Thread by @johncutlefish

It can be helpful to think of prioritization at three levels

1. core beliefs, models, perspectives
2. where we focus, the leverage points
3. how we intervene

Obviously, these are all related. A mistake ... (1/6)

...is to only focus the prior discussion at #3, and obscure the other bets/beliefs underpinning #1 and #2. With...

#1 - we are betting on what we understand
#2 - betting on the leverage points we identify and target
#3 - betting on how we intervene

It all matters... (2/6)

Using something like North Star Framework (your standard OMTM and inputs), we can codify many of the beliefs underpinning #1 and #2.

Which does a great job of setting teams up to prioritize "Level 2 Bets" (3/6)

Here's an example from the org I work at (@Amplitude_HQ). As a new prod manager, note how many facets of our product strategy are baked into this simple tree.

It is immediately evident our product is built for regular team learning...not one-off reports/ data snacking (4/6)

Putting it all together, you can see how we are viewing #1, #2, and #3 simultaneously:

Core bets related (#1)
Then you have our choice of inputs (#2-ish)
Opportunities to target (#2-ish some implicit #3)
Interventions (Level 3 bets) - #3

(5/6)

This all relates to prioritization, because without the full picture ...how your 1-3d / 1-3w bets (#3) map all the way up to your 1-3y / 1-3 decade bets (#1) ... it is very difficult to prioritize.

(6/6)