Just a moment on a Phriday to share one of my phavorite illustrations on the impact of requirements miscommunication:
With all the chatter this week on Twitter around domain expertise or skills, including an earlier blog post on this site, it seems that there is one other point in this discussion that was left out.
Where the product manager sits is not relevant.
If the product manager’s main responsibility is to have the conversations with the market about what their problems are, what they desire for a solution (not buttons or widgets,) and what they would be willing to pay to have this problem solved – why should it matter where the product manager sits?
In today’s world, it is relatively easy to jump on a plane (most product managers will tell you that they are among the frequent flier elite with the airlines) to go and visit customers and market people. There is also an abundance of virtual meeting software options available – WebEx, GoToMeeting, and even Skype (to list only a very few.)
This belief is shared by Steve Johnson and the Pragmatic Marketing team in their Practical Product Management course. The introduce the term ”NIHITO:” Nothing Important Happens In The Office. If it is about getting to the information, and that is the foundation of good product management, then why does it matter that the PM sits in the building, next to the dev team.
The product manager needs to be available and accessible, and have the right skills to get the information. Location is an artificial obstacle used for negative gain. Leaders – focus on what matters: content and customers!
Just an observation, looking in from the outside.
This morning I woke up to find that Dr. Jim Anderson wrote a blog post on “Which Job Boards Work Best For Product Managers?” I typically enjoy his posts, but today, Dr. Jim – you missed the mark.
Forrester Analyst Tom Grant wrote an interesting blog about requirements gathering. In the blog he enters into the world of “complete odiousness of traditional requirements” (his words, not mine.) Dr. Jim Anderson commented on this, saying that “The real problem is that we simply don’t know how to ask the right questions.” I couldn’t agree more!
I have long held the position, as I know many of the esteemed product management “gurus” have, that you can teach a product manager about the industry/technology/market, but you can’t teach an industry expert how to have a real conversation with the market.
I know many others out there will blast me for this. I am ready. A person who knows how to have the conversation is far more likely to get to the problem that is at the heart of the matter. This person is more likely to find what solutions (not technical features) will resolve the problem. And, this person will be able to find out the value of the solution. A technical expert will likely dive into features and functionality, and ask a different line of questions – none of which are about the problem.
Having domain familiarity is good. I admit it helps in framing the context. But, it is not necessary. Most people can be taught the basics of any domain, or at least enough to know how to keep the conversations relevant.
Looking in from the outside – companies (and hiring managers) should be looking at the qualities of the product manager’s aptitude, not their platform experience. It will serve the product better in the long run.
[This is a Guest Blog from Robin Zaragoza. Follow Robin on Twitter: @BstnMelody)
Searching for a job is fun! I relish the opportunity to be put on the spot and asked to prove myself to a bunch of people I don’t know yet. I especially enjoy this when I’m not even sure if I’m interested in the company with which I’m interviewing!
Ok, maybe not. I actually find job interviewing to be somewhat stressful – kind of like the first day of school. There is an underlying excitement at the possibility of discovering something wonderful, but mostly I wonder, “Will they like me?”
Now isn’t that a surprise? I wonder “Will they like me?” not “Will they think I’m qualified?” I thought long and hard on why this might be, and at the end of the day I believe this to be a reflection of what I value in a company. I want to work with people I enjoy being around. Sure, I would *also* like to work with people that are ridiculously intelligent and can teach me the world over. But if we don’t have a good working relationship and I don’t enjoy spending time with you, I’m going to find it very hard to be effective in my job.
This week I interviewed with a company that on paper looks great. They fit my criteria: consumer web company, soon to be profitable, very supportive investors. The founding team has already had a major success with a previous company. The product itself is very compelling and customers seem to love it. The director of the PM team comes from an impressive background. I could go on and on, but you get my point. If this were a dating situation, this company’s profile on Match.com would get tons of hits.
But it’s not just about what’s on paper. That first impression matters. Without getting into details, one of the interviewers asked me to solve a trivia question. I certainly understand the purpose of relevant trivia questions, but I felt the exercise could not be used to draw any meaningful conclusions about my ability to be an effective product manager, nor could it be used to estimate my “fit” with the company.
But my opinion about the trivia question is neither here nor there. The main point here is that the interviewer asked a question that he thought was relevant, while I simultaneously thought the question was irrelevant. So what conclusion can I draw from this? This is possibly someone with whom I do not share common values, and likely would not enjoy working with. I certainly expect workplace diversity and disagreement at times, but if common values are not present, then we’ll never get to a common solution. And if I feel that way about one person at the company, perhaps I would feel that way about others.
There were other signs that perhaps this was not the right opportunity for me, so I don’t want you to think I have made up my mind based on a trivia question. What I am ultimately trying to convey is the importance of knowing your lines and drawing them when you have to. When looking for a new job opportunity, consciously decide what you value in an employer and potential colleagues and make sure you stay true to those values. Don’t ignore your “gut” if you walk out of a job interview and you’re just not feeling good. Trying to rationalize yourself into a situation – even in a poor economy when its more difficult to turn down a job offer – can ultimately lead to a bad situation in the future. I know…I’ve been there.
So what do you value in a company?
Okay, so I’ve been quiet for the past 12 days. Sue me. But, more importantly is why I’ve been quiet. Just like any product management practice, sometimes you need to step back and take a look at what you’ve done, where you thought you were headed and what your priorities should be. (Execs get to do this all the time; underlings? Not so much, though they should.)
So, on the quest of the next great product management opportunity, I’ve retooled my resume once more. While it has been quite successful in the past, yielding calls and interest, this market is different. I was fortunate enough to actually have a recruiter provide the feedback from the recruiting team and tell me why they thought I wasn’t qualified. Great lesson if you can get it. I highly encourage everyone to befriend a recruiter for this experience. Humbling? Yes. Important? YES!
The other thing I learned from stepping back is that product management and marketing postings have shifted. The technology markets have embraced social media. Well, for those of us over 27, this means shifting and responding. It’s the same as we do in understanding our markets – we have to shift to dive into their problems reaching out to the market in the methods they prefer. Jobs are out there I’ve learned; but, I wasn’t looking in the right place.
I also took a few days r&r. I probably shouldn’t have and I’m sure every job coach in the market would yell at me for taking a break. But, you can’t look at your priorities and align them if you don’t. The same goes for when you stop and look at your feature list – you need to pause and re-evaluate before moving on.
With a renewed energy and focus, I’m back at. I’ve learned that for product managers and marketers, LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter are the right tools. Companies hiring for technology products expect you to know these tools. Failure to not be where they are looking tends to lead nowhere.
From the outside looking in = if you’re working in the role, go where the market is; if you’re looking, go where the market is posting. It’s not too late.
One thing I have often noticed is how when you’re uncovering/discovering/gathering requirements (yes, I know I used three terms here, but they are all valid definitions for the activity,) executives often tell product managers to “go talk to our customers.”
I get it. Our customers have used the product/service, can express ideas and thoughts in context, and – assuming they are pleased with you – are generally willing to clear some time. I did this in my last role. I would use our own events to speak with clients about the services they did/did not use, perceptions, influences, etc. But, I kept losing the battle on the inside.
What battle? The battle that says the market is more than our customers. Our customers already have been sold on what the product/service has to offer. Sure they may want to make changes, but they saw the light and purchased. What about the rest?
You can do a win/loss analysis, talking with those who did not purchase. You find out why or why not? What features/offerings were missing? Was it a cost isse? Or, even worse, a sales issue? But, again, you are still missing the boat here.
The market is not inside your active customer/prospect base. Executives need to encourage product management to look beyond the list. Find those who have not engaged with your product/service offering? Look at the competitors’ customers list (and you know they feature the showcased accounts on their Web site just like you do on yours,) scan the community postings, review the job boards for people in the market where you want to take your product.
Your current base already has purchased and seen the light. Your development teams aren’t buying. Looking in from the outside, isn’t the group of people you are seeking to learn from the group with whom you don’t already have a relationship? Find them.
And, tell your executives that this is the group that will offer the outside-in valued view.
[UPDATE: I no sooner hit publish on this and head over to my reader to see David Meerman Scott wrote about the same subject today. Who knew I would be on the same wave length as one of the good ones. Go figure? ]
I’ve been talking a lot with people who are starting businesses. And, I find myself repeating one statement over and over…even on this blog.
When you are talking with your audience – whether you want to find a job, sell a product, attract interest, or anything – is your communication talking AT the audience, or WITH them?
If your communication is all about what you or your product can do, then you are no more than an advertisement that can be turned off by switching the channel. Try re-framing the discussion/campaign/pitch to one that focuses on engaging in a two-way conversation. Talk WITH your audience. You will then be in a position to develop the relationship, which will lead to the desired results.
Same message…different day. But, looking in from the outside, one that merits consistent reinforcement.
I’ve been reading a lot… always have. But, now my reading includes a wide range of blogs as well. One thread I’m reading is of interest – the desire of executives to “change their business culture to be more market-driven.”
Whenever I read this I start laughing. First, to change a business culture is – on its best day – only slightly easier than fighting windmills. Culture is. Culture will be there on every executive change, and will always prevail. From my perspective, looking in from the outside of that executive circle, culture will only change if the employees desire a change. An executive cannot change the culture.
But, the more prevailing reason why this executive goal makes me laugh is the wording of their desire. “I want to make our business market-driven.” It’s not about making a business market-driven. It’s about building a product that solves the market’s problems.
So, to executives looking to bring about change – listen to the culture, adapt it, mold it, and steer it in a new direction. If you try to change it, you will fail. And, if you are trying to become market-driven, shift your words to “let’s focus on solving the market problems.” And, this is where product management CAN and WILL make a difference.
Just an outside opinion.
When you are building products everyone will tell you find the market problem. Before you start to design, know what is the problem. Before you plan your marketing, understand the problem. Before you sell, have your sales people (including the sales engineer) be able to articulate the market’s problem.
In working with services, it starts at the problem as well. Nothing changes here. BUT, and this is a big but…there is not a button or gadget that will solve that problem you uncover. In services it is about the people. Not the people in the market, but the people who are your product – those who deliver the services. The product is as much about the knowledge possessed and carried in their heads as the delivery.
Starting a service-based framework model requires both an understanding of the market’s problems, as well as an understanding of the knowledge that can be provided. Either one separately is not useful but together they form the foundation of the framework.
