Conversation

In case you missed it, I wrote a thing about product development methods. I juxtapose Amazon’s, Apple’s, and Pixar’s against The Lean Startup, and conclude that any divergence from lean startup is worth paying attention to, mostly because it’s ... well, it’s not the orthodoxy.
Quote Tweet
This week's Commonplace post is about product development methods. Specifically, Amazon's 'working backwards' process — and what it, alongside Apple's 'creative selection' process, and Pixar's 'braintrust', tells us about new product development. commoncog.com/blog/product-d
Replying to
Arguably, my comparison isn’t THAT controversial. All 3 methods focus on iterating on smaller cheaper things (as compared to an MVP): Amazon iterates on PR/FAQ documents. Apple iterates on prototype demos. Pixar iterates on ‘reels’ — crudely drawn and animated drafts.
2
2
But a more interesting question is: when does it make sense to iterate on a fatter MVP? Say, one where you have to get multiple user loops right, and persist working on a shitty product until you get all the little details correct?
Quote Tweet
Replying to @staticsteven
Saw this in @eugenewei’s recent essay on TikTok (eugenewei.com/blog/2021/2/15)
Image
2
In practice the right answer is probably something like “just do this enough times until you get a feel for things”. Product development as iterated taste.
1
1
Replying to
I don't see Lean Startup, Amazon, and Apple's approach as diverging—they all iterate on cheap artifacts to get feedback; features, docs, prototypes. In startups, shipping a feature takes days. In big tech, the same feature could take months, thus the need for smaller artifacts.
2
1
Show replies
Replying to
This article earned my 'follow' "ways of iterating cheaply through an idea space, with sufficient feedback, in the hopes of checking enough boxes for success." (I described Lean in Cognitive Productivity but used something different)
1
1