Posted on

Is your user story really about the user?

Once upon a time, in a land far, far away, lived a grumpy old wizard who loved spending time throwing stones at little kids who played near his mansion…

is-your-user-story-really-about-the-user

In just a few words, good stories transport you to a different place, stoke your imagination & involve you in the life and activity of someone you don’t know about. Almost immediately you begin forming an opinion about the key characters.

I love stories.

I was very excited when I first came across the term user story in Agile. This was not a user interaction, or a user feature. It was a story.

Ideally, the story would describe the user, his/her context, problem and gratification. It would make the user alive to the team trying to help him.

Sadly, from what I’ve seen across companies, not many user stories are written well.

Badly written user stories either have generic description of the user of the product, or end up being feature specs (eg: As a user, I want a green button labeled ON)

There are usually two reasons for bad user stories:

  • The product owner doesn’t know much about the user and/or
  • The engineering team treats the user story as a specification document

The user story should describe what the user wants to do. Instead, it ends up being whatyou want to do for the user.

Product owner and user research

I had earlier written about Agile as a concept vs. Agile as a process. A key limitation in treating Agile as a process is that the product owner is driven by the engineering team.

The key determinant is to keep the engineering teams executing, so the product owner ends up spending a lot of time ensuring the backlog is filled up in advance. This leaves little or no time for understanding the user.

Constrained by time, the product owner makes a generic outline of the user and anchoring stories around this.

If you treat Agile as a concept, the product owner is supposed to represent the customer’s voice in the development process. The product owner has to know his user’s needs well.

Many product owners, especially in B2B scenarios, end up figuring out user needs through secondary research, or based on quick conversations with a couple of target users.

Nothing is more dangerous (in the Agile environment) than a product owner who has limited knowledge about the user, but considers himself a representative.

Why?

Because the team ends up building a product that no user may end up liking. During the development process, the product owner argues eloquently about user needs, often mistaking that his/her view concurs with the user’s view. In the end, the product owner is satisfied with the product; no user is.

Users in real world often surprise you. If you’re in tourist mode, you often end up with the wrong conclusions.

I was once involved in building a mobile app for a low-end phone. I asked the product owner to draw some outlines of the user’s constraints and needs. When we reconvened, he came up with an observation that users were not bothered with data costs. “After all,” he said, “what difference does Rs. 10/- make to the mobile bill?” He was basing his argument on a chat with a couple of users across stores and one store employee.

Many of our target users were on pre-paid accounts, and rationed their mobile usage. They had dual SIM phones, and kept one slot for switching carriers who gave better deals. They would route incoming to the fixed SIM, and keep swapping the other SIM based on carrier packages where they could save money.

While we didn’t go about doing a detailed user study on this, I was able to cull information by speaking to a few college students, who were part of the TG, and triangulate it with information from friends who worked at carriers.

In this case, Rs. 10/- was an inconsequential amount to the product owner, but was a huge consideration for the actual user. If we had ended up missing this, we would have built a product that users would quickly have rejected due to high data demands.

Many engineering teams, especially those transitioning to the Agile mode of working, often insist on the user stories being complete, i.e. specified so that they can efficiently code out the solution.

This results in the product owner spending a lot of time writing and rewriting user story descriptions and acceptance criteria. As development progresses, the story backlog ends up having a lot of technical stories, bug descriptions and engineering terms. And in the process, the focus on the user’s problem is lost.

Ideally, a user story is designed to enable exploration of different ways of solving a user’s problem. It describes what the user wants, and a context in which s/he feels the need. The constraints are written in the acceptance criteria.

Given this, the technical team & designers can now explore multiple ways of solving the problem. The product owner can stay involved to judge which of the solutions serves the user’s need best.

In this approach, the team retains its flexibility in thinking up new ways of solving problems, often discovering better solutions than a didactic way of the specifications written by the product owner.

Of course this isn’t easy. It requires a lot of planning ahead to ensure there’s time for the exploration. It also needs maturity from members of the team. The team has to be comfortable that some of the work they do will be thrown away as they discover new solutions, and not stick solely to efficiency metrics.

Some organizations follow a dual-track method for Agile for this: a delivery and a discovery track. The discovery track is usually a small team that handles the experimentation. These solutions are often quickly tested with real users for quick validation.

One of the best ways I’ve seen to get out of the user story as spec is for the team to decide at the start of the project that they would keep a couple of experimental sprints, where they try an exploratory approach to build a solution based on understanding the user’s context without detailed specifications. Many times, these end up sensitizing the development team to the user they build for, enabling them to think for the user instead of thinking for the project.

One of the key beliefs in Agile is to know the user well, and build a product s/he likes. In my experience, I found that this often is key to building a great product.

I’d love to hear your experiences with user stories in the comments below.

Posted on

An outline of entrepreneurial rubbish

Note: This is a long form article. It will take time if you want to read it through the end. If you’re heady about entrepreneurship, you may be offended by a lot that’s in here. Also, if you’re looking for a listicle or an article to skim through, this isn’t it. So be warned before you start 🙂

an-outline-of-entrepreneurial-rubbish

Over the last few years, literature around entrepreneurship has increased manifold. Sadly, much of it is prosaic; some puerile.

I’m a demanding reader. Like most, I read a lot on the internet. I look for articles that engage my curiosity, amuse me, educate me or inspire me. I relish stories well told. I love articles that challenge my thinking and alter my world view. They make me realize that between the oft-cited ends of black and white positions lie not just drab shades of gray, but the entire vivid color spectrum. (Don’t trust me? Ask Photoshop!)

There have been articles and books on entrepreneurship that have done all of these. Books like ‘The Everything Store’ on Jeff Bezos offer a glimpse into how complicated setting up a new age business is. Others like ‘The Startup of You’ by Reid Hoffman and Ben Casanocha help pre-empt many mistakes first-time entrepreneurs make. Websites like www.avc.com offer sound reasoning on financing and share holdership. Many articles by the likes of Vivek Wadhwa explore what’s happening around the world and exciting new fields where people setup business. The common thread across the good articles is how grounded and truthful they are. Literature of this kind enriches your view of the world of entrepreneurship.

Then there is the other kind. This is the frothy tabloid variety: exultant about projected valuations for businesses that on close scrutiny appear exorbitant; breathless in dissecting every short term trend as if it will change the world; and forever in search of the next big thing.

Bad entrepreneurial literature largely follows one of three threads.

Funding frenzy

Firstly, there’s the variety that announces every funding statistic with ecstasy and tries outdoing others in spotting ‘trends’.

Every article here veers to the extreme — laudatory about the new startup on receiving funding, and eager to predict how success in the category will pan out. Witness the innumerable articles about Big Data, sharing economy, e-commerce and others today.

This narrative is invariably presented as a ‘Breaking News’ story — quick to predict trends, build heroes, present abstract reasoning on why this trend would make billions of dollars, and invariably in a few years, write obituaries dismissing their chances of success. Need examples? Read past literature on NFC or QR codes.

In the initial hype time, many more entrepreneurs and investors are drawn to explore the area. Driven by euphoria, money flows in as VCs and angels look to cash in to the trend, leading to more ‘Breaking news’ of new companies and investments. Other companies are accused as laggards, leading them to start their own initiatives in the area to tell their shareholders that they have a foot in the door.

Every company is highlighted as a potential Google or Facebook, every new founder eulogized.

Business models are given a miss in the coverage. Founders get away with talking scale, attempting growth-hacking, and if all fails, pivoting to something as ostensibly world-changing. Posturing is taken for substance; intent for achievement.

It’s one big party till the basics come undone.

The risk with this set of articles is they distort what entrepreneurs need to be prepared for when they start off in this new domain.

Entrepreneurs are led to believe that if they pick one of the new age ideas and get funded, they are well on their way to success. No one mentions that when the basics of business are not well understood, investors bet on various companies to spread their risk. They know it is a long shot and are willing to bet on few successes from many outlays. For the entrepreneur, it is not an option. It will consume his life and effort and often come to naught.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not in any means undermining the courage it takes to start something anew. But I think we need to take a more balanced look at new ‘trends’ and explore longer-term merits before committing to it.

I wonder why so many people put themselves through needless struggle due to misinformation. In our rush to be successful and well-known, do we realize that we could avoid much of our future woes with some initial planning?

The fundamentals of business do not change. You need a market that values your product, sound planning to take things from a concept to a viable product, a good team to support you, and most importantly, a business model.

Throwing together an app and expecting people to discover it, love it, and click on ads does not make you a millionaire. Planning a business model, in contrast, could.

Packaging known wisdom

Secondly, there is the variety of entrepreneurial literature that potters around important issues but never gets specific.

Most articles tell you about why ‘wow’ user experience is a must, the importance of having a good co-founder, lessons entrepreneurs can learn from a variety of contexts in their lives and the like. Once you’ve read a few, you realize that these are the tabloid variety of articles. There’s never something that you can take away and work on, but there’s just enough to entice you to read. Be light on specifics is the mantra. After all, if you don’t give specifics, you can’t go wrong. You can always say that your opinions were shortchanged by shoddy implementation.

The offline version of these are panel discussions at startup events.

Go to a few and you realize that mostly everyone repeats the same advice and statistics. People use generic examples like Apple’s focus on design, how companies like Nokia missed the boat on this and other well-known illustrations. This makes the speaker or writer look smart without actually saying anything of importance.

All wisdom is distilled into simple homilies.

But do not make the mistake of asking questions about details. These articles or talks are never meant to be about them, as the speaker glosses over real world difficulties to spin an interesting tale.

As readers, we often realize that much of this is trite — witness the innumerable number of articles of how people have learned entrepreneurial lessons from watching babies, dogs, pets and what not. You would think people are in a heightened state of awareness, teasing insights from every interaction of the day.

Given the rise of ‘growth hacking’ strategies, this variety is unlikely to die and will make the signal to noise ratio for good insights tougher to find.soon, and will make the signal to noise ratio for good insights tougher to find.

The promised life

The third variety is like an advertisement without a disclaimer. This variety markets a life that’s lived on ‘one’s own terms’, a promise of a life of guts and glory. Whatever happens, do it your way!

Much of this paints the picture of heroic struggle. This kind is aimed at first-time entrepreneurs, or those looking to start off. Anyone who has started something off, irrespective of how successful it has been, is allowed to proffer advice. Every story is incomplete without a triumph, even if it is in the coming. People never fail, they ‘pivot’. In case things go wrong, they ‘exit’. Just don’t ask about terms of the exit.

In this world, ambition is the ultimate seductress; struggle the ultimate romance.

The trouble with this thread is that it is, like the first variety, misleading and dangerous. It goads people on without outlining the risks.

Literature of this kind should be more nuanced and truthful. It should ideally present different stories of those who tried and failed and analyze why so. I do not mean the well marketed ‘failure events’, where people celebrate failure and gloss it over as an achievement. I mean real stories that let people know what’s at stake. Every opportunity has a cost behind it; every success a sacrifice. Entrepreneurship is a considered choice, not taken on because it is cool to be in the ‘club’.

Don’t get me wrong. I am not suggesting that people do not become entrepreneurs.

I think entrepreneurship is definitely an idea everyone should examine at some point in their lives.

But I find it unsettling that many of the entrepreneurs whom I meet seem enveloped by the idea that success as a natural outcome.

They have risked it all on an idea. They rarely pause to examine if their idea or product has merit. Or understand the effort it would take to make it successful. They have taken a leap, and now the universe has to pay them back.

Not many evaluate what their key strengths are as individuals, what are real market opportunities and whether they have a shot at success. Many quit their jobs based on fads of the moment, just because the urge to be an entrepreneur is strong.

You have multiple folks trying to build software, games and utilities that have odds stacked against them. They don’t think through whether it is the right time in the market for an idea, what factors can determine success and how many of these they can control.games and utilities that have odds stacked against them.

Much of the available literature of this kind is about how successful people got to where they were, often presented with the fanboy worship of the writer. So you get a laundry list of instructions asking you to be paranoid about your business, choosing the right co-founder, running teams effectively, pitching yourself, etc. There are a bunch of tips from others’ lives as if urging us to apply them to our own lives for definite success — the ‘how I did it’ and ‘how I live my life’ tales.Sadly, they don’t highlight that the journey is uncharted, and there are no milestones to mark progress. What works for one does not work for another. You cannot borrow tips from someone’s life and apply them to your own to achieve success.

We find advice against the grain of logic — don’t worry about profitability, there’s a ton of money waiting for the right idea.

It could be your idea that VCs smack down on as the winner. One day, people will talk about the tremendous odds you faced to push their vision through and finally, in a moment of triumph at a product launch that drives the world into a tizzy (or a funding round that’s publicized), punch the air to show that you did it your way.

Armed with vision, tenacity and hubris, we are told, we will definitely succeed against all odds. Life will be tough, but why dither? Struggle makes you stronger.

This appeals to our inner emotional self rather than a rational calculative mind. It promises a chance to burnish your name amongst those-who-count in the world.

Literature of this kind indirectly rails against being a salaried employee. There are many presumptions about this role: one does not have control over one’s destiny, has to do work that’s mundane, is not able to reach one’s potential and will ultimately regret taking up the Hobbesian choice: give up a life of glory for a one for steady accumulation of wealth and comforts.

But take note of why people jump ship into entrepreneurship, and you’ll see many who have been seduced by the idea of being an entrepreneur rather than the idea of building a business or solving a market problem.

What we need are more articles that present a firmer picture. Articles that advice on how to assess market opportunity and see if it is viable, questions to ponder on whether you feel deep within that you should be the one to fix it and a more balanced view of what you will be giving up. We need articles that make you question beliefs that you strongly hold true, for that is when you will be open to the possibility of being wrong, and hence be willing to learn. We need articles that force people to think about worthwhile problems to solve on which they can build a business rather than just the fad of the month.

Till then, as Bertrand Russell says, “A wise man will enjoy the goods of which there is a plentiful supply, and of intellectual rubbish he will find an abundant diet, in our own age as in every other. “

Note: This is a revised version of an article I had written two years ago. I know that there may be many who’s views differ from mine. I’d love to hear what you think about this in the comments section.

Posted on

Why services firms struggle to build products

I’ve seen this play out so many times over the last few years.

A business leader at a services firm will sit down and talk about how they’re working on a product. S/he will quote the usual mix of arguments – services as a business is struggling; Indian firms have challenges making products but they think they can do it this time; automation/products are key to their future – and finally end by being confident about the potential.

why-services-firms-struggle-to-build-products

A few months down the line, the business leader will lament about how the ‘team’ doesn’t get it, and how tough it is for services firms to think ‘product’. Management will consider hiving the product team off into a separate location, or even moving the product business out as a separate firm.

In most cases, the end is predictable. The services firm realizes that the product business is radically different from what they’re used to. The product experiment they started off with didn’t play out the way they anticipated. They usually shelve the product arm, or make the arm build products only for internal consumption, while their business continues to be services or managed services build on top of the product.

Why do things go wrong?

Most business leaders will reflect that their teams didn’t have the product ‘mindset’, but in reality, there are a combination of factors that affect this.

I’ve listed them in three buckets

  • Product management & skills
  • Sales/marketing
  • Business strategy

Product management skills

Inability to understand market needs

Most services firms are used to a pattern of bidding for RFPs, winning the deal, and then assigning a bunch of business analysts (BAs) to handle requirement gathering.

When they start experimenting with products, they graduate some of the BAs to become product managers. After all, they know client needs, right?

Wrong.

In practice, a lot of BAs struggle as product managers. The challenge is not with their skill or ability, but in their organizational roles thus far.

Most business analysts are used to starting on a specific client engagement, working with IT/business leaders and listing specifications for their teams. Their role involvesefficient translation of existing requirements.

However, for good products, there is no ‘client’ to give requirements. The challenge for product managers is to unearth requirements based on knowing market needs and customers so well that they can design a product without getting a business requirement document.

This is not about not asking customers for what they want (people often state the oft repeated lie of Apple not doing consumer research when this comes up), it’s about understanding the customer requirements better than they can, and coming up with a product design that would suit their needs.

This is one of the toughest steps in the journey, and one that most firms get wrong.

The inference seems simple, but I find that services firms need a lot of coaching on the process to even start thinking along these lines.

The myth of ‘productizing’ services

This is closely linked to the previous point.

Many services firms start thinking of products after they receive requirements for something new from one client (eg: data analytics). They believe they can easily productize requirements to come up with something they can sell to other clients.

This rarely works.

Building for one client often means that your product is so specific to their needs that you will have to make significant changes when you take it to others.

This means making modifications to existing design, that services firms usually agree to thinking they’re doing products. Very quickly, they realize that they’re back in services mode.

What is required is to build something that the clients feel they could adapt to instead of the other way round. That comes only when you can bring in market knowledge into the product instead of just client knowledge.

Lack of product marketing skills

Building a product business is a lot more than just building a product.

In practice, the product marketing team has to spend time positioning the product right, building the right communication stories and getting customers to feel the product is right for them.

This takes a totally different skill set than sitting with the client and getting him/her to sign off on a service delivered. It involves a lot of business storytelling, segmentation, messaging and more.

Most services firms do not have experience with these skills, as their marketing teams have largely been involved in corporate marketing, branding and events.

Sales/marketing

Incentives and organizational enablers

When services firms look at building products, they often ignore the rest of the go-to-market cycle.

For instance, a couple of services firms I know built specific sales teams for products. However, they drew the team members from existing services and presented product selling as a fresh opportunity.

The sales team quickly realized that product selling & business models are very different. Where they could ratchet up millions in sales revenues from a single client (and accordingly, earn their incentives), they now had to spend a lot of time with multiple clients to convince them about licensing deals and the like. This was a lot of additional effort that saw the sales team quickly lose enthusiasm.

In another firm, the product team tried piggybacking on existing sales representatives or account managers. However, they realized that the sales team would often offer the product for free as a sweetener to clients to win deals. After all, their primary aim was to close deals, not sell products.

Existing brand perception

“But we thought you were into <services>. Why are you doing products?”

Products from services firms live in the shadow of the larger brand, and often this gets in the way of customers treating them seriously.

Clients often do not believe that the firm will ‘stick it out’ in the product game, as they are known for services. Hence, they are often reluctant to place bets on products from services firms, even if they have an existing relationship.

The existing brand perception often interferes with the product positioning as well. Rather than flowing as a natural extension of the brand, the product positioning has to dodge references to existing business that may confuse the market.

Business strategy 

Legacy relationships & contractual agreements

Most services firms have signed contracts with clients that clearly state all ownership of data/IP lies with the client.

When they begin thinking of building products, they usually find that even good ideas need amendments to contractual agreements to let them use data. Client account managers are hesitant to get into the discussion, and clients too look at such requests with some reluctance – after all, the benefits for clients is rarely commensurate with the risk.

Risk of new disrupting the old

Many services firms announce their foray into products and platforms with flourish. While this brings their product business into focus, it also serves to threaten existing business lines.

These shifts are rarely easy, and there are often a set of well-entrenched players within the system who are skeptical, scared or both about the new developments. Inability of leadership to place the product offering within the larger organizational context often leads to existing verticals undermining the new efforts, and sometimes, even cheering failures.

Lack of strategic importance in firm’s business

Product businesses need time. Services businesses are about immediate revenue flows.

Services firms often lack patience to wait for the product businesses to steady themselves and contribute to the firm’s bottom line. After the initial buzz, many services firms lose focus on the product business (or treat it more like a marketing/PR exercise) as it doesn’t contribute in significant ways to the company’s bottom line.

In case the senior leadership/CEO has committed revenue numbers to the board/shareholders, there is added pressure to quickly show revenues. This often leads to shadow revenues (accounting for revenues for product usage within firms own services – often leading to double accounting) or drifting to managed services on top of product lines to build revenues.

In both these cases, the focus quickly shifts away from giving the product business its space.

These are factors I’ve observed, and I’m happy to hear thoughts/arguments about the topic. Please leave your comments below.

Posted on

When sales hijacks your product roadmap

Hey product manager, let me remind you of that time when you had the perfect roadmap for the market. You had it all sorted out (finally!) with engineering and were clear about what you’d build. Your teams had already worked on a few sprints and you felt that this time, you’d be able to get the product right.

when-sales-hijacks-your-product-roadmap

But then, your sales person turned up and said ‘I’ve just promised feature x to the client. We have to build it.’

You gnashed your teeth and got into an indignant fight.

The sales person just made your carefully crafted product roadmap look pointless.

How could he do this? You had just sent out your roadmap last month and said this is what he was getting. Why does sales always do this? Why can’t they just sell what you have, instead of pushing for what you don’t?

You take it up with your management, and maybe even the CEO, but finally are told that this client is just too critical, and you will have to build what the sales person wants.

You grimace, and feel all your passion drained out. Ok, you think, I’ll do it, but under protest. It’s my job to get it done, but it’s no fun anymore. Maybe you should just look for another job where they trust product managers over sales….

Let’s break out of the reverie. This is something that happens in a lot of organizations.

Most product managers have an ambivalent equation with sales. They need the sales team to bring in revenues, but hate having to accommodate what the sales persons ask (and always at the last minute at that!).

Is there a way out? Can you safeguard your product roadmap from mutilation?

To be honest, it depends on how your organization is structured and power equations within. But there are things you can do as a product manager to prepare for something like this.

Learn how sales works

A large number of engineers turned product managers look down upon sales as a necessary evil. They’re far more comfortable in the deterministic universe of building a product. Sales seem to be a profession for smooth talkers who care only about their numbers and not about the intrinsic product itself.

Unfortunately, this worldview makes life difficult for all involved, but is like a self-inflicted wound for product managers. You can complain about sales around water coolers all you want, but it’ll help more if you learn to appreciate how sales works.

In most of my product manager trainings, I ask product managers and aspiring product managers if they have worked with sales earlier. Many say that they’ve just accompanied a sales person on a customer visit. Often, they would be briefed by the sales person just before the meeting, and requested to not comment on anything beyond the demo. ‘Leave the relationship part to me,’ the sales person would say. If, during the meeting, they strayed from the brief, the sales person would try gesturing frantically to not say something that puts the deal in jeopardy. They usually walk out thinking that they should just send a junior the next time for the demo.

In my experience, I’ve seen that good product managers have a great understanding of the sales process and see themselves as team players in getting customers to choose your product/solution.

But I also find that most product managers have only a vague idea of how sales works. Sales is also a process, and most good sales folks have a keen understanding of how to get started in the market, generate leads, convert leads into conversations and go through the consideration-preference-sale process. Sales, especially enterprise sales, is a lot more strategy & structured approach than just numbers.

My recommendation to product managers who haven’t been through a sales cycle is to get a buddy in sales, and understand how they work. Not only does it make it easier to talk to them when it comes to client asks, it often gives surprising insights about how your product is used and/or what competitors are building.

Have different versions of your roadmap

Many folks are surprised to hear that you should have different versions of your roadmap. The sales team often uses the roadmap to sooth client concerns on whether your product/firm sees a long term view for something they need to invest in.

If you have the same roadmap that your development team uses, you risk the sales team aggressively committing to features to win the deal. Often, clients are speaking to multiple potential vendors, and there is risk of competitors learning about your product roadmap. There is also a risk that if the client signs off on a deal based on your roadmap, you have very little slack if things go awry (don’t they always?).

It often helps to have a ‘light’ version of the roadmap for the sales team to discuss with the clients. You could share the development roadmap in confidence with sales, but insist that only the light version be seen by clients. That way, the sales person also knows that he can reach out to check if he needs to share something from the development roadmap with clients on a case-by-case basis.

Negotiate

Most product managers know the art of negotiation with engineering teams to get them to agree on what to build. But good product managers also know how to negotiate with sales teams.

What does this involve?

Often, it means having the right amount of flexibility in your roadmap. Don’t look at yourself as a ‘mini-CEO’ who has to call all the shots for the product. At the other end, have your viewpoint that’s not based on what engineering can build or what sales tells you they can sell (this is why it’s important to know your customers well).

I’ve been lucky to work with sales folks who respect a well-articulated viewpoint on why a particular client ask will take the product down a path that will make it difficult to adapt for other changes later.

These conversations take the path of ‘how do we make this deal work?’ What usually follows is a negotiation on what we can tell the client, even if we can’t fulfil all his/her asks. This helps build a joint pitch on what we think is best for your business.

This doesn’t always work, but the process of negotiation with the sales teams often help build respect for your capability and reasoning as well.

Another factor that I’ve found helpful is to have a strong list of priorities for your product, and areas where you can be flexible. That helps in the give-and-take of the negotiation.

You may not always be able to prevent your roadmap from being hijacked, but you can minimise its impact with this approach. I’d love to hear your thoughts on this topic in the comments.

 

Posted on

Learn Silicon Valley antidotes to product challenges faced by Startups

Successful products are not an accident, even if they may look like it from the outside. Successful products are the end result of a series of challenges tackled well.

While each business is unique, many of these product challenges are not.

As Indian startups are working towards building market-winning products, wouldn’t it be great if we could learn from some of Silicon Valley’s best and avoid costly mistakes?

With this goal, Confianzys is getting Rich Mironov, a product management coach/mentor to Bangalore in February.

As part of the event, Rich will be conducting an interactive seminar for startups on identifying key challenges for product firms, and how these can be tackled.

Rich Mironov coaches product executives, product management teams and agile development organizations. He is a seasoned tech executive and serial entrepreneur: the “product guy” at six Silicon Valley start-ups including as CEO and VP Products/Marketing.

Rich combines “what-we-can-build” with “what-markets-will-pay-for” viewpoints. Since 2001, Rich also has been an interim executive, consultant or adviser to dozens of early-stage companies and larger technology firms including Yahoo, Cisco, Wealthfront, WhiteHat Security, Varian and VeriSign.

Rich has seen the ups and downs of the product industry in Silicon Valley. He has seen the product industry in the US also turn out turkeys by not focusing on basics. If the idea is not validated, development methodology like Agile can only take you twice as fast down the wrong path.

The seminar covers topics like:

  •  What makes good ideas turn to valued products
  •  How to crack your product challenges before the market cracks you
  •  The market only pays for what it really needs. How should you build this right?

As Rich says, “The really successful start-ups are those that believe that they are half right, and half wrong, and quickly figure out which half is wrong– not that the ones that believe they are doing everything right.”

Here’s an opportunity to learn from Rich directly. The seminar Silicon Valley antidotes to product challenges faced by entrepreneurs is scheduled for 25 February 2015 between 3-6PM at My Fortune hotel, Richmond Road, Bangalore.

You can register here for the seminar or read more at The Secret Sauce webpage. iSPIRT members can use the code iSPIRTMEMBERS to get a 25% off on the entry price.

Posted on

3 questions to expect at your Product Marketing interview

Perhaps you are an Engineer considering a lateral move into Product Marketing and watching out for opportunities within your company. Perhaps you’ve gone through an MBA and are anxiously awaiting interviews on campus.

Whatever the situation, your first interview for a Product Marketing role can be an intense experience, especially if your past interviews have been all about technology.

While each interview can spring some surprises, here are some often asked questions at Product Marketing interviews that you should prepare for.

What product in the recent past do you think was marketed well/poorly?

This question is not meant to check your knowledge of revenues or market share in a particular industry. Interviewers ask this question to see if you have a good grasp of product marketing strategies and how they work in practice. There is no one right or wrong answer here, but you need to be able to discuss a specific strategy that a product adopted, and explain why you believe it worked/did not work.

If your product faced Problem X, what would you do?

Case-style questions like these are popular at Product Marketing interviews because it gives interviewers an opportunity to test two things; one, it tells them how you approach a problem – whether you are good at asking the right questions and understand the root cause of the problem. Two, you can also show them how you would work towards a solution without complete data – and in real life, most problems need to be solved using an incomplete amount of information.

Some examples of case-style questions are:

  • “Product sales are low in the last 6 months. What problems should Marketing seek to fix?”
  • “If your product could use any of these 5 potential channels, which ones would you use?”
  • “Lead quality from our current website is poor. What would you change?”

Mike Volpe, the CEO of Hubspot mentions in a blog post that he uses these extensively, and gives some more examples.

Case-style questions involve using marketing principles but thinking on your feet. It is a good idea to get some practice doing this!

Give us an example of how you would think of a new product idea.

Relax – the interviewer is not expecting you to come up with the next billion dollar idea right away! Since being the voice of the customer lies at the heart of the Product Manager/Marketing role, this question is meant to help the interviewer gauge your customer awareness.

Are you excited about learning from the market and customers? Can you draw the linkages between what customers need and what a new product should deliver? Do you have an understanding of how to learn what customers need?

This question is really meant for the interviewer to find out of you are a Marketer at heart – whether you are passionate about creating products that will delight customers and make them reach for their wallets.

At the same time, it also gives you a chance to showcase your communication skills, since the interviewer sets you free to talk about an idea of your choice. With communication skills being an essential asset for a Product Marketer, that’s something interviewers watch out for as well.

What were some of the questions you faced in your first Product Marketing interview? Do share in the comments below.

This article first appeared on www.confianzys.com/blog. Confianzys is India’s leading product business consulting firm.

Posted on

Do You Need An MBA To Be A Product Manager?

An extremely polarizing topic, the question, ‘Do You Need An MBA To Be A Product Manager?’ is an often asked one on popular forums; the answers range from “No, an MBA won’t help you in any way, and you are better off not spending the money” to “Yes, it’s a must if you want to get hired by large corporations.”

Like most big decisions that individuals need to take as part of their career growth journeys, the answer is really:

It Depends.

Now that may seem like taking the easy way out, but there really is no one single decision that would make sense for every aspiring Product Manager. So, instead of asking if an MBA is essential to become a Product Manager, a better question would be:

What do I lack in my quest to become a Product Manager, and how do I acquire the skills I lack?

When you frame the question this way, you can make a decision that fits your career goals and skill levels, rather than following a generic guideline that may be right for someone else.

A few years ago, getting an MBA was the best way to gain exposure to various business functions and learn skills needed to be an effective product manager. However, there are multiple alternatives available today – working in a startup where every member gets exposed to different aspects, taking online courses, taking specific training programs to build key skills or learn methods, and more.

So, with that in mind, let’s look at some of the skills and qualities you would need as a Product Manager and how you can gain them with/out an MBA.

Joining the dots between Market-Customer-Product-Technology

A good PM needs to map market opportunities, understand customer behavior in the context of that market, visualize the opportunity in the form of the right product – and finally, ensure that the available technology can deliver the product in the form visualized.

An MBA doesn’t teach you to do all of this. However, it can help you learn the tools you need for the first half of the equation, i.e. understanding markets and customers.

Of course, successful managers who do this without an MBA exist, but an MBA can reduce your learning time at work.

The rest of it is a skill acquired over time, learning on the job and supplemented by Product Management training that you can practice at your role.

Communication & other soft skills

PMs necessarily have to work with Sales, Marketing, and Engineering; to do this successfully, PMs need communication skillsbeyond talking – they need to listen, negotiate, harness the power of teams and often, influence using their credibility rather than authority.

Do you need an MBA to acquire these skills? If your communication skills are poor, an MBA can help you polish certain aspects such as presenting ideas well; on the other hand, if you have excellent communication skills, an MBA may not help you much in this area. (And don’t take your own word for it – get an objective person you know to rate your skills).

Product Marketing

Depending on how your company structures its teams, PMs may or may not be hands-on when it comes to Product Marketing. In the Indian context however, most PMs will be deeply involved in some or all aspects of Product Marketing.

This is one area where an MBA can add to your learning, with courses on consumer behaviour, brand management, and marketing communications. Many engineers lack exposure to these aspects of the job, and having some training in them is an asset.

Today, you could also gain some exposure to these using online courses from Coursera or others.

Networking

Till a few years ago, colleges were the best areas to form strong networks. Most of the leading B-schools have strong alumni networks that allow exchange of information about new jobs, and often give visibility into what friends in other industries are up to.

However, today there are a multitude of forums to network within the technology industry like startup events, LinkedIn forums, expert networks and more. While these do not replace the traditional B-school networks, they definitely give a leg up to candidates looking to build their own identity and explore work in other domains.

Graduating from any of the top B-schools could give an edge in getting selected for roles, but a lot then depends on the candidate, his/her domain and functional expertise to clinch the job.

With many startups trying to make their mark in the product space, demonstrating expertise in your known area of work through blogs/forums or by interacting with others in events often throws up job opportunities that you may not be aware of.

The key skills of being a good product manager – intense curiosity to understand how things work, an ability to appreciate context and its effect, the ability to observe keenly, spot opportunities and work to tap them – are not skills that a B-school can teach you.

While a B-school might hone some of your skills, you should take a cost-benefit approach to this and rightly ask – is an MBA worth the money?

Without a huge education loan to pay off, you may decide to take the risk of picking a relatively lower paying job as a product manager for the experience, or maybe start your own firm based on an idea you have.

That would be the first step along thinking like a product manager.