Skip to main content

Product Management is like Therapy

"Uncovering psychotherapy emphasizes facilitating clients' insight into the roots of their difficulties."

Imagine you're a psychotherapist. Patients comes to you complaining that they are unhappy. You don't just ask them what's wrong. You probe into their backgrounds, their situations, and why what they describe makes them unhappy.

In product management, we do much the same thing. We interview prospective customers to understand their backgrounds, situations, and problems they face. We listen, but we are not passive. To get to the root problems that our product can help solve, we have to ask the right questions and not stop at what a prospect initially says is the problem. By the end of an interview, the prospect should have greater insight into her own situation.

Comments

Sean Murphy said…
I worry that this framing puts you in a "one up" mind set instead of peer to peer. If you are not getting questions from the prospect it's not a conversation it's an interrogation.
Roger L. Cauvin said…
Thanks for the comment, Sean.

Engaging a prospect by playing a role akin to a therapist is an acknowledgment that the prospect is the expert on their situation and challenges, not you. Central to prospect interviews is that you are not the expert.

Just as good psychotherapy is not an interrogation, neither is a prospect interview. Questions are facilitative, not interrogative. The best session is one in which the therapist or the product manager effectively empowers the "subject" to share her wealth of knowledge that only she has.

Popular posts from this blog

Why Spreadsheets Suck for Prioritizing

The Goal As a company executive, you want confidence that your product team (which includes all the people, from all departments, responsible for product success) has a sound basis for deciding which items are on the product roadmap. You also want confidence the team is prioritizing the items in a smart way. What Should We Prioritize? The items the team prioritizes could be features, user stories, epics, market problems, themes, or experiments. Melissa Perri  makes an excellent case for a " problem roadmap ", and, in general, I recommend focusing on the latter types of items. However, the topic of what types of items you should prioritize - and in what situations - is interesting and important but beyond the scope of this blog entry. A Sad but Familiar Story If there is significant controversy about priorities, then almost inevitably, a product manager or other member of the team decides to put together The Spreadsheet. I've done it. Some of the mos

Use Case as a Black Box

Consider the following use case: Purchase Items Actor: Purchaser Precondition: Purchaser types at least thirty words per minute and has a web navigation efficiency rating of at least 40. Postcondition: For the average Purchaser acting at full efficiency, the number of seconds elapsed is no more than 30 + 20 * n, where n is the number of items purchased. The name of the use case represents a functional requirement. What does the product do, or enable the user to do? Purchase items. What are we to make of the preconditions and postconditions? What relationship do they have to the requirements for the product? Answer: the preconditions and postconditions are the nonfunctional requirements attached to the functional requirement . Another way of expressing the nonfunctional requirement would be as an attribute and associated constraint: Usability: For a Purchaser who types at least thirty words per minute and has a web navigation efficiency rating of at least 40, it shall take no

Henry Ford's "Faster Horse" Quote

You may have heard the ( apocryphal ) Henry Ford quote: If I'd asked customers what they wanted, they would have said "a faster horse". Over at the On Product Management blog , Saeed gives his take on this infamous quote. He "hates" it, and gives some compelling reasons. Saeed is spot on in his explanations. Personally, I think the quote is great, but it's a matter of interpretation. The valid point of the quote is not that it's a bad idea to facilitate a conversation with your market to better understand it. The valid points are: You must ask the right questions to get valuable answers. You must interpret the answers thoughtfully - often outside their direct meaning - to glean reliable information. Asking questions is not always the best way to "listen" to your market. (E.g., sometimes pure observational studies are more reliable.) Nonetheless, I find the quote is helpful to combat "armchair product management" in the