Anthropology and Product Management

Myths that Misguide

2011-03-07T15:00:00Z

Myths can powerfully guide or misguide.

Myths, in the sense of fables or epics, historically captured and conveyed important life lessons to members of a particular culture. The adventures, misadventures, trials and triumphs of the protagonist served as examples of what choices (or lack thereof) could deliver.

Myths, in the sense of commonly held misconceptions, can be tremendously unhelpful.

I'm interested in hearing from others on the misguiding myths you've encountered in product management and marketing, and how you've identified them as such and how you've acted to counter them.

I have a few examples to share. Of course, the interpretations of these depend a lot on their definition and to what degree we believe they hold water. But that's the point of deconstructing them. Let's equip ourselves with clarity on what portion of truth and untruth these contain.

Examples of Internal Myths

"I have to do it all"
Many product managers fall for this one, even more so than some other roles, because we typically have the personality that cannot leave dropped tasks or processes alone - we have to pick them up! But we also learn through painful experience that burn-out is all but guaranteed if we aren't willing to invest some time and energy in convincing other people to help out where they can (or should), even if that means escalating the discussions into some uncomfortable territory.

"Quality is more important than speed" (or vice versa)
The quality versus speed trade-off is sometimes a false dichotomy, even though a persistent one. It's just one example of a false dichotomy in product management. The simplistic expression is seductive because it compresses many considerations into a either/or choice, and it is human (and lazy) to desire just two alternatives to choose from. An experienced product manager recognizes that the speed-to-market versus product quality dilemma often hides incomplete positioning or a feature set assumed to be written in stone. The alternate choices get more interesting when the debate recognizes all the variables, and embraces the deliberate compromises that need to be made, given the product's ultimate goals.

Examples of External Myths

"The customer is always right" or "The customer is always wrong"
The real question is what is the customer right and wrong about? Depending on your business model, your market, your position on the product lifecycle curve, where your customers are on the technology adoption curve, as well as your instincts, your customers will be right and wrong about different things, but never absolutely either in all things of interest to your product's success. There are customers worth listening to. There are listening techniques that maximize the value of their input. There are some things, innovation being one, where only a special few of your customers might contribute anything. And there are customers, no matter how well you execute, that may be worth firing - they are that wrong!

"Our customers want too many customizations"
I've encountered this one many times in the B2B software space. The subtext of this myth is "we didn't design the product in such a way that the inevitable customer customizations would be manageable in terms of cost to us". This is typically the result of technical debt, which is a lot like credit card debt in the sense that it's a method for delaying cost at an eventually greater overall cost. Addressing this myth may be possible in your strategic plan. If you make configurability a strategic feature of your product early on, you'll rarely feel that customers want too much customization, because you'll be delivering it at speed and at a reasonable cost.

Have you held any of these myths? Debunked them for yourself? For others? What other misguiding myths have you encountered?

Trevor Rotzien
the product manager

The Foreigner who could be Undermining your Global Team

2011-01-12T13:00:00Z

So, you've got global team. People based in several different countries are working on your product.

How are they all going to work together?

They've spent all kinds of effort and money on training and cultural sensitivity to be more compatible with your work culture. The heavy-lifters are papered with certifications. The managers are degreed. There are Service Level Agreements in place to ensure their commitment to getting things done. The remote collaboration tools are up and running, so work can continue almost it not a full 24 hours a day, rotating through the longitudes, time zone by time zone.

But in spite of these preparations, there is a foreigner that might be undermining the entire project. They just don't get the complexity and subtlety of a global team working together. They haven't put that much effort into adapting or developing genuine interest in how the other team members think of the product, the work, collaboration, or any ostensibly shared point-of-view. It's not that they consciously mean to introduce difficulty, but they are operating with some old, stubborn and largely unconscious assumptions that blind them to the significant risk their blindness entails. Even if the risk is recognized by another, it will be difficult to escalate, since the problem foreigner has high status, so their bubble is largely unchallenged.

Who is this threat to the global team?

It's you.

Or it could be, if you're operating under a few common fallacies:

1. It's all the other people that are foreign, not me.

2. It's right and proper that the others mold themselves to my culture.

2a. Okay, it's maybe not right and proper exactly, but at least necessary, since the project originates here. It's our project, it's their job to conform.

Are these fallacies obvious? If you're an experienced product manager and/or an observant traveler then perhaps they are, but they are not obvious to everyone.

Even if these fallacies are obvious to you, what concrete actions will you take to counter them? While acknowledging them is a start, acknowledgement alone won't protect your project nor open up the possibility of harnessing the differences across your global team to build a more integrated, more effective culture.

Consider constructive profiling. While there is simply no substitute for understanding individuals individually, reading up on the business culture tendencies of the nationalities of your global team can at least provide you a framework for study, to consider what policies and procedures may need to be changed. For example, how might a particular group's perceptions and expressions of authority make getting honest input a challenge? What types of communication could surface more brain power and less deference? This is just one example of a myriad of team integration considerations that are worthy of pursuit.

It's often we Westerners that assumes the "others" are foreign, but we are not... it's that West-centric assumption of being the measure of all things. It's more interesting and more effectively to accept that you, the Westerner, are a foreigner too, that the entire team is an aggregate of "foreigners". Teamwork is nurtured by an attitude that pursues a new, synthetic culture, and that all cultural ingredients should be considered as potential enablers for success.

Time and attention pressures often minimize a product manager's willingness to put the day-to-day on pause long enough to consider the cultural aspects of a project. But not doing so increases the risk of unspoken disconnects and reduces the opportunities for social innovation that could raise the quality of the overall result.

Trevor Rotzien

the product manager

Success with Globally Distributed Teams

2010-12-02T14:07:35Z

As companies utilize distributed teams more extensively, the landscape of the work environment is changing. These distributed teams can be excellent venues for a diverse mix of perspectives, ideas and insight however there is huge potential for misunderstanding or blocks arising from socio-cultural or language differences. Following are 5 key points that, when followed, can assist in creating a sense of community, connection and communication between individuals who may be situated thousands of miles apart.

Rapport:

Building rapport within the team is important because it is the foundation upon which the entire team is built; it is the connection between individuals. Take the time to find out who the other team members are as people, not just their role at the company. What do they do outside of work? What is their history at the company? Team rapport is the glue that holds the team together and the starting point for building trust.

Ritual:

Humans find comfort in structure, consistency and predictability. Rituals serve to tie the team together, making the entire group feel part of the "us" rather than feeling split into "us" and "them". Rituals are those often-overlooked small events or behaviors that team members eventually come to count on and take comfort in their familiarity. This could be something as simple as an established format for the meetings or as silly as assigning the joke of the day to a different regional group, to be shared at team meetings.

Rephrase/Re-frame:

When there is miscommunication between team members, it is often due to do the fact that some members have different native languages. Unfortunately, such miscommunication may be interpreted as a lack of cooperation, stubbornness or even incompetence. If a particular request has repeatedly been disregarded, or an individual seems unable to grasp a particular concept or process, try rephrasing the request or description using different word groupings or patterns. Languages differ on basics like sentence structure, therefore subtleties can get lost in translation. What not do do: repeat the same phrase over and over, or louder.

Rules:

Keep in mind that each society and culture is comprised of unwritten, unspoken rules. These guide our behaviors and give us our acceptable social-behaviorial parameters. The process of enculturation occurs as we grow from infancy, so we spend a lifetime learning those rules in order to be successful in our own society. When we interact with others from different cultures, we are not operating within the same set of rules, so confusion and misunderstanding can occur. When I was in Bangalore, India recently, I spoke to a product manager who shared with me his experience of being unaware of one of the unwritten, unspoken rules of his US based counterparts. His US based team member asked him if he could participate in a conference call, which would be scheduled after the Indian product manager's usual work hours. The Indian product manager explained that he would no longer be in the office at that time, because it fell after his work hours. This ended up causing great friction within the team because they perceived the Indian product manager as not willing to go the extra mile, when in fact he did not know that he was implicitly being asked to stay later in the day to accommodate the conference call. Once he understood what was being asked between the lines, he was happy to accommodate the later call.

Release:

It goes without saying that the greatest challenge of a globally dispersed team is the geographic distance that separates the team members. One essential component of successfully working in that environment is the ability to release tight control and allow those dispersed team members to stand on their own. It is not helpful to be a control freak and it is especially not helpful to be one from 8,000 miles away. Trust that the company who hired these individuals saw an adequate level of competency and skill in them. If you are incorporating the principles mentioned above, you should feel more at ease releasing responsibility to your team members.

Globally distributed teams are incredibly complex and these tips are only a small window into improving the dynamics of these groups. What particular methods or tactics have you found to be successful?

Paula Gray
the anthropologist

Knees and Elbows for the Product Manager

2010-11-08T18:31:10Z

Editor's note: We invited Laurie Jane, Product Management Director at Yesmail, to wrap up our exploration of martial arts insights for product managers with her personal Muay Thai perspective. The three of us co-facilitated a session at ProductCamp Seattle last month, so we thought it would make for nice symmetry if we extended all three perspectives to this blog.

One of the things I like about product management is communicating concepts to a variety of different audiences that may be new to the subject matter. In fact, there are some days when I feel more like a translator than anything else. Not only do I attempt to translate or explain business initiatives to engineering and other stakeholders, but I also try and translate market trends and customer feedback into product ideas, product capabilities into positioning, and so on.

Thus, when discussions began with fellow avid martial artists and ProductCamp Seattle attendees Paula Gray and Trevor Rotzien around doing a session on product management and martial arts, it ultimately seemed like another type of translation exercise on two subjects I enjoy discussing. I've been training in martial arts since I was a teenager and have practiced everything from Muay Thai, Wing Chun Kung Fu, Tai Chi, Eskrima, and a few other styles. I've been back practicing Muay Thai, also sometimes referred to as Thai Boxing, for the past several years. While the art has gained popularity across the globe, (especially in the United States and UK), it is still something that many people have not been exposed to. The art of Muay Thai originated in Thailand and while the origin date is often debated, it is generally believed to be several hundred years old and was developed as a close combat fighting method that used the entire body as a weapon.

While it may seem difficult to weave a fighting style into the realm of product management, even though there may be times when it seems like a problem could best be solved with a jab or a swift kick, there are some basic tenets to the art and practice of Muay Thai that may help provide a refresh for your product management perspectives.

Train the Body, Mind, and Heart

The basic training philosophy of Muay Thai is to train the body, mind, and heart. Muay Thai fighters train their body for speed, strength, and endurance. Within product management, your body could be thought of as your product foundation, or the core function of what your product does. To identify if your "product body" needs training, evaluate whether or not the key functionality is strong, if you are able to execute effectively, or perhaps if your product is enduring in the market space. When sparring in Muay Thai, you train your mind to make quick changes to your strategy and technique responses. Similarly in product management, you also need to be able to know how to make sudden decisions that are aligned with your overall strategy. Last, it's important to have enthusiasm or "heart" for studying Muay Thai to truly be successful, and you need to ultimately enjoy what you do to be effective in product management.

The Science of the 8 Limbs

Muay Thai is called the "science of 8 limbs" because you use your fists, feet, knees, and elbows as weapons. Each one is used differently depending on your range or opponent, and some people are more adept at utilizing certain limbs more than others. Good products are threatening because they also have a variety of "limbs" or deadly weapons that allow them to be more successful than competitive offerings. These could be things like differentiation, market share, brand recognition, technology, service, or price. In Muay Thai, it's important to know when and how to use each limb in a fight, and in product management, it's essential to understand your product's overall value and identify which of your product's "deadly weapons" could benefit from improvement.

The Wai Khru Ritual

Prior to boxing matches in Muay Thai, practitioners perform the Wai Khru ritual (also known as Ram Muay, the boxing dance) as a show of respect for teachers of the art of Thai boxing. It's a series of movements that not only prepares the fighter mentally for their match, but also demonstrates their skill level and style. Likewise, product managers often have a series of movements or process to guide a product through different stages before it is released to their customers and into the market. The Wai Khru ritual is improved with practice and feedback. Product managers should also seek to better their product process "ritual" to ensure that products are truly ready for release.

While the worlds of Muay Thai and product management are generally very far apart, they both offer techniques and training methods that focus on improving oneself to be as effective as possible within the discipline. It is often said that Muay Thai was "born on the battlefield" as a result of weaponless fighters needing better ways to fight against those with weapons. Unless your product is somehow impenetrable to the competition, I think every product manager could use more ways to be effective in our respective battlefields.

Note: A special thanks to both Trevor and Paula for inviting me to participate in my first ProductCamp session (it was also my first time attending a ProductCamp) and for the attendees who joined us to learn more about our martial art and product management experiences.

Laurie Jane
a product manager

Guiding Principles of Karate for the Product Manager

2010-10-11T17:00:07Z

There is a legend of a great karate master that I'm sure circulates in many dojos (karate studios). The story is that of a young karate student who begins his practice and shows a natural talent. He is aware of this talent and asks to demonstrate for the class and calls attention to himself whenever possible. As a beginning student he walks with the lower belt swagger which is common among newbies. He makes sure to line up in the front of class. However, as his training continues and he begins to progress through the belts, he becomes aware of the enormity of how much there is to learn, and how little he yet knows. It is a deeply humbling process. By the time he reaches his black belt, he walks with his head held low and humbly lines up in the back of class. It is then that he truly grasps what it means to practice karate.

The style of martial arts I practice, Karate (specifically the Gosoku Ryu style), has a long history originating in the Ryukyu Islands (now called Okinawa). More than the practice of an art or defense form, it is a philosophy or way of living called Bushido "the way of the warrior." Its principles were a code of ethics similar to those that guided the Samurai. Though "the way" is steeped in tradition, honor and spirituality, following it made the warrior no less fierce.

Master Gichin Funakoshi set out to pen these principles in his book The Twenty Guiding Principles of Karate: The Spiritual Legacy of the Master. One of his most famous quotes is "the ultimate aim in karate lies not in victory or defeat, but in the perfection of the character of its participants." He believed that success lies not just in the mastery of moves and technique but in how we choose to live our days.

I recognize many who read this don't choose to walk the path of the warrior but as I observe and study product managers I see them often in conflict, even under attack or at war. As both a martial artist and anthropologist I see how the culture of those ancient warriors, who often were forced to stand alone, parallel some of the challenges faced by product managers, often the lone warriors themselves.

I believe Master Funakoshi's principles can offer some guidance and maybe even a code for the product manager warrior.

Karate-do begins and ends with rei.

Rei is the term for respect. We show it in karate class by a respectful bow to our teacher or our opponent. However, it is much more than that. It is what makes martial arts, an art. By incorporating this respect in the workplace, not just the respect for our peers, but respect for our critics and our opponents as well, we often find our greatest teachers.

There is no first strike in karate.

This is often a tough lesson for beginning martial artists. Possessing the skill to strike a mortal blow is not license to do so. Karate is not designed for offense but rather, defense. The confidence and ability to avoid an altercation altogether is what we are going for here. In the workplace this same idea holds true. Though you may hold enough information to strike a "mortal" social blow to a coworker or team member, stop. Just because you can is not justification enough to strike. There is far more potential to lose the trust of an entire team, because each one will mentally, even if only for a second, put themselves in the shoes of the stricken team member. Even if they supported you in the strike. They will see what you are capable of, and realize you may one day do the same to them.

Karate stands on the side of justice.

When the time comes when you are certain your point, belief, thought is right, and for all the right reasons, do not hesitate to use your strength and skill to fight on the side of justice. You are, in a way, the protector of what you feel is right - be prepared to defend it. This is still a defensive move on your part so do not pick a fight (see #2).

First know yourself, then know others.

In life, as in martial arts, an understanding of our true strengths and weaknesses is crucial. Not an ideal picture of ourselves, but our true traits and qualities. In my field of anthropology, we stress conducting participant observation within populations because research has shown that in surveys and interviews people often speak of an ideal rather than the reality. Be accurate with yourself and do not over inflate your strengths. From this place of honesty you can then look at others and more accurately gauge their strengths and weaknesses as well. From there, a strategy can unfold.

Mentality over technique.

This principle is about being aware and not putting yourself in a position to be forced to defend yourself in the first place. It is ultimately better to avoid the use of any technique than it to use that honed technique and skill. In short, use your brains before your "fists," think it through.

Though it may be popular in the group and easy to slip into the "lower belt swagger" you will find less desire to do so as your own skill and confidence levels grow. Unlike the ancient samurai, you still have to work with the people you confront.

Paula Gray
the anthropologist

From the book The Twenty Guiding Principles of Karate: The spiritual legacy of the master
by Gichin Funakoshi

What Kung Fu teaches about Product Management tactics

2010-09-13T15:30:00Z

Prologue

I'm unfashionably late with this posting. ProductCamp Seattle 2010 preparations, not to mention my day job, have been keeping me busy.

Preparing for ProductCamp as part of the volunteer team necessarily also means preparing a session for the event, and my co-blogger Paula and I have been throwing some ideas around. Punching and kicking them even!

It turns out Paula and I both practice martial arts, albeit fundamentally different forms. Is there an increased statistical likelihood that someone who practices product management also practices martial arts? Anecdotally, I'd say definitely maybe. There's Brian Lawley's notorious martial arts presentations at PMEC (where one's attention on his martial arts analogies are distracted only by the plethora of shiny, sharp and/or heavy demonstration weapons). There's Paula and I comparing notes between her advanced Japanese karate and my intermediate Chinese wushu (known in the West as kung fu or gong fu). Just last week, when I brought up the topic in the context of a ProductCamp session, one of the people who had registered also shared with me her interesting and varied history in various martial arts styles.

Are you one of those "martial" product managers or marketers? I'd love to hear from you.

Martial Arts and Product Management

Gear-up!

Paula and I divide up our duties as co-bloggers primarily along the line between theory and practice, strategy and tactics, philosophy and craft. While we may work on both sides of that line at our jobs, it makes for a clear separation of blogging responsibilities and, more importantly, an interesting dance of ideas - since the abstract must intertwine with the concrete. When we realized our mutual interest in martial arts was a rich topic to mine for product management nuggets, it was obvious that Paula would present principles and I would present tactics and techniques.

My task is further facilitated by the style of wushu I study, Fang Sheng Chuan. It is a very practical, no-nonsense, real-world combat style. As my Sifu says, in Fang Sheng Chuan, there is no "dancing". There are no ritualized movements and no decorations. Fang Sheng Chuan seeks the ultimately achievable bio-mechanical efficiency and power to end a conflict, if a conflict is genuinely necessary. Even the philosophical side of this style is primarily about tactics.

What can martial arts, specifically Fang Sheng Chuan, teach about Product Management tactics? Consider these examples as just a start:

Master both stability and readiness-for-movement: Beginning students in martial arts are usually taught "stances" that emphasize balance and stability - rootedness. Intermediate students spend years unlearning those stances to become light and quick on their feet, so they can respond more effectively to changing circumstances. Advanced students and practitioners master both: they are stable and agile. Their trick is to attain stability just for the momentary flicker of time needed to deliver a powerful blow, and then uproot in the next half-heartbeat so they can be where they need to be next, like chess on purified caffeine. The rest of us only see a continuous blur of movement, not realizing that there are ephemeral islands of immovable rootedness in that blur. Likewise, you, your organization and the culture and methods around your product, must be stable enough to withstand external assaults, but outward-sensing and agile enough to alter position and direction very quickly.

Clearly unfamiliar with any actual martial art form

Don't telegraph your intentions: Your preparations for action should be externally imperceptible. Your opponent should find it very difficult, if not impossible, to anticipate your next move. If something must be detected, let it be only a deliberate and economical feint that invites your opponent to squander their resources or open their defenses. In practical terms, this is basic secrecy about new product or market development, optionally combined with misdirecting "leaks" that your competitors take interest in, but your customers don't.

Take the shortest possible path to a target: Large movements may be flashy and exciting, but they squander both time and energy. Squandering time means you could be too late; squandering energy means you may not have the impact you need to be successful and/or you are stealing energy from important future actions. Projects and features can take on an ever-expanding life of their own. You must constantly and vigilantly triage, even when it's unpopular, so that the energy you have makes the impact you need at just the right time. Also, marketing should have a fine focus, both in terms of the message and its target audience. Make your point concisely.

Somebody is gonna hurt, but probably not this guy's opponent, who has all the time in the world to prepare a "landing" for the flashy flying kick man

Hard against soft; soft against hard: If an opponent offers a fist, deflect it with an open hand. If an opponent offers an open hand, strike it with a fist. Respond to an opponent's product offering of rigorous technical features with your product's flexibility and lower implementation costs. If your opponent's product seems vaguely defined in an area important to your customers, hammer home how your product does it specifically better. It is not effective or healthy to repeatedly exchange equivalent blows.

Combine defensive and offensive actions: This is both more efficient and more surprising to your opponent. Strive for product or marketing enhancements that strengthen your product defensively and offensively at the same time. Utilize formal techniques such as SWOT to compare and contrast alternatives. While is can be difficult to achieve combined action, when you do, the impact is huge.

If you are product person and a martial arts practitioner, let me know about your insights. Even if you are not both, throw some questions into the ring and see what it provokes. Either way, join me later over at Paula's post, where we can consider some martial arts principles that may make us better product managers by further informing our tactics.

Trevor Rotzien
the product manager

The big bang and the evolution of brand and product management culture

2010-08-10T22:13:23Z

An excerpt from the white paper entitled "Business Anthropology and the Culture of Product Managers."

Brand or product management was born from intense, sustained and rigorous trial and error in the market research department at the giant consumer packaged goods company, Procter & Gamble. In 1931, D. Paul "Doc" Smelser, a PhD economist from Johns Hopkins University and the head of the new unit at Procter & Gamble, called the Market Research Department, hired female college graduates to conduct fieldwork. He sent them door to door to survey homemakers about their use of all kinds of household products and their usage patterns in a method akin to anthropological customer ethnography. Within several years, the size of the department's staff grew to around 34 with dozens of field researchers. The first brand to incorporate these market research methods in the product design process was Camay soap (Dyer et al. 2004).

Camay soap would be the catalyst and Neil McElroy would lead the charge, in defining brand management. Procter & Gamble's perfumed beauty bar, Camay soap, challenged the purity positioning of P&G's own product, Ivory soap. The two products targeted very different markets and were in competition for resources within P&G. This convinced McElroy, then a young advertising manager, of the need to establish assignments for its marketers in brand-specific teams to allow those teams a measure of autonomy in running marketing campaigns (Dyer et al. 2004).

In a P&G company memo written by McElroy on May 13, 1931 (McElroy, 1931) he outlined what he felt the duties and responsibilities of the "brand men" should be. He assigned them the task of studying and analyzing the brand history and instructed them to "study the territory personally," both the dealers and the customers.

It is interesting to note that both Smelser and McElroy understood the importance of fieldwork. They both advocated for getting out of the office and talking face to face with customers. Like anthropologists, they were aware that there is no more valuable data about people, than how they behave in their own environment. They recognized that surveys, scheduled interviews, focus groups still only give a partial picture.

McElroy's (McElroy, 1931) memo laid the groundwork for a reorganization and shift from a geographically aligned sales perspective to one oriented around the brands. This resulted in a fundamental restructuring of P&G to its core (Dyer et al, 2004). John Pepper (Pepper 2005), former P&G chairman of the board, president and CEO, states "responsibility and accountability for discreet business units were assigned to separate organizations" by Neil McElroy, when he helped create the brand management system in the 1930s (p. 305). Procter & Gamble (Dyer et al, 2004) brand managers assumed responsibility for the coordination of all activities and tasks involving their brand. Far more than just marketing, the brand managers would also coordinate product development and field sales.

As a result of this comprehensive training, from McElroy forward, every one of P&G's chief executives would hold the positions of assistant brand manager and brand manager on their way up the executive ladder. The discipline of brand management forms the very culture of P&G and shapes its landscape. It has has been emulated in a variety of forms within companies from every sector all over the world. In a recent article, Tyagi and Sawhney (2010) state that "product management is the most common organizational mechanism to manage products, relative to other mechanisms like a functional structure or key account management" (Howley, 1988; Skenazy, 1987; Workman, Homburg and Jenson, 2003 as cited in Tyagi & Sawhney, 2010).

Shared Challenges

In the 1980s (Dyer at al, 2004) P&G discovered a way to improve upon the brand management system. Procter & Gamble sought to redirect the internal competition between brand managers, outward toward competitors and the new focus was on teamwork. David Swanson, the senior vice president of engineering began using cross-functional (read cross-cultural) teams to speed up product development, improve product quality and trim costs. This cross-functional team system set up what would become one of the greatest challenges for brand and product managers.

According to Gemmill and Wilemon (1972) product managers are often assigned profit responsibilities for their product(s) but not given authority over the cross-functional team units on which they depend in order to carry out those responsibilities.

Therein resides the major challenge still shared and faced by product managers today; gaining support and cooperation while wielding little to no formal authority in the cross-functional team.

Paula Gray
the anthropologist

"My goal is to use anthropology to better understand human behavior in all of its settings, whether those settings be an isolated village in the Himalayas or a corporate office in New York City."

Ann T. Jordan
Anthropologist

The entire white paper can be accessed at http://www.aipmm.com/html/newsletter/archives/000437.php

References

Dyer, D., Dalzell, F., Olegario, R., (2004) Rising Tide: Lessons from 165 Years of Brand Building at Procter & Gamble. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press

Gemmill, G., & Wilemon, D., (1972) The product manager as an influence agent. Journal of Marketing, Vol. 36 (January 1972).

McElroy, N. (1931) Procter & Gamble company memo, May 13, 1931.

Pepper, J. (2005) What Really Matters. Cincinnati, OH: Procter & Gamble Company.

Tyagi, R., & Sawhney, M. (2010) High-performance product management: The impact of structure, process, competencies and role definition. Journal of Product Innovation Management 2010: 27

Tribes in Conflict... in the Same Village!

2010-08-02T16:00:00Z

In previous posts (as well as in ProductCamp and conference sessions) I've mentioned the various professional tribes within organizations and the challenging dynamic they present to an observant, socially-curious product manager. I've also suggested ways in which a product manager can thrive in the complex social environment and bridge gaps across the different vocabularies and views that the various professional tribes hold. An underlying assumption in my proposals has been that despite differences, the overall intentions of the tribes basically align to the good of all, or can be encouraged to align. What if they can't?

We like to believe that we operate socially, if not with angelic beneficence, at least with informed self-interest. We inherit this perspective from the Enlightenment, "systems thinking", and widely accepted (at least until recently!) models of the marketplace. As busy and pragmatic product managers, we may hold on to the convenient assumption that, whatever their differences, the various professional tribes we rely on - that the entire company relies on - are rational and will act in their own long term benefit. Given that we are all in the same revenue and profit "boat", no one would deliberately poke holes in the hull, right? No, not deliberately, at least not in the belief they are poking holes in the boat, but perhaps deliberately poking holes in another tribe you rely on. For them, the boat taking on water may be just an unintended consequence of undermining their perceived adversaries.

While I am a huge fan of employing social, collaborative, and semantic clarification techniques to align tribes in the pursuit of a successful product, I have to recognize the limits of these techniques. They can certainly help achieve a shared meaning within a project if the biggest issues are simply misunderstandings. They cannot, however, do much about genuine and heartfelt distrust, disrespect or antagonism between tribes within the same organization. Part of the reason true antagonism cannot be talked away is that it often has a rational basis of its own. For example, incentive programs in many organizations lag far behind their evolving priorities, so that while you, as a product manager, may clearly see the destination, some groups may have no clear incentive to help you get there.

So what to do if you suspect that your success as a product manager is being threatened by a clash between groups that a finely honed team glossary won't fix? Your options depend on your position and your relationships with the relevant executives.

If you are an executive, surely you've got the relationships and influence to deal with it directly, from disciplining and coaching individuals, up to and including re-organization.

If you are not an executive, it is going to be an uphill battle, but not necessarily a hopeless one if you have good relationships with managers and executives. A frank discussion with your own manager may: 1. Alert your them to a problem they weren't aware of, and/or 2. Educate you to contributing factors you weren't aware of. In any case, your first hope is to have your manager, or another management ally, escalate the issue to a level at which it can be addressed. This is only likely if you are perceived as trustworthy and not prone to crying wolf. If you are going to raise the red flag, make sure you that you have good information on both the issue and your recommendation for ameliorating it.

Hopefully you can protect your product and make your work life more enjoyable by bringing attention to inter-tribal conflict in your organization. But if, in spite all your best efforts at lobbying, escalating and suggesting, the organization makes no movement in addressing an issue of this magnitude, you have to reconsider your role. Is the organization serious about how its groups work together? Do they understand the connections between the belief in a common set of goals and the achievement of those goals? Or have the measures of department-level metrics disconnected the organization's fundamental value proposition from its day-to-day functioning? Given how challenging product management is considering the external forces alone, can you continue to thrive in such a situation?

A few thoughts to take with you:

While a significant part of product management success is driven from your ability to understand, clarify, and communicate product goals across different professional tribes, clarity alone can't overcome genuine antagonism between them.
If you do not have the authority to address this kind of issue directly, effective escalation requires your thoughtful action, credibility and good relationships with those who can truly address it.
If those who can address the issue won't, you need to reconsider if you can succeed where you are.

Trevor Rotzien
the product manager

Bonobos in the Boardroom

2010-07-08T23:44:37Z

Yes, we walk bipedally, we think in abstract terms and we can do integral calculus, but just maybe we might have something to learn from our primate cousins, the Bonobo. Bonobos (Pan paniscus), also called pygmy or gracile chimpanzees share more than 98% of the same genetic material (DNA) with humans.

Frans De Waal asserts in his book Our Inner Ape (De Waal 2005) that Bonobos represent humankind's noblest qualities; kindness, generosity and altruism. He contrasts Bonobos who are gentle, loving and, how shall we state this, rather friendly with the more aggressive, territorial Chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes). Where Bonobos are considered mellow, Chimpanzees can have contests for male dominance that are so forceful and frequent that males have been described as having demonic streaks (Goodall, 1986; Wrangham and Peterson, 1996).

De Waal further explains how chimpanzees and Bonobos exhibit marked differences in social behavior. He notes that when studying animal behavior, students are accustomed to ranking individuals from low to high based on their level of dominance within the group. This task comes easily when studying male Chimpanzees and Baboons or the females of many of the Old World monkey species. (Side note: the idea of social rankings was discovered in the 1920s in domestic fowl when the direction of attacks among hens was studied - this is where the term pecking order comes from).

In addition to the resulting dominance that arises from conflict, many species exhibit status displays that function similarly to a military uniform that clearly signals an individual's rank. A dominant male Chimpanzee will make himself look bigger by raising his hair and standing straight upright and the lower ranking subordinate male will grovel about in the dust uttering pants and grunts. What makes Bonobos unique is their lack of these structured rituals of dominance and subordination. This offers insight into how unimportant status and rank must be in their society.

I know many reading this may find these displays of dominance vaguely familiar. Who hasn't seen some of these contests for dominance within teams? Though we know this dominance structure exists, could teams evolve to lose it? Could we learn from the Bonobo and drop the struggle to be dominant? How would that change the way we get things done? If there were less energy and focus on who holds the power, could we focus more on what needs to be accomplished?

The struggle for dominance, status and rank within a team wastes precious time and can be counterproductive. Though a dominant individual may appear relaxed when their status is secure, they may also resort to aggressive behavior when challenged. This may turn into outright bullying of less dominant individuals and those individuals may lose their voice in the team.

As a team leader, it is important to temper the dominant behavior of team members to allow input and participation from the entire group. Your sharpest team member may very well be your quietest.

"Of the millions of pages written over the centuries about human nature, none are as bleak as those of the last three decades - and none as wrong"

Frans De Waal
Biologist, Ethologist

Paula Gray
the anthropologist

"That's not what I asked for!"

2010-06-28T17:20:00Z

As a product manager, have words ever gotten you down? Or, more precisely, has the lack of shared meaning of words used by the team - even ostensibly shared words - appeared unexpectedly and disastrously like an iceberg in the mist?

At the most recent Product Management Educational Conference (PMEC), Paula and I facilitated a session on the importance of a common team vocabulary, and the dire consequences of not establishing one upfront for every project.

Why is it so common for projects to proceed without establishing shared meaning first? The answer is two-fold: The upstream effort is not insignificant, and comprehending the consequences isn't straightforward. At the start, downstream consequences are difficult to forecast and are easy to put out of mind. At the end, it is difficult to evaluate impacts of unshared meaning in retrospect.

Why is it worth it to confront unshared meaning within a project even if the challenge is easy to deflect and the risks are not easily quantifiable? We should deal with this because the dangers are real and we know it. Even without quantitative tools, anyone who has spent any time working on challenging projects with multidisciplinary teams has direct experience of unshared meaning. In your past projects, think of the cumulative effect of every avoidable misunderstanding, of every requirement missed, of every heated debate that burned up hours when in fact agreement had already been achieved, and ask yourself how much of this unconstructive controversy boiled down to a simple difference of definition?

Better statisticians than me may have developed ways to measure the quantitative cost of misunderstandings in the workplace, but my direct experiences offer up more than enough compelling examples to convince me. I imagine yours do as well. What would you imagine the cumulative dollar cost might be, even if not all projects fail completely?

Certainly the exercises we asked our session participants to undertake were object lessons in just how elusive shared meaning is when specialists attempt to work together. I found it fascinating to overhear the teams struggle, albeit with some success, at quickly generating shared definitions for a series of innocent looking terms: "Product Management", "Customer", "Successful Product", "Timely", and "Freedom". (Admittedly, that last one was a wildcard!).

Along with anecdotes from our work histories, the exercise highlighted why a systematic approach to achieving shared meaning at the beginning of projects is not easy but is so valuable.

Am I simply talking about putting together a glossary for the project? That's part of it, but there's more. What I am suggesting is that once the team is defined, we very deliberately and explicitly recognize the root causes of unshared meaning as a team, admit where our team is vulnerable, and share in the solution.

At the end of the session exercises, Paula and I shared a brief, but rich, guide to establishing a Team Rosetta Stone. The overall process includes:

Identify Need
Build Draft
Provide Access
Utilize Consistently
Review and Revise

For much more detail, help yourself to a copy of the handout.

Of course, this process can't stand alone; it needs to be integrated with your project's life-cycle.

Does this challenge ring true for you? Do you have any horror stories to share? What solutions have you employed to achieve and maintain shared meaning and avoid unconstructive controversy to the benefit of your products?

Trevor Rotzien

the product manager

Humans are Social Animals

2010-05-07T20:45:08Z

Cover via Amazon

Human beings are social animals. Our lives depend on other humans. Human infants are born unable to transport or care for themselves. Their survival depends on another human's efforts. We develop and learn about the world around us through the filter of other people. Our connections to others are key to not only our survival, but also to our happiness and the success of our careers.

I'm reading an excellent book titled "Connected: The Surprising Power of Our Social Networks and How They Shape Our Lives" (2009) by Nicholas Christakis and James Fowler. They delve into the social theory underlying the impact that our social networks have on our lives. The bottom line is that we are influenced by, and we are able to influence, people up to three degrees removed from us. With that thought in mind, now look at your social network within three degrees from yourself. Are these the people you want shaping nearly every aspect of your life? Does this group have enough depth and breadth? Should you expand this group?

One way to grow your social network, especially benefiting your career, is to join a professional association. Once you do, you must decide how to utilize that membership to gain the greatest value. Some people believe an association membership is something that is passively done to them, rather than an active starting point for their own action. Being an active member in a professional association can:

Open doors to new opportunities
Connect you with like-minded individuals
Connect you with respected colleagues holding differing opinions or perspectives
Provide a venue to share solutions
Land you your next job
Even set you apart as a thought leader

It is all in how you use it to your advantage.

You can also gain additional credibility and recognition as a product manager by writing and submitting articles, which you can do from anywhere in the world, or participate in online board or forums. You can volunteer at local or regional events. Or you can volunteer to mentor a "newbie" in the field.

As competition continues to be fierce in the job market, with many applicants from great universities with advanced degrees and experience, one factor that can set you apart is your professional social network. An extensive network is a resource from which you can draw at will. Consider these people your eyes and ears on the ground. Whether you meet in a terrestrial based regional group, or expand to connect globally via the internet, the success of your connections will be based on the amount of effort you put in.

I consider one's social network as a definite career asset. What is your social net worth? Are you wealthy, barely breaking even, or bankrupt?

"While social networks are fundamentally and distinctively human, and ubiquitous, they should not be taken for granted."

Christakis & Fowler

Paula Gray
the anthropologist

Are you a Mole or a Meerkat?

2010-04-29T00:00:00Z

Mole?

A mole is solitary. A mole is hard-working. A mole gets the digging done.

A mole also spends most of its time in the dark. A mole receives little to no assistance from other moles. A mole rarely sees the light of day, let alone the scenery. A mole is not routinely provided tips about opportunities beyond its burrow. A mole presumably gets better and better at digging, and that's about it.

A mole has a very short life span. It is difficult to determine whether or not a mole can be said to be "having a good time" along the way.

Meerkat?

Meerkats are highly social. Meerkats work hard like a mole does, but meerkats work as hard at social interaction as they do at any other activity that's important to them.

Meerkats spend plenty of time out in the light, and are often scanning their surroundings. Meerkats can expect assistance from each other, and tips and insights about what's going on all around them, even at a distance. Meerkats develop and apply a variety of skills.

Meerkats have a much longer life span than moles, and they appear to have a lot more fun along the way. They labor, they party, they play, they share, and they are continuously engaged.

Product Manager?

On the scale of Mole-to-Meerkat, where do you fit? Where would you like to?

Do you engage with other product managers beyond your business responsibilities? Have you joined an association or a networking group? If you've joined, do you actually show-up? Have you volunteered your time, energy and smarts?

We product managers, given our innate tendency to take on too much work and perceive all gaps as fillable, can be completely consumed by our jobs, and many of us don't take time for anything else, much less professional associations. Perhaps it's the classic "I just don't have time", or the more subtle "Maybe I could make time, but would it be worth it?"

Not so many years ago, I decided to set time aside for product management associations, first as an occasional attendee, then as an active volunteer. Just this year I joined the Advisory Board of a regional association, the Product Management Consortium, and the blog of an international one, the AIPMM.

That decision has resulted in hugely positive impacts on how I view my role, the breadth of my knowledge, and the degree to which I enjoy what I do. I meet very interesting product people of various specialties, hear stories that provide new insights from other industries and careers, and get support for problem solving that I simply can not get on my own. I also enjoy a greater immediacy of news, events, and job leads. The value of association to me has been substantial, tangible, and has only grown over time.

So if you're a Mole who, during a rare break at the surface, glanced at we Meerkats and wondered if things are really any better for us, I can enthusiastically assure you that they are.

Come on over!

Trevor Rotzien
the product manager

So you think you work with morons...

2010-04-05T14:57:10Z

So, you think you work with a team of morons. You are certain that your life is being hindered by the sheer incompetence of your cross-functional team mates and you have no choice but to grind through the endless days in agony. I have 5 simple points for you to remember, to bring you back to reality.

1.You are not your job

Though your job is important, very rewarding, and provides your financial support, keep in mind it is not who you are. You are a complex human being -far more than a job title and paycheck. You are a mix of emotion, intellect, insight, personality "seeing" through a cultural lens.

2.They are not their jobs

You may want to define them simply as "engineer", "salesperson", or "marketer" but they too are not their jobs. They are also complex humans who experience joy, despair, and delight as you do. They have dreams, and fears that keep them up at night. Reducing them to a job title prevents you from understanding their complexity and hinders your ability (I know its cliche) to "understand where they are coming from."

3.The company hired you all

Keep in mind that the team members whom you know with all certainty are the most incompetent morons to walk the face of the earth, were all hired by the same company that hired you. Read that sentence again. If you are sitting across the table from, and/or working with this team, you were not deemed so far superior to them. The company sees value in them, just as they see it in you.

4.You cannot do it alone

Unless you have unlimited overtime hours to spend, you need the team. You alone do not make a team. You may think you would be able to do their jobs better but unless you are going to quit this one and go do that, let them do it for now. Take a time-out from armchair quarterbacking their jobs, and put your focus squarely on yours. Even our non-human primate cousins understand the need for group cooperation.

5.You do not hold the "key"

Yes, you are smart. Yes, you went to a great university. However, let go of the false belief that you are the only one who knows "the way", that you alone hold the "key" to eternal product success. You are no Yoda, and this isn't a Star Wars movie.

The company functioned long before you came along, and will (I know it may be hard to believe) go on functioning long after you are gone. Your task is to ask yourself what you are giving to this organization. How does the team benefit from your presence? Do you attempt to manipulate or criticize people through passive-aggressive behavior or are you genuine and collaborative? Do you cloak your venom against your teammates in anonymity, or are you worthy of their respect? For your own benefit, choose to be genuine and worthy of respect. Your reputation is part of your professional net worth, and if you "aren't feelin' the love" maybe you aren't giving any.

"The purpose of anthropology is to make the world safe for human differences."

-Ruth Benedict, Anthropologist

Paula Gray
the anthropologist

Don't presume your team agrees

2010-03-29T15:02:35Z

Paula's post on groupthink got me thinking about agreement. Not only about the potentially dangerous effect of unexamined agreement within a group, e.g. the groupthink that Paula discussed, but also the equally dangerous effect of presumed agreement. A team composed of multiple professional tribes often doesn't agree even when there appears to be a "consensus". However, they may not be completely aware of this until the project has an unpleasant outcome.

You've just initiated a new direction for your product, and you're assembling the team. If you're like me, you prefer that all contributors, regardless of professional role, really work as a team, and not as semi-detached departmental representatives. Before the formal kick-off of the initiative, I like to have a relatively informal concepts meeting to talk about what we are doing and why. It requires a whiteboard, and it requires that the terms we throw around with confidence are actually defined, even (gasp) defined in writing.

Why? Admittedly, many people, feeling impatient with the urgency of "getting things done" chafe at the idea of yet another terminology exercise. They may protest "we all know what X means; can't we just get on with it?"

But sharing a word is not the same as sharing a meaning.

A common problem in new or even old teams is what I call "Presumed Agreement": the presumed agreement of meaning based solely on an agreement of words.

On a consulting assignment many moons ago, this phenomenon was brought into stark relief for me. The project in question was in turmoil. The sponsoring executive was on the verge of firing the contractors, but wondered how to professionally recover from terminating such an expensive, vaunted project. Meanwhile, pretty much every tribe within the project was blaming the other. The phrases I was hearing included "They didn't deliver what we expected", "They don't get it" and the like. Long story short, I convened a meeting of all project members, set rules such as "all attendees have equal voice, whether VP or contract programmer", and announced that the first exercise was one of terminology clarification. Much groaning and skepticism ensued.

Company Engineer: "But we all know what 'X' means! That's not the problem!"

Me: "Really?"

Contract Programmer: "Sure."

Project Manager: "Of course!"

Me: "Okay. But I need to be certain. How about you write your definition of X on the white board so everyone can see it?"

(Irritated and incredulous murmurs across the room)

Contract Programmer: "Alright, but this is going to be a waste of time."

(He writes his definition in big, impatient letters and turns to face the room)

Company Engineer: "That's NOT what X means!"

(The room is now in an uproar)

Suffice it to say that the terminology exercise was taken seriously, and in a half-day we had a refreshed, concise, and most importantly, actually agreed-upon lexicon for the project. By the end of the second half-day we had identified and patched all the conceptual holes that the previously only presumed agreement had left in the project and which had been at the root of so much waste, angst and distrust. Understanding was achieved and morale lifted. The project recovered and was successfully managed to completion.

I can't emphasize enough how important the detection and cure of presumed agreement is. After that experience, I wondered how many projects are believed to have failed for all kinds of highly analyzed and subtle reasons, the kind that Harvard Business might cover, when the actual root cause was something as basic as terminology.

So how does presumed agreement relate to tribes? I'd say that it is the tribal nature of professional roles that helps to guarantee dialect differences in the understanding of common words, and if these differences are not surfaced and dealt with early and often for each new project, they will fester and potentially render the entire effort futile.

Trevor Rotzien
the product manager

Notes:
I discovered after the fact that my conception of "presumed agreement" is a kind of "bypass", as defined by Isa Engleberg: "Another barrier to language is bypassing. Bypassing occurs when group members have different meanings for different words and phrases and thus miss each others meanings. To overcome the risk of bypassing it is important to look to what the speaker wants and not always at what the speaker says."
Engleberg, Isa N. Working in Groups: Communication Principles and Strategies. My Communication Kit Series, 2006. Pages 126-129.

If you find the problem of miscommunication and biases in groups as fascinating as I do, try searching on any of these concepts (that I may cover in future posts):

Abilene Paradox

Bandwagon Effect

Deformation Professionnelle

False Consensus Effect

Herd Instinct

Interloper Effect

Need For Closure

Pseudoconsensus

3 Ways to Avoid Groupthink

2010-03-11T21:42:19Z

Groupthink is a concept within social psychology (okay so I'm stepping off my anthropology soapbox and borrowing one from my friends at soc-psych) that defines a style of group decision making where individuals are more motivated to agree rather than voice their own, differing opinion. While it may seem less contentious, it lacks the point of group decision-making, which is the input of a variety of perspectives and opinions.

As a product manager sitting in the center of the organization, your opinion is crucial. You have a unique perspective - not part of development, marketing, sales, or distribution but at the central hub of them all. I like to think of the product manager as providing balance. However, if you are not willing to state your opinion respectfully and clearly, the entire group is denied your valuable insight (I know, sometimes they don't recognize the valuable part).

In an age where consensus and cooperation is the key, it should not be at the cost of the critical discussion and evaluation, needed to examine alternative viewpoints.

Here are three key points that create an environment where group discussion can lead to good decisions and avoid the pitfalls of the dreaded groupthink:

The task at hand needs to be the driving force, not social harmony - now is not the time to conform.
Leaders need to encourage people to share alternative perspectives - you don't need to protect the leader from contrary views. If you are the leader, make it known that it's okay for group members to hold a differing opinion.
Put procedures in place to ensure that group members critically evaluate all ideas and gather outside feedback where appropriate - don't view outside opinions as inherently inferior.

By fostering an environment where differences are welcomed, the team or group can benefit from a multitude of complex viewpoints. At times, things may get intense but as a product manager, did you really ever think you were going to be immune from conflict? Not a chance.

"Everything that irritates us about others can lead us to an understanding of ourselves"

--Psychologist, Carl Jung

Paula Gray
the anthropologist