Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Pawel Brodzinski's avatar

“How can we 10x this with the same effort?”

A prerequisite question should be: Should we? Should we have 10x of this in the first place (given that we could)?

One very common mistake is to want 10x more features. Surprisingly often, people act as if they believed this would give them an edge.

In reality, they'd build an abomination that wouldn't resemble the original product/offering they envisioned. What's more, whatever value the product would still provide will be buried under a ton of bloat. That, in turn, will create a whole new market for more niche solutions that do one thing but do it well.

The same is true if we look at business as a whole.

Shopify's early days might have been built on leveraging the team's capabilities. Later? It was anything but. In Lutke's infamous farewell message to hundreds of laid-off people, he mentioned "eliminating over-specialized and duplicate roles as well as some groups that were convenient to have but too far removed from building products" (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/shopify-layoffs-10-percent-workforce-ecommerce-retail/).

BTW: go figure what the feelings of engineers were who learned they were just "convenient to have."

But the point remains. They hired all these people because they could. They were building "non-core" products/services because they could. Did it give them any additional value? Nope.

It's the same story with so many early-stage products (which is my world). They want all the features. Interestingly, with AI it's getting easier to give them a bigger chunk of what they want, but that's another story.

However, if they could get 10x as many features, it wouldn't make their products better. It would make them worse.

Leverage does make sense when you set it up in the right spot. Most spots aren't right.

Expand full comment

No posts