Tweet

More from @johncutlefish

John Cutler

@johncutlefish

22 Dec

@Amplitude_HQ

I'm going crazy trying to explain this seemingly basic concept, but striking out. Any ideas appreciated!

At the day job (@Amplitude_HQ) I meet teams who imagine the following...that there is a linear relationship between analytics instrumentation "work" and insights ... (1/n)

Meanwhile - the teams that are actually doing the work (and integrating it into day-to-day product work), see something that looks more like this...

A quick pass at instrumentation unlocks a lot of valuable insights. Integrating it into day-to-day work unlocks even more (2/n)

Can't put my finger on the why

With a self-service analytics product, it is 1) easy to add new events, props, etc. and 2) you have a whole variety of insight variations.

With just 2 events, 5 props each, and a handful of user properties you can answer LOTS of questions (3/n)

Read 5 tweets

John Cutler

@johncutlefish

19 Dec

I frequently encounter leaders who believe their team(s) aren’t “ready” for taking a more outcome focused approach. They talk of “baby steps” and “learning how to crawl before...”.

Here’s what they are missing
... to learn something, it is important to practice the thing (1/n)

You don’t learn this by running a (or working in a) feature factory, cranking out the stuff sprint by sprint.

You learn by doing a version — albeit probably more controlled/structured — of the thing ... (2/n)

What might that involve?
- direct contact w/customers
- some ability to “sense” outcomes qualitatively/quantitatively
- a feedback loop

Instead of
(Someone else learns) - build - build - build - build - build

More
Learn - build - build - measure - learn - build - measure (3/n)

Read 7 tweets

John Cutler

@johncutlefish

18 Dec

have been thinking all week about experience...

I've meet execs who swear "we can't do X because we can't hire engineers like [big tech co]". Are they right?

and others who say ... "all you need is psychological safety and empowerment and ppl will figure it out"

hmm (1/n)

... I'm reminded of an environment that had an extremely strong foundation of quality (and safety, and empowerment). And exp. leaders.

In that env, a new grad would take 2-4y to really start figuring out the product thing. AND...would start contributing quickly.

and.. (2/n)

... another env with very talented/experienced folks all with 10+y experience, being mired in complete insanity. Things falling apart. Bureaucracy. Toxic company politics. It was terrible. Many people left. Some people stayed in a Sisyphean effort to fix the org.

and...(3/n)

Read 9 tweets

John Cutler

@johncutlefish

15 Dec

a question I ask startup founders that they seem to find helpful ...

"what do you need to be the best in the world at?"

(hyperbole intended)

here's what is fascinating about the replies...(1/n)

Some people will list 5-8 things.

"We need to be awesome at a,b,c,d,e,f,g!"

...w/o an ounce of self awareness that being awesome at one thing is HARD. Two things is REALLY HARD. Three? Nope.

Here's another thing...

Most people haven't "unpacked" the value chain (2/n)

Take something like targeted in-app #UX enhancements ...

you need to be amazing at 1) doing that w/o breaking someone's product, 2) doing it quickly, 3) the targeting, 4) all the requisite data plumbing, 5) clean data, 6) marketing it, 7) best in the world at in-app #ux (3/n)

Read 5 tweets

John Cutler

@johncutlefish

13 Dec

a big learning the last year is the degree to which your most passionate team members will *expect* leaders/managers to coherently frame strategy

this is where "autonomy" often hits a snag. Leaders assume it means "bottom up" planning. But that isn't it ... (1/n)

Writing up 3 vague bullets on a "vision" slide is easy. Also easy is planning out each and every chunk of work for the year.

Much harder is detailing a strategy that leaves room for creativity and agency ... but is also coherent, backed by evidence, and is opinionated ... (2/n)

Opinionated? Isn't that bad?

I don't think so when it is opinionated at the right level. Passionate problem solvers want to know that their company has a perspective and doesn't want to be everything/anything.

"Um hey, so what are your OKRs" doesn't land. (3/n)

Read 4 tweets

John Cutler

@johncutlefish

6 Dec

a differentiation that many teams get wrong:

time-based goals
vs.
persistent models

let's dig in.

left: time-based goals
right: persistent model

why is this important? ... (1/n)
* PS, school example took about 120 seconds. apologies

quarterly goals like OKRs often cloud the actual underpinning model ... the beliefs ... the assumptions ... the mental model for value creation.

spending time on understanding the persistent model makes time-based goals MUCH easier and gets us out of the factory model (2/n)

Even something is "bad" as this mind map (it took a team 5 minutes) ... can help build a common vocabulary.

with each passing quarter you will focus on parts of the puzzle. and you may revise the model. but even this rough first pass gets us started (3/n)

Read 4 tweets

Share this page!

John Cutler

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @johncutlefish

John Cutler

John Cutler

John Cutler

John Cutler

John Cutler

John Cutler

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Like this author's thread?