How to Lead in Product Management: Practices to Align Stakeholders, Guide Development Teams, and Create Value Together

by Roman Pichler

vision is a high-level, overarching goal that is typically ambitious and inspirational. Consequently, it cannot be measured.

goal expresses an aim, something we want to achieve. Some goals are big and may never be fully realised, like a vision; others are SMART—specific, measurable, agreed upon, realistic, and timebound, like a sprint goal.

objective is a goal that can be measured. You can therefore select metrics to determine ...

human beings, we reach optimum performance when we are focused and relaxed. If you are stressed, tense, pressured, worried,

Effective conversations not only exchange information between people but also create a shared understanding, build connections, and establish trust.

Listen Deeply

Listen for Facts, Feelings, and Needs

recommend a Buddhist teaching called Right Speech.43 The teaching offers the following five guidelines: Speak with the right intention; say only what you believe is true; only speak if it’s beneficial for the people listening; don’t use harsh or harmful words; and make sure you speak at the right time and place, and I would add, using the right channel.

Selected Conversation Techniques47

discuss five common pitfalls next. These are win-lose—believing that there must be a winner and a loser; truth assumption—assuming that the other person is wrong; problem-solving mode—seeing the disagreement as a primarily intellectual issue; blame game—assigning fault to the other person; and artificial harmony—ignoring conflict.

competitive confrontation, passive aggression, conflict avoidance, and passivity

To skilfully deal with conflict, we must change our attitude: We should no longer see conflict as something that produces winners and losers but as an opportunity to connect, learn, and generate mutual gains.

First, we commonly assume that our perception of reality and perspective is correct. Consequently, the other person must be wrong—without being aware of this or questioning it (Stone, Patton, and Heen 2010).50 Second, we are often attached to our ideas, opinions, and products, sometimes to the extent that we identify ourselves with them. When this happens, we are in danger of regarding disagreement as a personal criticism or an attack, even if this was not the other person’s intention. Third, we may find it hard to admit that we are wrong, as we are driven by the desire to be right, to achieve and win.

Treating disagreement as a purely intellectual issue does not do it justice. Instead, explicitly acknowledge the individual’s feelings.

Artificial Harmony

Here are four reasons for this behaviour: Fear of confrontation: We are concerned that we will cause more harm by addressing the issue than letting it be, and we tell ourselves that if we don’t deal with it, it will eventually go away or resolve itself (Sofer 2018, 65–66). Additionally, we may worry that resolving the conflict will make us vulnerable—we might not feel safe to admit that we made a mistake or have a weakness, or we might be uncomfortable talking about “fluffy stuff” like feelings and needs (Lencioni 2002, 63). Wrong priorities: We believe that addressing the conflict is not a high priority and that we should attend to other, more pressing matters. After all, there is so much real work that needs to be done, including reviewing the product roadmap and refining product backlog items. We really don’t have the time to sort out all these pesky people issues. Work culture: Some organisations see conflict as a necessity for collaboration, innovation, and growth; others regard it as undesirable or even unacceptable. For example, when I was working at Intel, I felt that I could express my disagreement with senior stakeholders—challenging the status quo was an important part of the work culture at the company. But I have also worked with organisations that had strong hierarchies and an authoritarian leadership bias, where having meaningful disagreements and engaging in conflict was much more difficult and sometimes perceived as a sign of disrespect. Lack of trust: Whe...

“When I see / hear [observation], I feel [emotion] because I need / value [need]. Would you be willing to [request]?”

Conflict resolution is not about winning, retaliating, or putting the other person in her or his place. It’s about developing a shared perspective on what happened, agreeing on the changes required, and re-establishing trust. This requires a willingness to forgive the other person and yourself (Amro 2018).

Emotion How do you feel? Location Where do you feel it? Sensation What does it feel like? Is there pressure, tightness, aching, heaviness? Warmth, openness, lightness, flowing? Tonality What’s the overall flavour or tone of the emotion? Is it pleasant, neutral, or unpleasant? Meaning Are there any thoughts or stories connected with the emotion? If you had to describe it in one word, what would it be?

non-violent communication, needs are considered to be at the root of our feelings; they are the real reason why we feel the way we do and why we want what we want (Rosenberg 2015; Sofer 2018). For instance, Bob might seek recognition, empathy, and possibly financial gain—he might want

True conflict resolution is only possible if both parties are willing to co-operate—move beyond blame, take responsibility for their behaviour and feelings, and embrace a contribution mindset.

You can encourage change in another person, but you cannot make someone else change.

Determining who makes decisions in an organization is one of the best ways to understand who has the power—who is in control. John A. Buck and Sharon Villines

Deciding together leverages the collective knowledge and creativity of the dev team and stakeholders. It helps you consider all viewpoints, thereby reducing the risk of wrong and biased decisions

In a situation like this, it can be helpful to determine the last responsible moment. That’s the point in time when the cost of delaying a decision outweighs the benefits of not making it.60

For example, I’ve seen companies in which product people had to ask senior managers to approve their product backlog prioritisation and businesses where a product person had to consult a subject-matter expert before being able to make a decision on a feature. In the first case, the individuals lacked the necessary empowerment. In the second case, the product people didn’t have the knowledge required. If you find yourself in a similar situation, then identify and address the actual root cause rather than trying to optimise the decision-making process. Finally,

First, the group is not familiar with collaborative decision-making; people might be used to the person in charge of the meeting or the most senior individual making the decision. Second, people don’t trust each other, possibly because the individuals haven’t worked together or the group hasn’t gelled yet. Consequently, they may not feel safe to speak their minds or to disagree with

I therefore recommend separating the product and facilitator roles. To put it differently, avoid facilitating as the person in charge of the product. Instead, ask the Scrum Master to take on this role.

successfully decide together, the individuals will benefit from adopting a mindset that is based on the following three principles:62 Full participation: Everyone is willing to contribute, and everybody is heard. Nobody seeks to dominate or hijack the decision-making process. Everybody feels safe to speak her or his mind. Mutual respect and understanding: People make an effort to attentively listen to each other and appreciate the other person’s perspective, goals, and needs. The individuals intend to talk to one another kindly and to treat each other respectfully. See the chapter Conversations for more information. Open-mindedness: The group members strive to keep an open mind, understanding that everybody holds a piece of the truth and that everyone’s perspective matters. “Ideas should not be favoured based on who creates them,” as Brown (2009, 73) puts it.

Communication Guidelines for Collaborative Decision-Making63 Always speak from a place of respect for others and assume good intentions on the part of the group members. Respect differences of opinion and value the diversity of the group members. Listen with an open mind; be receptive and refrain from making premature judgements. Speak honestly and openly. Always stick to observable facts. Refrain from judging and labelling people; separate individual and opinion. Ask questions when you sense misunderstanding or disagreement. Speak up if you have not been participating. Make room for others if you have spoken often. Do not interrupt others, but allow a brief moment of silence to let the previous speaker’s words sink in before the next person speaks. Stay present; do not engage in side conversations or answer messages on your electronic devices.

There are four common decision rules that facilitate group decisions: unanimity, consent, majority, and product person decides after discussion.

Additionally, don’t allow unanimity to degenerate into design by committee, where people agree on the smallest common denominator and broker a weak compromise in order to shortcut the decision-making process or maximise their own gain. This is unlikely to result in a sustainable agreement and translate into a successful product. As the saying goes, “A camel is a horse designed by a committee.”

Weak Comprimises impacting EWP

Consent is the absence of objections: A decision is made when nobody disapproves.

people are unlikely to support your decision if they don’t feel heard and understood. I’d like to therefore stress again how crucial it is that you take a genuine interest in the individuals and empathically listen to them. If people don’t feel understood and appreciated, they are unlikely to buy into your decision. Instead, they might follow it out of obligation, or they might ignore or even oppose it. But none of those actions makes it likely that the desired outcome will be achieved.

for successful negotiation (Fisher and William 2012): People: Separate the people from the problem. Interests: Instead of arguing over positions, look for shared interests and needs. Options: Invent multiple options, looking for mutual gains, before deciding what to do. Avoid the mistake of prematurely excluding options and opting for one solution. Criteria: Use objective criteria or a fair standard to determine the outcome.

following five stages that intend to take the negotiator from listening to influencing the behaviour of the other person (Voss 2016): Active listening: Make an effort to empathically listen to the other person while suspending judgement. Empathy: Understand the individual’s perspective, needs, and interest, thereby accepting that emotions play a major role in how we behave as human beings. Rapport: Build rapport and establish trust. Influence: Help the other person let go of her or his position, understand your needs, and look for a solution that addresses the individual’s needs at least partially. Behavioural change: Agree on an acceptable solution that can be implemented (if possible).

There are four conversation techniques that are particularly helpful when negotiating (Voss 2016):70 Mirroring and positive reinforcement: Repeat the exact same words in a warm and accepting voice, no matter if you agree with what was said or not. This provides you with three benefits: First, it ensures that you heard correctly what Sophie said. Second, it plays the message back to the sender and allows her to reflect on it. Third, it shows that you take an interest in what Sophie has to say and builds rapport. Labelling: Listen for the other person’s emotions and call them out. You might say, for example, “You sound concerned. Is that right?” or “I sense that you are upset.” You thereby acknowledge the individual’s emotions and show that you understand and take an interest in how she or he feels. This builds trust and encourages the other person to reflect on how she or he is feeling. Open-ended questions: Ask open-ended questions to uncover the other person’s needs, as suggested before. Say, for example, “Please help me understand how this would be beneficial.” Similar to labelling, this shows that you are interested in understanding Sophie, and it builds rapport. Patience: Be patient and take the time to attentively listen to the individual. Don’t interrupt the other person and don’t try to rush the conversation. Otherwise, it will be hard to understand Sophie’s underlying needs and motives. If you don’t have time to listen to her, then thank her for raising the request...

great guide to your needs is your emotions: Becoming aware of them and asking yourself why they are present will usually lead you to your needs.

Nice

make sure that the solution you develop is fair—that it honours Sophie’s and your needs.

No deal is often better than a bad one.

Im often to eager to get a deal. Be prepared to leave with no deal

If you find that you regularly negotiate, then ask yourself why that is. Here some common causes: You might lack the necessary authority to say no to powerful individuals and enforce joint decisions. People might not buy into the vision and product strategy but pursue their own, individual goals. You therefore lack shared overall goals that provide direction and alignment, as discussed in the chapter Goals. You might not involve the right people in the decision-making process, or you use the wrong decision rule—for example, product person decides after discussion instead of consent or unanimous agreement. The individuals are not willing to embrace a collaborative and transparent way of working but try to request or demand special favours from you.

Mindfulness helps you make better decisions for the following two reasons: First, it helps you recognise cognitive biases. These include confirmation bias, the tendency to prefer data that confirm preconceived views; negativity bias, focusing on negative experiences; and overconfidence bias, overestimating the reliability of one’s own judgements, control, and chances of success. Recognising these biases reduces the risk of making wrong product decisions—for instance, disregarding valid data because it does not match your view. Second, mindfulness helps you to be more aware of your feelings—for example, how excited, sceptical, or displeased you are. This makes it less likely that your emotions drive a product decision—for example, that being angry with someone prevents you from paying attention to the person’s valid concerns.

What did I get done this week? Which challenges and difficulties did I encounter? What did I learn? How am I feeling right now? How did my moods and energy levels develop during the week? What changes do I want to make next week?

Motivation Value learning Autonomy Mastery Purpose

The difference between being good and being great at something is therefore significantly influenced by how industrious we are.

see yourself as malleable and adaptable. With the right effort, you will learn new skills and deepen existing ones; you will develop and grow. By doing so, you adopt a growth mindset.

Developing an open mind provides you with an inner agility.

compassion counteracts these tendencies. It “involves wanting health and well-being for oneself,” as Neff (2015, 12)

instance, the development team may be able to refine some user stories without you, or the sales team may not require a separate update on the new release, if you encourage the individuals to attend the next sprint review meeting.

A simple trick that stops me from rushing around is to walk slowly, as you would when you go for a nice, leisurely walk. Here is one example of how this has helped me: I used to walk as quickly as possible from the airplane to the passport control at Heathrow Airport every time I was coming home from a business trip, until I finally realised that this saved me a couple of minutes but made me stressed. I consequently started to pay attention to my walking and to slow down my pace even if others overtake me. I now feel more relaxed when I leave the airport and less tense when I arrive at home.