Related Posts
Rising Star
See it works
Which companies are doing H1b and immediate GC?
Any body got retention offer from LTI?
Hows the onsite situation in LTI?
Additional Posts in Product Management
Mentor
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
Subject Expert
I do think this is common, particularly at smaller start ups where they prioritize moving fast. It’s not wrong, it’s just what they feel they have to do, but it does tend to result in some less than optimal tech decisions.
My advice: define all the priorities for the product clearly, including both functional and technical requirements (performance/architecture/clean up should be included here). The reality is that adding a whole bunch of new functionality without fixing the underlying technical issues likely will compound the situation. Prioritize getting that fixed as quickly and easily as possible, while simultaneously evaluating what new features could be implemented that don’t make it worse.
Consider looking into the concept of error budgeting. It’s a technique Google developed related to SRE work. Implementing it requires a bunch of work so you probably won’t want to do that, but the philosophy can still apply. Essentially, the concept is that you prioritize tech debt/architecture/performance and don’t release new features until your product is within its error budget, where errors relate to performance KPIs. For example, up time could be one, where you agree you’ll be up to three 9s...every time you go down, it’s a ding to your error budget. If you’re not within your budget, you need to prioritize fixes that get you there.
I’m way over simplifying this for the purposes of posting here. My main point: yes, this is common. And your best bet to getting to new functionality may be to solve the technical issues first, while doing what you can to release new features simultaneously. Of course, sometimes timelines and leadership demands don’t allow for this, but you have to try to manage that as best as you can and define a clear plan to move forward that balances the priorities.
Yes, sounds typical. Lots of existing fires due to functional and non-functional gaps in the product and delivery process, lots of new customer requests, and you have your own vision for what the product should be where no previous strong vision may have been present.
Identify the biggest immediate problems, prioritize them, and fix them. Lay out the longer term vision and strategy and start to lay out what’s next after the fires are out. Find some balance so it’s not just 100% fire fighting for the next few quarters, making some progress on new requests and long term goals.
It might feel like a complete mess but if you make sense of the mess and show progress righting the ship, people tend to take notice and respect this.
Thanks PM1