🧵a huge challenge with scaling B2B SaaS is the exploding complexity problem.
through heroics and brute force you can try to contain the problem...until you can't. At which point it consumes everything.
Why does it happen? ... (1/n)
first is the general non-linear nature of the problem
innocently we imagine that adding a new product (or person, segment, etc.), for example, is like going from 10 to 12. Instead, it is like going from 10 to 20.
you quickly overwhelm systems designed for linear things...(2/n)
second, is that the exact efforts to contain the problem at first -- the heroics, the longer hours, the more complex meetings, the project plans, the dependency wrangling -- HIDE THE PROBLEM.
It just gets soaked up into our brains and our processes (3/n)
in fact, if you punish the systems thinkers and empaths who sense the impending wave for being "problem focused" or "not pragmatic and in the here and now" ... you lose, perhaps, your only early warning system.
JUST TRY HARDER...(4/n)
...it is easy to explain away what is happening as a management problem or process problem. Oh hey, lets hire in a new level of management...that will do the trick!
Does it? No...it actually impedes feedback loops and adds more noise ... (5/n)
so you see the classic drift into failure.
before you know it, the people who actually knew what it was like "before", leave.
normalization of deviance.
self preservation at the expense of outcomes... (6/n)
this is hard problem, but it seems to me that that key lesson might be:
1) few things are linear in complex sociotechnical systems 2) monitor the health of feedback loops 3) listen to the messengers (don't shoot them) 4) accept the problem.... (7/n)
When someone says
"What! Are you telling me we can only do three things well? We can't do four?"
... in the back of your mind remember it isn't 3 to 4. (8/end)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
the distance between those adding complexity to the business and those having to deal with the increased complexity in day-to-day decision making
without healthy feedback loops, you can get a massive increase in complexity before the alarm bells go off
in addition to pure distance (hops between people), you also get some interesting effects.
experienced ppl tend to notice the early signals, bc they are able to juggle the ramifications.
e.g "for *that* persona we'd do this a bit differently..."
...less experienced team members may not notice as quickly. They will artificially reduce added complexity and/or just not do anything with the extra cognitive load.
While external forces definitely play a role here and may limit your options, this is an area where a lot of pain is self-inflicted.
managers: "why aren't they pushing back?"
team members: "I never have a second..."
How can you turn the tide? ➡️
1/
You can almost never agree to something w/o something else suffering. A good habit here is to identify the thing that will get less attention, and say it out loud.
To focus on _____, we’ll probably need to de-prioritize _______. Have that answer ready.
2/
It is important to visualize *all* of your work, not just the work in work tracking tools.
Whenever I see ppl brain-dump *all* of their promises, it is far more (like 3-4x) than they immediately acknowledge.
product principles are underutilized, and often phoned in.
key symptoms. they:
* aren't opinionated enough
* don't get the cognitive gears turning
* don't help guide decision making
* reveal nothing about the strategy
* are generic and yawn inducing
how do you fix them? (1/n)
Start with a simple prompt:
When faced with a decision between ____ and ____, we tend to favor ____ because ____
Ideally this is coherent with your actions and past decisions. If not...now would be a good time to start 🙂
The best principles...(2/n)
...cause a bit of friction/tension.
You pay attention. They are forcing functions.
e.g. at @Amplitude_HQ we aren't focused on analysts working in isolation, so we might say "we are biased to scaling data literacy over enabling lone hero analysts"
just occurred to me that part of the product managers job is to frame decisions in a way that actually INVITES disagreement, dissent, challenge.
let me explain
it is easy to frame things that ppl will agree with (1/n)
..lots of successful product managers are good at this. The problem is that they aren't inviting other perspectives. They frame it up -- nice consultant like -- in order to sell the direction.
Nods all around. YES. But months later...
(2/n)
That approach gets things in motion quickly, but it doesn't lead to the best decision quality.
Now other people are so vague that neither support or dissent are possible. There's nothing to go on. No rationale whatsoever.
the idea that remote is universally good for introverts (notwithstanding the many variations of introversion) is problematic...
1/n First, to create *any* environment that is safe and inclusive takes intention and care. It is not magic...introvert * remote=good.
2/n Case in point, there are many in-person work environments that are intentional with respect to the needs of introverts. And many remote environments that aren't...
3/n In many newly remote settings, you simply see decision making shift to smaller, select groups.
What feels comfortable and easier, is merely a reduction in collaboration, healthy tension, and transparency.
Possibly "easier" for the introvert. But not in the long term