These result in binary discussions which might be the results of black-and-white, right-or-wrong, win-or-lose pondering: Both you implement one thing otherwise you don’t.
To maneuver towards simpler, nuanced discussions, you could set up requests in keeping with the agreed-upon standards you’ve established as a part of your goal-setting course of.
As a substitute of asking a stakeholder “Is that this characteristic priceless to you?” ask “How priceless is that this characteristic to you?” The ensuing dialog ought to provide the info you could collaborate on a listing of “desires,” ordered when it comes to significance. It’s important that this rating vary from 1 to n, with out permitting a number of gadgets to share the identical place within the hierarchy. This offers everybody a voice within the prioritization course of and excuses you from having to reject requests unilaterally. Some requests will fall by the wayside when the group downgrades them in favor of extra necessary ones.
Reframe the Request
A request that appears unreasonable initially can yield optimistic outcomes with some refined reengineering. First, hear to what’s being mentioned. Actually hear. Put your assumptions apart and attempt to perceive the place the opposite particular person is coming from, after which discover frequent floor. In case you dig a bit of deeper by asking “Why”—not essentially the 5 occasions you’ve heard about; two to a few will typically suffice—you would possibly unearth an element that speaks to a shared aim.
Even a wonderfully smart request can profit from a deeper dive and little bit of reframing. I keep in mind a scenario through which I used to be engaged on a enterprise intelligence instrument for a B2B mobility service. My consumer requested me, not unexpectedly, to get subscriber numbers up. Whereas the motivation for growing the variety of paying subscribers could seem self-evident, I wished to ensure I had the total image, so I requested, “Why?”
It turned out that the product in query was approaching the tip of its life cycle, and my consumer wished to squeeze out the final drops of revenue earlier than changing it with a brand new product. With this info, I reframed the request to “How would possibly we significantly enhance income within the brief time period whereas laying the groundwork for the upcoming product launch?”
Finally, the perfect resolution was to not trouble with subscriber numbers in any respect however to raised align pricing with worth. Clients had been paying a hard and fast month-to-month subscription, no matter how typically they used the instrument for rider transactions. The extra rider transactions they processed, nonetheless, the extra worth they derived from the instrument. Clients ranged from particular person taxi drivers making solely a handful of month-to-month transactions to multinational freight carriers—with dozens of subsidiaries and hundreds of autos—making lots of of hundreds of month-to-month transactions. The identical mounted month-to-month subscription was too excessive for the small shoppers and too low for the large ones.
By making small pricing changes, we elevated income whereas baby-stepping towards a tiered pricing construction (primarily based on variety of transactions) for the soon-to-be-released product. The brand new mannequin decreased the value for many prospects whereas growing it for the largest prospects, who had been benefiting disproportionately.
By reframing requests on this approach, you may create win-win conditions. The particular person bringing ahead the request feels heard and revered, and also you achieve perception that may add worth with out derailing the product growth course of.
Encourage a Local weather of Contribution
One of many largest dangers of claiming no is that rejections can undermine the spirit of openness and collaboration that you just’re making an attempt to foster, each inside and out of doors your group. Concepts encourage, whether or not or not they grow to be related, and the very last thing you wish to do is stem the move of creativity and communication.
I as soon as labored with a junior QA engineer who had a wealth of concepts. At practically each assembly he requested a number of questions and volunteered strategies. His options had been typically not actionable ones, and a few of them might have been dismissed as unhelpful or irrelevant. However his dedication and enthusiasm had been invaluable. He was completely invested in delivering the very best product, and his contributions energized and impressed others. An angle like that’s contagious.
You wish to create an setting through which individuals really feel inspired to share ideas and concepts, and are rewarded for doing so. Your group ought to be motivated by the potential of enhancing issues as a substitute of discouraged by the considered being dismissed, ignored, or ridiculed. Implementing a number of easy practices can assist make sure the psychological security of your group.
Acknowledge concepts and requests publicly. This builds belief and reveals that you just worth strategies and are dedicated to contemplating them. Arrange a request field, or a Confluence web page or different public discussion board that each one stakeholders can entry. When a request is available in, log it and ship a message to the requester, thanking them for his or her contribution.
I do know this will show controversial, however I typically go so far as to open the product backlog to everybody. This may be notably useful in fostering engagement from the product group, in addition to permitting group members like QA testers and designers to notice issues they’ve encountered. The principles are easy: Anybody can add to the finish of the backlog, and through refinements (or different weekly conferences) group members share what they’ve added and clarify why. Solely the product supervisor can change the order of points or delete gadgets. Many individuals assume that granting everybody this stage of entry will result in chaos and anarchy, but it surely doesn’t. I’ve tried this at organizations of various sizes and it solely fails when individuals are too shy to contribute their concepts.
When you’ve applied an answer or launched a characteristic even roughly associated to one in all these logged requests, credit score the requester publicly. That is particularly necessary when the answer will not be a transparent success of the unique request however extra of a reframed model. Exhibiting appreciation for everybody concerned in a hit creates goodwill, builds camaraderie, and encourages individuals to proceed collaborating.
Weighing the Professionals and Cons of Saying No
In case you take the time to essentially hear and perceive the place stakeholders are coming from, you hardly ever have to reject proposals outright. Lively listening, clear communication, and mutual respect are key substances in dealing with requests which will initially appear problematic or out of scope. Most occasions, the artwork of claiming no by no means really entails saying “No.”
There can be conditions through which it proves unimaginable to search out frequent floor, and a direct no is required with the intention to defend the product and the mission. In different circumstances, you could be compelled to observe by way of on stuff you don’t agree with. As a lot as your job is to guard the steadiness of desirability, feasibility, and viability, there’s a fourth dimension to contemplate: pragmatism. To maintain issues shifting ahead, compromise is essential, and typically which means avoiding a no altogether.
The great thing about Agile product growth is that its iterative nature presents many alternatives for course correction. In spite of everything, the aim is build-measure-learn, not debate-dispute-derail.
