วีดีโอ

28:25 i’m going to use this phrase “agile rituals“ in my next presentation

26:53 you’re 1,000,000% right on this point. I’ll use a case study that accompany that has fixed this problem: Logitech. Another name for product owner is stakeholder or division, head or industry lead

19:40 I think this is a symptom of what I would call “crabs in the barrel” mentality that is the nature of product in the last few years. As different groups, especially organizations that sit together like Venn diagrams where product designers projects are managed by PMs, but the designer organization is managed by design directors, and likewise for engineers, business analyst, and even client partners. This is a bastardization of the user experience ethos that likely was mistranslated or even promoted by the UX teams themselves. We can look all across places like LinkedIn, where the change agent cape that UX professionals take on combine with the smartest people in the room ego of the engineering teams forces, PMs to manage all of that. But other product managers are merely quashing all of that a night, truly engaging in taking the positive out it so that it won’t become a meme of itself. This is caused a lot of headaches and a lot of product teams to the point where many product teams simply configure their processes to have this customer understanding happen once, store it into a knowledge base and make the mistake that they don’t have to even deal with it. It would take years of UX debt to uncover this Blindspot. A solution that Marty is leaning towards should be communicated as a company designing aesthetic and axiom: we empathize with the user and their journey to becoming the customer without relying on them to be the feature creator of the product or service.

15:35 Marty is getting into heretic territory here. Sadly, unless you get into a relationship with a great visionary, director, level person, mini organizations, especially those who have over hired and stuff their organizations with bloated product teams will not only be the opposite of this, but will really disagree. I agree with this sentiment. But the way, most organizations higher, even when we are dealing with a new reality of limited budgets and reduce teams, they literally are blind to skills that are different yet complementary. HR hiring managers will use automated AI to screen exactly for that precise fit. Even those who do it manually Will rationalize that their need is to find someone that can just “jump in and understand” rather than rely on the intelligence of someone they hire to use complementary skills to not only figure it out, but to bring the type of innovation that a Martin or other product managers really want out of their teams

12:37 the point being made at this timestamp is in contrast to my earlier comment pretty spot on. I wanted a few people who the product designing function who dealt with designers whether they are sea suite, or whether they are starting out, always constantly losing focus on this point. The problem comes from a dual issue: product managers generally discounting it because of the pressure coming from the start up, who is already behind the eight ball in terms of to hit a home run being down several runs in the bottom of the ninth versus your blue sky, in love with the profession fluffy designer who wants to slavishly follow the religion of UX process, and is typically oblivious to understanding how to design a product with impact. I think product leaders of the future would do best to stir the pot of that gumbo in order to get the best of both worlds. Research can be actionable, immediate and aware of business goals. Designers can combine insights, understanding and synthesizing it together with intuition , product managers can realize that user experience cuts across all titles and build product efficiencies within their teams, leveraging technology for faster builds (particular black box of engineers, who are as guilty as anyone for being oblivious to the business goals and urgency of hitting deadlines)

8:02 I absolutely disagree with Marty‘s take on search engines. Google search engine wasn’t better. It was simply profitable. It was a way for big money interest to dominate over useful information. No one except for those of us inside of our gilded product/business towers think that search engines have any real value I’m not talking about whether they are profitable or not. I’m talking about useful for everyday people. There is an extreme amount of frustrations in the finding experience in digital platforms. It is why a significant amount of people simply shrug their shoulders and don’t engage.

Divide and conquer

I agree with everything Marty says about Agile (with a capital "A"). However, I think he over-indexes on the "Product Owner" bit. It is just a role. Is it because it has the word "Product" in it? 🤔 Also, I don't think process can be always thrown away in favor of speed/innovation. Just like CI/CD is a process (which Marty seems to approve of), testing and verification is a process, code review is a process, blue/green deployment is a process. Yes, they slow things down. But for many products, you just can't fix it after release with any repercussions - so the extra time and effort for these processes is justified. Not every process is as stupidly evil as "putting coversheets on the TPS Reports". After a company grows to a certain size, policy and process play an important role - the leadership cannot be in the room every time a decision is made. Of course, process is often misused and overblown but so is product dogma. Building a product needs more than just sound product thinking or just good engineering - there are many different dimensions and viewing it from just one lens is a mistake.

There is a strong Dave Ramsey vibe coming through here. Saying "just make your teams able to release every two weeks" is as easy as telling someone that makes $300 a week to "save $1000 in a hurry". Disregards any regulations in the industry, ignores organizational silos, and relies on manufacturing boogeymen (SAFe, Agile, Europe, The US Government) to keep emotional binds tight. (shrug) Sadly, there ARE decent ideas embedded here; which I suppose is how book-selling consultants stay in business.

How do you release once a day? You can't possibly be working on anything complex.

Amazing!!. Thank you so much!!.

Bookmark 31:57

Green washing

Bravo :) Merci pour le partage !

Product Owner part is pure manipulation. The fact is: 1. You can have a PO and an SM in your team and still deliver continuously 2. You can have a group of talented engineers that continuously deliver but the end result is not relevant to the market 3. Managing delivery is nowhere near to 10% for any role, it is more 4. Many big and successful companies in Valley have very well defined processes 5. The companies above have POs and PMs in their structure working very effectively 6. PO role was introduced with/by Agile and the role includes also Product Management responsibilities. It works the best for small teams, that's why PMs come into the play with the scale 7. PO is just a name, it is all about responsibilities. You can call it PM, or other names, however there are duties that should be covered by someone. In one of my previous companies (30K Valley company) PMs were acting more as Marketing Managers and POs were responsible for for customer relationship and defining features, as well as driving the delivery. At lastly, there is no universal recipe for success, you need to inspect and adapt.

The ten misconceptions outlined by Marty: 1. you need to solve a problem nobody has solved before 2. you need to spend as much time as possible understanding "the problem space" 3. you need to be an expert in the domain 4. you need to listen to your customers 5. you need to commit to your solution, and iterate until success 6. you need product owners 7. you need to come up with innovative product ideas 8. you need your engineers to focus on coding 9. you need to focus on creating a product your customers love 10. you need process people to grow your company

Great talk ❤ and many learnings

Too good, Thank you for sharing

I refer to that group of people that want to "productize" a process as the "methodology industrial complex". They can take something very useful and morph it into something that takes it completely away from its original intention and purpose. Every company and product team is different. Every set of customers is different. You have to be more in service to your team and customers and the problems you are solving than a slave to the process...

Marty you are the best! What happened with your voice???

Excellent keynote. Thank you for sharing.

Excellent .....as allways !

At what time did he hold this speach? (Year)

Love the videos! Increase your stats = Promo-SM !!!

This is Gold. Thank you.

Thank you for sharing! Very inspiring!

superbe, merci

Super présentation, très bon retour d'expérience.

Trop fière de vous ! Et tellement juste votre histoire, universelle des équipes qui marchent !

Bravo pour la présentation Léo et Martin, crystal clear ! 🙌 Et merci à la @School of Product pour l'invitation et la qualité de l'événement ! On remet ça bientôt ? 😉

@Pablo : tu cherchais un exemple mature et qui a résolu sa transfo et sa gestion de sa dette et de ses dépendances ? Il me semble que la SNCF est à un niveau de maturité assez élevée selon moi (tout comme ses filiales Kisio et oui) Comme toujours contenu passionnant. Merci pour le Meetup.

Great to learn about this!

www.foreveremployable.com

Oh non, le son c'est dommage

Vraiment excellent ce Oussama, super attitude :)

très bonne initiative😍😘