Advice to a friend dealing with their chaotic startup...

Startups are inherently chaotic. No chaos = no opportunity. Startups exist because there is uncertainty, and new things to learn. (1/7) #startup

During a period of rapid growth, all things (structures, processes, etc.) eventually break. Some chaos is self-inflicted, and too much chaos can cause collapse / chronic harm (2/7) #startup

Agility is solving today’s problem, while not limiting your ability to solve tomorrow’s problem. There’s always a temptation to solve tomorrow’s problems.

There are good ideas everywhere, and opportunities everywhere. So focus is hard (3/7) #startup

Startups require an almost supernatural level of focus. You have to focus, while knowing full well many things are broken, and need work. Nothing is truly repeatable or efficient at this point, even when we want it to be (4/7) #startup

And that’s hard...so we tend to load up on the good ideas.

Pursuing all the good ideas will leave you (and others) burnt out. Self-inflicted chaos (5/7) #startup

"The engineers on my team just want to code. They don't want to have anything to do with product. They just want specs. What do I do?"

1/n Are you asking them do to X *and* do their "day job" as defined by their managers (and frankly your roadmap) ?

If so, start there...

2/n Do they have a reason to believe that doing X will in any way improve the quality of the product and make their lives easier? Have they ever seen X "work" ?

Show don't tell.

3/n Is there average day/week a quagmire of unnecessary meetings, wading through tech debt, struggling to get *anything* to work ... and jumping through process hoops to prove their worth?

If so...no they will not have bandwidth.

4/n How do incentives work on the engineering team? Maybe they want to help, but their "grade" is determined by something altogether different.

"I'd love to, but I am on the hook to deliver [some project] this quarter to make a good impression..."

Talk to eng management.

5/n Have they had any time to practice?

Or did they get thrown into the deep end the first time they were given a shot ... expected to brainstorm on demand, be as vocal as practiced PdMs and designers, and "participate" !

Make it safe to practice. Reasonable expectations.

Here’s a trap I’ve noticed leaders falling in to. And it can be tough to untangle.

People bring problems to them. But not many people ... like 1-2% of the company. So they walk away believing it is a small problem ... “I need to hear from others”.

What is going on? 👇 (1/n)

What determines whether ppl speak up?

Awareness
Awareness of impact on others
Perceived impact/severity
Sense of urgency
Sense of safety
Skill in providing feedback
Confidence that org will respond
Perception that issue is being addressed

Why does this matter? 👇 (2/n)

Take a newcomer to the company.

Newcomer sees the problem. But...

They aren’t aware of impact
Low sense of urgency
Don’t interact much outside their team
Believe something is being done about it
Less confident about navigating org

well, they don’t speak up 👇 (3/n)

...

Another scenario.

An employee has seen repeated cycles of feedback over the years, and no tangible action. They lack confidence org will respond. They’ve figured out how to work around the problem.

“I guess that’s just the way it is”

Well, they don’t speak up 👇 (4/n)

Or

Imagine that most retrospectives are local. People don’t really get to hear open feedback from across the org. So they themselves sit around wondering if it is “just me”.

Or mentioning X is seen as “bringing problems not solutions...”

Well, they don’t speak up 👇 (4/n)

the product manager is responsible for the product's success...

simple. But....wait....

1/n There are many $ successful products that are terrible for humans (both inside/outside a company). Is that success?

2/n Conversely, what about "great products" that end up being "not successful" ?

Did the product manager do their job? Where does their role begin and end?

3/n Success over the lifespan of the product? next quarter? until they leave? while company exists?

There are many ways that short term success can come at the expense of mid/long term impact

4/n Success can mean very different things depending on the stage of the company, and the maturity of the product.

In an early startup, company/product are inexorably linked. In a more established company "the product" may be one of a dozen bets, most which will fail.

5/n What if a company has very low product aspirations?

What if it doesn't believe that their products can be a source of differentiated, sustainable mid/long term growth?

Is the role responsible for success *insofar as success is defined*? Something else? Who decides/defines?