Read on Twitter
Three types of Product Managers, per @sachinrekhi:
1) Builders
2) Tuners
3) Innovators
I really like this framework because it’s quite accurate without being too prescriptive.
The blog post:
https://www.sachinrekhi.com/3-types-of-product-managers-builders-tuners-innovators
My high-level thoughts
1) Builders
2) Tuners
3) Innovators
I really like this framework because it’s quite accurate without being too prescriptive.
The blog post:
https://www.sachinrekhi.com/3-types-of-product-managers-builders-tuners-innovators
My high-level thoughts
Each of the "3 Senses of a PM" maps to a type preference:
Analytical sense → Tuner
Product sense → Innovator
Execution sense → Builder
(*preference* being the key word there—in practice, each type will benefit from each of the 3 senses)
As a reminder: https://twitter.com/shreyas/status/1055720052064833536
Analytical sense → Tuner
Product sense → Innovator
Execution sense → Builder
(*preference* being the key word there—in practice, each type will benefit from each of the 3 senses)
As a reminder: https://twitter.com/shreyas/status/1055720052064833536
When looking for your next PM job, ask the Hiring Manager the primary type for the role.
2 benefits
-If HM doesn’t know about these types, they’ll learn something new from you
-If HM can’t articulate the primary type, it’s at least a yellow flag (eg. HM lacks clarity of thought)
2 benefits
-If HM doesn’t know about these types, they’ll learn something new from you
-If HM can’t articulate the primary type, it’s at least a yellow flag (eg. HM lacks clarity of thought)
Companies should seriously consider using this vocabulary in their PM job postings. Much clearer to say that “this role is best suited for a Builder type” than to list 15 bullets with excruciating details & fine-tuned qualifications (which tend not to be all that useful anyway).
This would be harder for larger companies to do today (because of the need for consensus at such companies). But it can start with smaller companies & their hiring managers, and will over time be picked up by larger companies as these types get better understood in the industry.
Why is this framework important for hiring?
Too often, brand names & raw intelligence end up being the biggest factors in PM hiring decisions:
“You seem smart, able to get things done, and you worked at Google AND Facebook. That’s good enough for me!”
Too often, brand names & raw intelligence end up being the biggest factors in PM hiring decisions:
“You seem smart, able to get things done, and you worked at Google AND Facebook. That’s good enough for me!”
What I’ve learned in practice is that type mismatch severely limits an otherwise-talented PM’s impact in a new role. And when you end up in a “high expectations, not enough actual impact” situation, that leads to frustration and tough conversations later on.
This is not to say that you should never work in a role that is mismatched with your default type. Rather, that both the hiring manager & the PM should recognize when that’s the case & give adequate time (& training/mentorship) for things to click when there’s a mismatch. Intent!
As @sachinrekhi says in the blog post, it can be a good idea to seek each of these 3 roles early on in one’s career as a PM.
And once you’ve gained mastery over the broad set of PM skills...
And once you’ve gained mastery over the broad set of PM skills...
...You will, at times, want to buck conventional wisdom e.g. operate as an Innovator in what is viewed by others as a Builder role. Doing this thoughtfully & with intent can yield surprisingly larger outcomes for your product & create major differentiation for you personally.
Last but not least, if you're a Product Manager, you may want to follow @sachinrekhi if you don't already https://twitter.com/sachinrekhi/status/1328142318747185153
Back to the top of this thread: https://twitter.com/shreyas/status/1328372392566030336
