Three Product Teams

Three Product Teams

This post originally appeared in my newsletter on January 18th, 2023. Sign-up for weekly posts.


This post will explore three popular models for product teams.

  • Sprint, Story, and Backlog-Centric
  • Team and Mission-Centric
  • Engineer-Centric (with Rockstar PMs)

Sprint, Story, and Backlog-Centric

No alt text provided for this image

This model manifests in the following beliefs:

  • Designers?should?spend most of their time designing. Developers?should?spend most of their time building.
  • Developers are a precious/scarce commodity and must only take on?well-vetted and validated?work.
  • The product manager should insulate developers from the chaos upstream. That way, developers can focus.
  • Developers are at their most valuable when they are writing code. Designers are most valuable when creating prototypes, mockups, etc. Product Managers prove their worth by saying No often and only agreeing to do the most valuable work.
  • Unless the designer gets upstream—earlier in the assembly line—they will not have the time and space to do good work.
  • Work flows one way. It gets "delivered" to customers.
  • Developers set a sustainable pace. The PM applies "back pressure", and the team is responsible for "committing" to a reasonable amount of work each sprint. If they keep those commitments, they build trust, which then, in turn, keeps people off their backs.
  • Developers ultimately aren't responsible for the impact of the work they undertake. Their responsibility is to "build the right thing right".
  • Designers are responsible for the "right design" (not the right thing).

Potential Pros:?Sustainable development, a process for decomposing tasks, steady flow. Processes in place add regularity and predictability. Helpful in a business that has a limited number of teams and has to apply back pressure.

Potential Cons:?Negative impact on product outcomes. Customer proxies. Taking "bigger swings" and tackling more nebulous efforts can be difficult. Learned helplessness on the part of teams. They need to build product chops.


Team and Mission-Centric

No alt text provided for this image

This model manifests in the following beliefs:

  • Having an outsized impact as a product team often involves tackling nebulous, poorly understood things and finding a way forward (together).
  • More time typing and "mousing" does not necessarily equal better outcomes. Being a designer or a developer involves more than using Figma and coding.
  • Healthy cross-functional teams are a precious/scarce commodity; therefore, they should focus their energy on high-leverage things.
  • The way to resolve the chaos upstream is through strategic alignment, coherent goals, and shared models.
  • Direct contact with customers is one of the highest-leverage things a developer, designer, or product manager can do. It up-levels all other work.
  • There are times when designers AND developers will get value from more exploratory, focused "upstream" work. The team can figure out how and when to make this happen.
  • There will be ebbs and flows in terms of?pace. Similarly, the team will go through different motions like convergence, emergence, and divergence. It's not just one gear.
  • Instead of working passing?through?the team, where developers turn ideas into code and features, the team is moving?forward?towards a goal.?

Potential Pros:?Great for tackling nebulous opportunities and achieving outcomes together

Potential Cons: Teamwork is challenging. It requires stable teams, and it may appear unproductive. It may be difficult to retain some designers and developers who prefer working alone. Extra meetings could seem superfluous in a startup. Hard to do performance reviews when the team is the unit of leverage.


Engineer-Centric (with “Rockstar” PMs)

No alt text provided for this image

This model manifests in the following beliefs:

  • Developers function best when on "maker schedule" not "managers schedule." Meetings are costly and largely a waste of time. Managers are responsible for limiting meetings, limiting disruptions, and letting developers work.
  • "Give an engineer a challenging project and get out of their way!" A strong belief is that individual engineers can do incredible things if left alone.
  • Developer success is about delivering increasingly complex projects and initiatives (with some attention on actual impact)—strong incentives to pick "ideal projects" that serve as proof points for expertise and career progression.
  • "Talented engineers work best when working alone! Only weak engineers have to pair." Strong individualistic vibe to work.
  • Designers should develop fully featured designs because engineers "are busy!" Yet, in many cases, there is a core belief that designers are valuable (primarily for their "product design savvy").
  • Product managers have to "sell" engineers on the value of their proposed work. They can't tell engineers what to do. Product managers prove their worth by being highly analytical, highly organized, great presenters, reigning in ego-driven executives, and having?strong convictions.

Potential Pros:?High focus on engineering productivity and empowerment. Under certain conditions, empowered engineers can have outsized impacts.

Potential Cons:?Lack of teamwork. Siloed initiatives. Handoffs impact outcomes. Distance from customers. Promotion-driven development.


Is one “the best”. No.

Am I personally biased toward the team-based model? Yes!

Can companies do perfectly fine with the others? Many do.

They are also vast over-generalizations.

The world is complex and can't be boiled down into three models. There are plenty of companies with all three models in play concurrently. Each model has advantages and arose from a specific problem and environment.

Above all, it is important to examine your own beliefs!


This post original appeared in my newsletter on January 18th, 2023. Sign-up for weekly posts.

Jose Valle

Product | ProdOps | PLG | Data Driven | Lifelong learner

1 年

The team/mission centric is the most desirable, however, for it to scale you need aspects of the other two -especially the backlog centric one.

Patrik Gustafsson

| Elevating people and product | Software Development | Leading software companies to great success |

1 年

My view on a good product team encompases aspects of all these. Backlog to show the order opertunitites or outcomes will be adressed. Adressed as a team, with just enough prework by indivual team members for the team to have enough understanding of the problem space to get a flying start. A team based way of working that does not interrupt maker time more than necesary. A trust in team members to archive the goals. Commitments are on focus and goals not on number of tasks to solve.

Nick Candler

Performance Marketing Designed for Scale | Creative Strategy and Paid Social Consulting & Coaching @ themetagame.us | Fully Scaled Creative Services @ 10scale.co | Meta, Google, ASA and TikTok ads

1 年

Wherever possible, big fan of team based also, especially for creative businesses. It’s nice to leverage the creativity of everyone on the team by giving context, some room to play, and working toward goals together.

KRISHNAN N NARAYANAN

Sales Associate at American Airlines

1 年

Thanks for posting

Tassiana B.

Making the world healthier & more sustainable through innovation… and happier through art

1 年

Once again very well said, John Cutler It is clearer to me which type of team do I tend to naturally and which other type I try to stablish depending on the frame conditions. I do believe it has a lot do with company culture. Trying to change the model requires education & learning new skills.

要查看或添加评论,请登录

John Cutler的更多文章

  • Workshop During Business Hours For Oceania, East Asia, and Southeast Asia

    Workshop During Business Hours For Oceania, East Asia, and Southeast Asia

    With a young child, it has been difficult to arrange a three hour workshop block that would be convenient for my family…

    9 条评论
  • LinkedIn TBM vs. Substack TBM?

    LinkedIn TBM vs. Substack TBM?

    A quick note to clear up some confusion between my LinkedIn newsletter (this newsletter), and my Substack newsletter…

    6 条评论
  • Fluffy & Ambiguous

    Fluffy & Ambiguous

    This post originally appeared in my newsletter on Sep 23, 2022. Please sign up there for a weekly post (I re-post on…

    6 条评论
  • My Chat With Gene Kim

    My Chat With Gene Kim

    I wanted to share some fun quotes from my chat with Gene Kim on my podcast. There were so many insights in this chat…

    6 条评论
  • Professional Everything Everywhere All at Once

    Professional Everything Everywhere All at Once

    Things not adding up? Struggling with incoherence? Welcome to professional Everything Everywhere All at Once. The Hope…

    11 条评论
  • Notes on Product management theater | Marty Cagan (Lenny's Podcast)

    Notes on Product management theater | Marty Cagan (Lenny's Podcast)

    I love Lenny Rachitsky podcast. When an episode launches that I know I'll get questions on, I do an exercise of reading…

    49 条评论
  • The Predictability Trap

    The Predictability Trap

    Don't make predictable delivery the goal. Put value front and center and put sustainable and differentiated growth…

    23 条评论
  • Return on Investment (and Allocation)

    Return on Investment (and Allocation)

    This post originally appear in my free newsletter. In December I am running a paid workshop on scoping and shaping if…

    8 条评论
  • What If We Could "See" Org Dysfunction?

    What If We Could "See" Org Dysfunction?

    What if we could visualize the complexities of complex knowledge work? What if we could visualize environments that…

    25 条评论
  • Subtractive and Additive Change

    Subtractive and Additive Change

    This post originally appeared in my newsletter on February 9th, 2023. In my new role, I have to think a great deal…

    23 条评论

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了