Lesson 1b: Clarity, and the tools to get there

(This is a follow-up to my ‘0. Lessons from a career in tech’ - see comments for a link)

In the first half of this topic (1a), I wrote about asking loads of questions:

• What is most important?

• Why is “A” the most important priority right now?

• Some people think “B” is the most important, because of x,y,z… what’s your take?

• “A” seems to contain a whole bunch of sub-topics - which of A1, A2, A3 is more important?

• Will “A” fully prove or disprove this stage in creating this new product?

• What quantified goals does the team need to have for “A”?

• So if “A” fails, then we should definitely kill this product?

• Etc.

Beyond asking all these questions, what other tools are useful to get to clarity?

I’ve found a blank whiteboard and a blank sheet of paper are both wonderful and necessary tools.

After a few days of learning by asking questions you need to try to frame up the story - fitting the pieces of the puzzle together, with a focus just on the most critical pieces.  This is best done with a blank sheet. Exactly what you draw on the piece of paper (or whiteboard) depends on the problem - perhaps it is a growth loop, or a flow, or… What matters is that as you draw you need every critical piece of the puzzle to be prominent, and less important things to be minimised or absent. I find the process is difficult - it requires several attempts (e.g. several half-hour blocks of time spread over 2-3 days) to even get close to something clear and coherent, AND the process leads to more questions.

“More questions” is good: the next step is to iterate - return to people you’ve already questioned, and some new people, and play back your story to them.  It’s best to do this live, in front of a fresh whiteboard, since the sequencing matters.  As you play it back, you typically get plenty of unprompted feedback, and of course you ask more questions.  After a few more sessions like this, you are ready to re-do your story - you now understand that the old one isn’t right — so start again with a blank sheet and typically over 1-2 days you can produce something better.

That’s another iteration.  I find that 2-3 iterations are sufficient - you have created something that is clear, consistent, focused on the critical aspects only, and that withstands any questions and criticism.  Something that is so clear in your mind that you can recreate it effortlessly.

After this it needs to be written up, maintaining extreme clarity. A short written document (perhaps with 1-2 diagrams) is typically far better than a presentation.  Presentations tend to have bullet-points and simple statements/words which are open to multiple interpretations from different perspectives and people.  That’s exactly what you’re aiming to avoid.  So, carefully write a nuanced, opinionated, clear document.  Your choice of words matters.

Give that document one final pass with key members of the team to ensure they are 100% aligned. And then you need to broadcast this, often repeatedly, to the teams. Broadcast in a way that matches the culture of your organisation, and follow-up repeatedly.

What can go wrong with this?  Here are a few common hurdles:

• Often you can’t quite get to the clarity that is needed. If you are not used to this process, or struggle to think clearly, you’ll need to spend more time on it.  That time needs to be spread over a longer duration. The process benefits from being put down, slept on, and picked up again. Even with practice, the process will typically take most of a week, but might take several weeks - longer if you are not yet skilled at it. It simply cannot be done in a few days. (Bezos has good words to say on “scope” in his 2017 shareholder letter).

• If you are not able to reconcile the differing perspectives you receive across the team, or are unable to take a decision (you might lack context, bigger picture view or simply authority), you will need to involve your leadership. Sometimes this can be resolved quickly and informally (e.g. in a 1:1 with your manager), sometimes it may require a product review. Either way, be prepared to lay out a small number of options, with their pros and cons, and drive a discussion that leads to a decision on the right critical priority.

• If you don’t involve a broad enough set of perspectives, you will write the wrong story.  The right set of perspectives can be very broad, and will depend on your organisation and your particular product. There are role/capability-based perspectives such as: Tech (engineering, product, data science, design, research,…) Marketing, sales, product-marketing, partnerships,… Finance, Legal (product legal, policy, privacy,…)

• There are also other conceptual perspectives which may be important: Long term vs short term Risk vs opportunity One-way vs two-way doors …

• There is often a temptation to try to short-cut producing the final write-up by editing an existing document rather than starting from scratch. This always fails to produce the clarity and focus that is needed. The structure, sequence, key points of your write-up are best written from the clear understanding you’ve built in your head.  That was the point of the entire process!  By all means copy/paste some phrases, a diagram, perhaps even a paragraph, from pre-existing documents - if they perfectly match the picture in your head, but make sure your thinking is not misdirected by them.  For me at least, writing up a few pages from scratch is an excellent internal validation (do I really have all of this clear?), and a rewarding process.

That’s the end of this lesson.  Hope you’ve enjoyed it.  Next up will be how to “2. Focus (and get things done)”