建设有意义的职业生涯 | Jason Shah(Airbnb、Amazon、Microsoft、Alchemy)
Building a meaningful career | Jason Shah (Airbnb, Amazon, Microsoft, Alchemy)
Jason Shah: Pushback is, I couldn’t imagine a word more viscerally that makes you feel like you’re sort of physically going against what somebody else wants, and it gears people into a mindset of then, well, how should I push back. It starts from a place of I need to disagree, I need to say no. It’s a very negative mindset, purely based on the word that has come to label a behavior that alternatively could be about how do I shift the direction on something, or how do I help the business actually succeed when I disagree with somebody about something, and that’s a very different mindset. And so, the two things that I’ve seen be most successful would be, I think number one is actually understanding what a goal is or what somebody’s kind of issue is with something, and then actually aligning those things in some way.
Lenny: Welcome to Lenny’s Podcast. I’m Lenny, and my goal here is to help you get better at the craft of building and growing products. I interview world-class product leaders and growth experts to learn from their hard-won experiences building and scaling today’s most successful companies. Today my guest is Jason Shah. I was lucky to work with Jason while I was at Airbnb, and when I started working on this podcast, I knew that I wanted to have Jason on. He was actually my very first guest on this podcast when I was pre-recording some episodes, but as you’ll hear in our chat, we decided to take another crack at it for reasons you’ll soon understand.
In this episode, we cover what it’s like to be a PM in Web3 and how that’s changed as crypto winter has returned, how to lead a team through ups and downs, which leaders in Web3 know all too well, including how to keep morale up and people focused when so much is changing around you. We also get into a ton of killer advice on leadership, hiring, pushing back on your CEO, working backwards, career advancement, and a lot more juicy stuff. Jason is a gem and I am really excited to share this episode with you. With that, I bring you Jason Shah.
If you’re ping-ponging between lots of documents and spreadsheets, make your life better and start using Coda. You can take advantage of a special limited time offer just for startups. Head over to coda.io/lenny to sign up and get 1,000 in credit on your account. I’m excited to chat with my friend John Cutler from podcast sponsor, Amplitude. Hey, John.
John Cutler: Hey, Lenny. Excited to be here.
Lenny: John, give us a behind the scenes at Amplitude. When most people think of Amplitude, they think of product analytics, but now you’re getting into experimentation and even just launched a CDP. What’s the thought process there?
John Cutler: Well, we’ve always thought of Amplitude as being about supporting the full product loop. Think collect data, inform bets, ship experiments and learn. That’s the heart of growth to us. So, the big aha was seeing how many customers were using Amplitude to analyze experiments, use segments for outreach, and send data to other destinations. Experiment in CDP came out of listening to and observing our customers.
Lenny: And supporting growth and learning has always been Amplitude’s core focus, right?
John Cutler: Yeah. So, Amplitude tries to meet customers where they are. We just launched starter templates and have a great scholarship program for startups. There’s never been a more important time for growth.
Lenny: Absolutely agree. Thanks for joining us, John, and head to amplitude.com to get started. Jason, welcome to the podcast.
Jason Shah: Thanks so much, Lenny. Really excited to chat with you today.
Lenny: Something listeners don’t know that we know is that we actually recorded an episode between you and I back in April. It was actually my very first episode that I ever did for this podcast, and it was before I launched. It was kind of like a pre-launch launch episode, and interestingly enough, by the time the podcast launched and it was going to go out, well, let me also add that we chatted mostly about Web3, forgot that detail. So, most of our chat was about Web3 in the state of Web3 and PMing in Web3, and by the time the podcast’s supposed to come out, Web3, things have changed in the world of Web3, and so, it kind of felt a little stale and out of touch, and so, we decided let’s do it again. And so, how do you feel about that?
Jason Shah: I appreciate that, Lenny. I’m honored that you would have me back. I’m going to count it as the personal record of two times on Lenny’s Podcast, even if the world only knows it as one.
Lenny: Wow. Good one. Okay, first ever guest and first two-time return guest. Amazing. Okay. To set a little context for folks on your background, your career, could you just give us a 60-second overview of your background and your career and how you got to what you’re doing today?
Jason Shah: Yeah, for sure. Thanks again for having me, Lenny. So, my career has all been about solving important problems in a unique way. I think the latter part is the youngest child in me who has to be special and do things different than other people, and the former is about making sure that my time is spent well since we’re all limited there. So, I actually got started in a sense in tech when I was 15. I started my first company, much like a lot of teenagers, it was around test prep and getting people ready for college, and it was my first exposure to using technology at scale to help people, and I just found it addictive ever since.
And so, I ran that company for seven years through school, was lucky to do a small acquisition to a partner of ours that we had worked with throughout, and then I would just hooked, and I moved to San Francisco without a job. I was really arrogant. I said, “I’ll never work for anybody else,” and then lo and behold, Yammer comes along, I’m super excited about it, I had been working on a product actually in the same space. And so, that was actually my first formal product management role, and I stayed at Yammer, I stayed through the Microsoft acquisition back in 2012. Low and behold, I was at the world’s largest productivity company at Microsoft, and most people there in my opinion were wildly unproductive and I wasn’t shipping a lot. I got the itch again, so started another company called do.com and ran that for about four years, and then eventually, we found a better fit with Amazon. They were growing their AWS offering, SAS products. So, we partnered with them to kind of do a small acqui-hire and help build the team out and the product there for a little over a year.
Jason Shah: And then again, to be honest, I got bored and excited about what Airbnb was doing and the mission around belonging. That’s why I was lucky to meet you and so many other really wonderful product leaders and just human beings in general at their core, and then to keep things brief for now, I got to work on a lot of really exciting products and businesses there, but eventually got the itch for Web3 after being a kind of observer from afar, investor, and I wanted to be a builder in Web3 specifically, and to me, it’s a new vision of a better version of the internet. I’m really excited about that. So, I’ve been with Alchemy which is a blockchain infrastructure company for the last year, and really excited about all the opportunities. I’ve gotten to work on products that have been part of most people’s everyday lives, and I’m hopeful that we’ll get to do that with Web3 and Alchemy as well.
Lenny: Amazing. I just realized as you’re chatting there, do.com, I’m pretty sure I used that back in the day. I think I just realized that.
Jason Shah: I hope so. That would be a new, I’ll add that to my second podcast achievement is if I got Lenny to use a product that I worked on, especially a startup.
Lenny: Wow. Cool. Okay, so we’re going to go a little bit backwards through your career and start with Web3. We’re not going to spend most of the time on Web3, but just thought it’d be good to chat about some of these things, partly because you guest authored the sixth most popular post, online newsletter of all time, currently at number six, and it was about how to be a PM in Web3. Basically it’s called The Product Manager’s Guide to Web3. And so, a few questions there I wanted to touch on. One is just like, how would you describe the current state of Web3? We’re recording this at the end of July, and so, we’ll see when this comes out. But I’m just curious from someone working within it, kind of going through the boom and the busts, not the bust, the winter that we’re kind of in a little bit right now. Yeah, how do you feel about it right now?
Jason Shah: Yeah, for sure. So, as much as I’m a techno optimist, I’m also realist, and with that being said, I genuinely believe Web3 is in the strongest position that it’s ever been in. I think it’s important to remember that the term Web3 has barely existed in kind of popular lexicon for barely a year. We’ve definitely had crypto for more than a decade now as technology, arguably as a financial instrument of some sort, but specifically the number of companies that I’m seeing be formed, the number of products that are starting to actually achieve some form of early product market fit, some products that are starting to scale. There’s definitely been obviously a huge drop in price. There’s definitely been some huge scandals in terms of financial mismanagement and the contagion from that.
But I think it’s been my experience that a lot of new technologies don’t move up in a straight line, and Web3 is especially challenging here because so many things have been financialized from the outset, whereas generally speaking, you’ll see startups or new technologies mature over many years, whether it’s the internet itself, artificial intelligence, QR codes, all sorts of things that kind of have gone through different periods of adoption, and so, I think we’re seeing things kind of record Ethereum transactions happening, new Layer 2 technologies launching all the time that are going to help scale Layer 1 Blockchains, Solana has announced its phone that’s going to be the first sort of Web3 native phone out there. So, there’s so many new exciting product developments and users entering the space that as much as prices have come down, I’m really optimistic about the state of Web3.
Lenny: I think about a little bit is going through this shift in excitement about Web3 as a PM within a company working in this space, I imagine it tests some of the core skills of a PM, like keeping people focused, prioritizing effectively, keeping morale up. If people are getting like, “Oh man, all my cryptos going down,” I’m curious how you’ve been able to leverage those skills and what you’ve learned going through this experience, keeping people focused, morale up, prioritizing effectively, those sorts of things.
Jason Shah: Yeah, it’s a great question. It’s really important, right, because we’ve seen in this space that there are these cycles, and I think that morale and ability to keep building are the determinants of long-term success, and if everybody kind of takes the ball and goes home, that uncertain future won’t necessarily materialize. So, in my opinion, I think that the only way to maintain moral is to make progress. I think that no speech, no sort of extrinsic motivators like we’re going to give everybody some free crypto to keep motivated about it or something like that really works. I think people get really excited when they see progress.
So, for example, at Alchemy, we see more developers than we’ve ever had on the platform today, and then we’re shipping, we just launched Solana support and people are like, “This is real.” We’re actually doing things, building things. We just had our team out at EthCC which is a big conference in Paris for the Ethereum community, and it was wild the number of people that were there, products being built. Pretty much every crypto conference has a hackathon, and so, it keeps the spirit of building so alive.
And so, I think it at Alchemy and just in other situations that I’ve been in as a leader over time, I think it’s all about a focus on progress and moving forward. We saw this at Airbnb when the business had a draw down in revenue, and I know you’d covered this with Sanchan recently, right? It was 85, 90% revenue and you didn’t know when it was going to turn around, right? It’s not just like, “Oh yeah, this will come back in six months and we can just keep plowing forward.” But I think what worked was making progress and actually focusing on product and your customers, and ultimately if you hire the right people who are motivated for the right reasons, I think that recipe keeps people highly motivated and highly effective at building for when things do eventually turn around.
Lenny: One of the most interesting and maybe surprising points you made in the post that you wrote about being a PM in Web3 is that there’s much less need for a PM, especially early stage Web3, and it feels like, the stuff you’re talking about feels like a PM’s really helpful along these lines. So, I’m curious, are things changing at all there? Have you changed your perspective on PMs and Web3, and then I don’t know, where do you see the evolution of product management and Web3?
Jason Shah: I actually am seeing things change a lot, and one thing in Web3, if one learns nothing is the ability to admit when they’re wrong or when things change. And so, I think that that’s exactly what I’m seeing. So, basically, I’m specifically noticing a lot of teams hiring product leaders, more product managers. Those product managers are actually now working kind of increasingly in sort of more traditional product management fashion, in addition to some of the differences that we discussed in the post around the community management and role in marketing and things like this, but specifically, Uniswap just made a big hire out of Meta. I saw that Gemini also did the same. We’re seeing OpenSea hire a lot of talent along these lines too, even through the ups and downs that their business has seen, and at all levels. Whether it’s kind of product manager, senior product manager, director, VP or CPO, you’re seeing it across the board.
Jason Shah: And so, I think that’s partially happening because you’re seeing a maturation of products, right, and so, maybe you can start early with a few engineers, a community manager, get the ball rolling, but eventually the product is more mature, the complexity has grown, the role of the product manager is far more useful than they can differentiate. I also think the market is getting increasingly competitive. So, there’s many NFT marketplaces. There’s many Layer 1 and Layer 2 blockchains. As a result, I think product is always a competitive advantage, right? If it’s working, it improves strategy, it improves execution, and improves team collaboration. And so, maybe that was less of a difference maker before where these teams didn’t need that competitive advantage as much because maybe they launched a token and the token was mooning, and so a bunch of people were adopting the product, but that only lasts so long, and first principles still come come in to focus, whether it’s one day or one month from now.
So, I’m definitely seeing it shift. It’s definitely making a huge, positive difference in the cases that I’ve observed, and my hunch is we’re only going to continue to observe this because with more user adoption comes new challenges, and for all these players that are growing and getting some form of adoption, the product complexity is only going to grow, and having somebody to help lead teams, help prioritize between all the different products that they could build or strategies they could pursue is going to only increase in importance.
Lenny: I know we’re like we’re PM people talking about the value of PM, but something I find is that people that are kind of anti having a PM or don’t see why they need a PM in my experience just haven’t worked with a great product manager because my experience, you find a great PM, they just make everything better, and so, it’s not surprising to hear what you’re sharing which is people are kind of discovering that value of bringing on a product manager, even if it’s mostly engineering work. And so, that’s promising, and I wonder if that’s just a natural evolution of a new space where people are like, “Eh, I don’t need PMs in this one,” and then like, “Oh, okay, well, I see. All these things aren’t happening. We need someone to help. Who can do that for us? Maybe it’s a PM.”
Jason Shah: Yeah, that’s a great observation. I think that combination of having a direct need for something that emerges as well as if somebody’s had either a bad experience or not even had any experience with somebody who can play this role which is quite common in Web3, especially because a lot of folks are relatively early in their career, given the kind of accessibility of the space, and I think frankly the more adept understanding of the space naturally that a lot of people have when they’re early in their career and less set in their ways. And so, that’s a great point, and as a result, the better PMs we see in Web3, hopefully the value will prove itself out over time.
Lenny: And hopefully they do well so people don’t keep getting burned out by bad PMs.
Jason Shah: We’re rooting for all PMs, but definitely Web3 PMs too.
Lenny: Yeah. What’s surprised you most about working in Web3 as a PM?
Jason Shah: I mean, I think that the biggest surprise to me, despite what we were just talking about, was how big some products have gotten without kind of the traditional either product manager role or without the playbooks that we’re so used to from the last 20 years of the internet. And so, for example, Uniswap has done more daily volume on certain days than Coinbase, and Uniswap is about a hundred people versus 5,000-plus at Coinbase, right? So, that’s astounding to me.
I think a lot of these NFT collections and communities that have grown. I met with a lot of these at NFT.NYC recently, and a lot of them, aside from the price speculation and things like this, have actually built, the Bored Ape Yacht Club is actually building a metaverse project that does look better than some of the digital games that I’ve used in the past of Second Life and things like this. Obviously, a lot of time has passed and so there’s a greater foundation of technology to build off of and they’re working with a partner on that product as well, but there’s a ton of progress being made without some of the traditional product structure or individuals. And so, again, I think PMs play a really strong role, but it’s been incredibly surprising to see how far products can get without the product playbooks and resources that somebody who’s worked in the internet space from the last 10 or 20 years is so used to.
Lenny: Awesome. Okay. We’re going to move on from Web3 and chat a bit about some of your other career accomplishments and companies you’ve worked at. So, you worked at, you mentioned Yammer, Microsoft, Amazon, Airbnb. I’m curious which of those companies has most informed the way you approach product and build product and run teams because they’re all so different in how they operate, and I’m always curious what company is the formative experience for you that’s like, “Here’s how I like to build product most.” I know it’s always a combination, but how do you think about that?
Jason Shah: Yeah, it’s definitely a combination, but I would say if I had to pick, Amazon, even though I was only there for about a year after the acquisition. I say that because of this blend between product and business thinking that is especially present there. And so, people say Google is an engineering culture. People said Facebook is a product culture, Airbnb or Pinterest, sometimes a design culture or things like this, and I think that Amazon was a place where you couldn’t divorce business and product. You couldn’t be a product manager without thinking about revenue growth, without thinking about go to market, and I really like that because as a startup founder doing product in a bigger company, it gave me the chance to exercise a lot of those skills.
It’s very similar actually to how I feel at Alchemy now where I remember my first month there I was like, people ask me how’s it going, I’m like, “I feel like an athlete. I feel alive again.” I can do M&A one day, I can be doing product another minute. I could be figuring out, oh, we need to hire our first lawyer to write onboarding plans for employees the next minute, and it wasn’t as siloed as sometimes a product role can be. So, I think Amazon, I went there to learn and understand. That was my biggest goal was this is an incredible company that’s gone into… The Whole Foods acquisition happened when I was there, and I was wondering how does the same company kind of within retail win with the AWS, go create studios, and I think the Amazon culture ultimately more than anything else around ownership, being vocally self-critical is right a lot as one of the leadership principles. All these things combined I think created a really unique culture.
So, I would say Amazon’s had the biggest impact on me, and there have been certain lessons that I’ve taken from, like you said, all these places, but Amazon was by far the place that I think left the biggest mark on my view on product and leadership.
Lenny: That’s quite amazing that you were there for a year and that’s the one that’s most informed and impacted you. Do you feel like people should try to go work at Amazon as a training ground as a PM? Is that something you encourage PM to try to do?
Jason Shah: In general, I certainly had a positive experience, but I think that as you know and as I’m sure you’ve advised countless people, it’s so context dependent. Are you learning the zero to one? Are you learning the one to scale? What’s your aspiration? Is somebody trying to start a company eventually, or are they trying to work the ranks of the product leadership trajectory? And so, I definitely enjoyed it a lot, and I think to your point, there’s often a non-linear sort of correlation between factors that we traditionally think are linked, right? So, my time there was one of the shortest, but my learnings were some of the greatest because I was really intentional and maybe because of the sort of moment in time and what I wanted to get out of it.
The same way for what it’s worth, while we’re talking about this disconnect, when I went to Yammer, I also interviewed with kind of… This was the era of TaskRabbit. I talked to Square and I remember people always say, “Well, what stage do you want to join seed, Series A, Series B?” And the crazy thing is that Yammer was, it was already passed a hundred people, it grew to 500 by the time of the acquisition, and it felt almost like the culture was so tightknit, it felt like a seed stage company at some points, even though eventually it kind of felt like… Well, once it was acquired from Microsoft, we’ll just say it didn’t feel like a seed stage company anymore, but it felt smaller than a lot of the actual smaller companies than I was at. So, I think that’s something I’ve noticed a lot is that a lot of the proxies don’t necessarily match the internal realities in certain cases.
Lenny: You mentioned you picked up a bunch of tactics and kind of lessons from some of these companies. What’s one concrete process or tactic that you took it away from either Amazon or one of these other companies that stuck with you that you like to kind of share with folks?
Jason Shah: Yeah, definitely. I mean, I think one that Amazon is well-known for is the working backwards process, and for those that don’t know, the idea is try to define effectively an ideal end state which funnily enough is very similar to some of what we both experienced at Airbnb and took away, and usually the mechanism for doing this is what’s called a PRFAQ, and that’s a press release and frequently asked questions, and it forces a certain degree of clarity to have to actually write a press release about the product that you’re going to eventually launch.
Every employee goes through actually like a business writing class after they start at Amazon. They give you a little card with five tips that you’re supposed to keep on your desk about concision and specificity in the words you use. For example, you should never write the word great in an Amazon press release. You should write user friendly in X, Y, Z way and will save customers time 20 minutes each day through this. It’s intended to be very concrete in a way that avoids some of the fluffiness that frankly… It’s funny, when people try to move from slides to docs, they really just import the same mindsets that they use in slides, but just with more words now.
And so, I think the working backwards process of establishing the long-term goal using a mechanism like a press release and the FAQs where every word matters, and even the FAQs, for what it’s worth, there’s a section for external FAQs that you would include for example as an appendix, but also internal FAQs that are meant to de-risk launch or raise the elephant in the room or dogs not barking as Amazon likes to call it often. So, that was a really helpful process that felt very true to me as a way I like to live my life as well, and then also very applicable.
Lenny: The tidbit about not using the word great is so interesting. Is there anything else there that you could share about just basically just like how to write effectively and communicate and launch. Is there any other tidbits along those lines?
Jason Shah: Yeah, that’s a good question. In addition to not using the word great and words like it that are either subjective in what they mean or unclear in what they actually mean, definitely using numbers more than adjectives. Strict concision, I would go over these documents countless times, and there’s a phrase, I can’t remember, it’s either Mark Twain or another famous writer who said kill your darlings, right? Cut, cut, cut, and just remove. And so, I think I found that really useful in emails I write or documents I write to this day is just going over, not because you’re saving ink by cutting words, but because it forces clarity of thought. Fewer words means every word is 10 pounds in weight instead of one, and that means that the decisions you’re making, the trade offs are far more intentional, and in the case of great, if you say something is great because we’re going to deliver something in two hours versus Amazon’s great because the selection is very wide, the implications on strategy are completely different. And so, that’s one of the benefits of being very specific and very concrete in language.
Lenny: I didn’t intend to go too deep into this topic, but no one’s ever covered this working backwards process on this podcast, so it’s kind of interesting to talk about it a little bit more maybe. How does that actually work? So, you sit there and you actually write out a press release that would go out when you launch this thing. Is there like a template used? Is there anything you could share for folks that want to try this out and/or point them to a resource that will help them down this road?
Jason Shah: Yeah, definitely. That’s a great question. So, there definitely is a template, and so, it’s a combination of an internal training where you have to write one of these documents. You review kind of good, bad, medium versions of this. It’s generally used if there’s let’s say a proposal for a new product or even a proposal to buy a company. This helps really simulate what it’s going to be like.
With respect to a template, what I recall is it was often sort of an introduction where you get kind of right to the point. You say what you’re announcing. Then usually you would describe the problem in one paragraph and in very clear language. Again, all of the writing is this way. Then the solution, you briefly describe the product. After that, there’s always a customer quote, and this is an example of this customer obsession that Amazon is so famous for that many companies like to say or emulate, but I think it really kind of may not be true if you evaluate the mechanisms that they use, for example, product specs that either don’t have customer data or don’t have quotes from customers, things like this. And so, there’s a customer quote, and you have to literally put yourself into the shoes of… Let’s say you were launching Prime. Put yourself in the shoes of Lenny from San Francisco. What exactly is he going to say when he has access to this, and how’s it different than his life today, and what are the words that he’s going to use?
Lenny: You can’t use great.
Jason Shah: I mean, if great is one of your favorite words, maybe you could stretch it, but I think if you were in a room with your peers at Amazon, they might put some red pen through any greats that are used there. So, I found that really helpful, and it also helps force out of this box that product managers, product leaders tend to get into of thinking that they are always the customer and being a little sort of intellectually lazy, where I’m like, “Yeah, I would like Prime, so let me write the quote for what I would like,” but maybe I’m only a small segment within our total customer addressable market.
Jason Shah: So, anyhow, there’s a customer quote, then there’s one leadership quote similarly that this achieves a complimentary goal, like how does this fit into our strategy in a way that you would express to the public but is still true to what the internal sensitivities and mechanisms would be. And then a call to action towards the end, and not just download here, but this will be available to customers next month. They can go access these portals within these Whole Food stores at this state. It again forces clarity of thought with respect to not only the rollout plan, but taking a step back. When you read it, do you feel like you would actually want this product? Would you use it? So, I found that really helpful as a structure.
Lenny: Can you just summarize those again real quick?
Jason Shah: For sure. So the structure of the PRFAQ docs was generally an introduction where you’re announced the product, problem, solution, customer quote, leadership quote, and a call to action.
Lenny: So, interesting how similar that is to a one pager potentially. The other thought I had while you’re chatting, so the Airbnb approach is work back from the ideal, Brian talks about it, the 11-star experience versus the Amazon approach which it doesn’t need to be the ideal, it just needs to be an awesome launch. So, that’s an interesting difference, both effective in different ways.
Jason Shah: I think people tend to, when they see that both companies have some sort of working backwards process of thought, I would say working backwards on one hand and then 11-star experience on the other. Listening to how you describe it, I want to almost frame it as working backwards from sort of a moment in time or a launch like you said with Amazon versus working backwards from a quality standard in some sense of an 11-star experience.
Lenny: Going in a slightly different direction, one of the things I wanted to chat about is you worked at all these different companies and they have different types of leadership and different approaches to leadership. And so, I’m curious, what have you learned about effective leadership watching all these awesome operators work, and what kind of separates them in your experience from folks that maybe aren’t as effective?
Jason Shah: Yeah, it’s a great question, and to briefly recap, right, I’ve gotten to see somebody like David Sachs who’ve been the CEO of PayPal and then the founder of Yammer and gone to do many more things since then. I’ve gotten to see sort of Jeff Bezos at a distance. I was never that close to him obviously and never got to work with him, but got to observe his impact on the organization. Obviously, I’ve gotten to witness Brian Chesky and his leadership in sort of the pre-IPO days as well as through the ups and downs of COVID, and then also now at Alchemy, our co-founders, Joe and Nikil are leaders that have really had an impact on me as well, and I would count myself, but I’ve also see myself as a bad leader in the start of [inaudible 00:29:56] and learn from that.
I think it’s a really important thing to reflect on, and I think for me there are three things that have stood out the most. I think number one, nothing is above them. I’ve seen whether it’s Brian caring about the full bleed image on the homepage, whether it’s Jeff Bezos who famously would receive customer emails, read many of them, forward them, and he’s famous for question mark emails where for his time’s sake he would just forward an email to a leader with a question mark and you would just have to figure it out and then report back in 24 hours with the resolution thereof. But nothing’s above them, and a lot of founders or a lot of CEOs or even CPOs and leaders think you get to a certain point and then I’m above a product spec, I’m above looking at the data running a sequel query, and I think that that is a mistake in a lot of ways, especially from a standpoint of who people come to respect as well as efficacy at one’s job.
And then the other two things would be, I think they’re in the details. So, it’s less about being above something, but this is kind of Amazon’s famous for auditing the details for example, and leaders are… For example, when we were going to launch Prime, order a bunch of Prime things and see what happens and really test things out, and write up a long feedback email on Saturday or something like that, and make sure that things are moving forward.
So, I think in my opinion, some of the best leaders, David Sachs would do this too. He actually ran the product reviews. It was the CEO of the company doing product reviews, not some kind of middle tier of a director of product who was just running them. They were force involved and there were things to delegate and activate around, but Sachs was in all of those details and ran those product reviews himself and would talk to the product managers directly, and I think that was really impactful, and it also, I think from an accountability and culture perspective, when you’re PM and you talk to the CEO and you feel like you’re presenting something at product review, it’s totally different, and it creates a certain amount of responsibility and quality, frankly, that I think is really important, and it’s a way to coach obviously as well for those leaders to really make a mark on the organization.
And then lastly, I think they adapt, right? I think that are a lot of leaders who are like, “I’ve worked 20 years to become a leader in this way and I have a playbook,” either based on past experience or based on some sort of philosophy that they’ve developed over time that they feel committed to in some way, and I think coming back to some of these examples of watching Brian lead through COVID or watching Joe and Nikil now through this particular crypto winter shift gears and figure out exactly like we’re still building the core business, but how else can we lean into this and adapt to the unique opportunities that are in front of us. I think that’s really powerful. So, what I’ve seen is nothing is above them, they’re in the details, and they adapt to new information and new situations. That’s what I’ve seen the most that I’ve appreciated in the best leaders that I’ve gotten to either observe or work closely with.
Lenny: Awesome. That’s super interesting. The first two are kind of connected which is really interesting, and it just reminds me of Brian and how detail-oriented he was about everything. He used to review every product launch and every screen of every new product. We had to show him here’s what we’re launching this week, and he just kind of went through and either blew it up or let it pass. And then I just remember the founders, when they were designing the office space, just looking at pictures of listings they wanted to… Because Airbnb, the office conference rooms were modeled after Airbnb listings, and Jim just looking through hundreds of listings that the team brought him and he’d just picked the ones that he wanted to turn into conference rooms. Also, obviously Steve Jobs. This is a really interesting through line of great leaders is just this huge attention to detail, and there’s probably something about once they let go that thing start to kind of diminish. Is that what you find?
Jason Shah: Yeah, that’s such a great point. You mentioned the Jobs example and there’s a great book that you’ve probably read or in your community seen, I believe it’s called Creative Selection by Ken Kocienda about the early days of the iPhone, and I think it was Project Purple or something like that, and you’re absolutely right. There wasn’t no slides, none of this. They brought in the prototypes for each of those reviews and things like how to do typing on a tiny screen and those early keyboards and how to do auto complete, and Jobs was totally in those details from Ken’s telling in this book.
So, I couldn’t agree with you more, and it’s something that people miss because most of their exposure to leaders is on a YouTube video or at all hands, and so, they don’t really get to see that side of leaders I think, and it’s also not what I think from an ego perspective is kind of what people want it to be about. They want to be about making big decisions or commanding a large group of people, and I think it’s hard to do that without these pieces.
One other thing I just wanted to briefly touch on to your point on how they’re connected, it’s a really good point, and at the surface it almost seems like they could potentially be the same thing. One thing worth calling out though I think is the idea of something not being above somebody or a person not being above things. I think the biggest thing I take away from that is humility is that nothing is not my job, right? Anything, could be picking up paper off the floor and putting it in the trash, or it could be reviewing a product spec, whatever it is, and then begin the details in my opinion is about craft, right, and really understanding things at a low level such that you’re able to reason about it and make good decisions, like Brian with the homepage or Bezos in some cases with customer processes that he got in the weeds on. I think the two together, humility and being excellent at craft, I think is a very potent combination, especially when you throw in the last thing of being able to adapt to any situation.
Lenny: That’s really interesting. What it also makes me think about is the reason things are less good often if there isn’t a person at the top that’s being very detail-oriented, and I find this with the newsletter and this podcast and other stuff is no one’s going to care as much about it. No one’s going to be like, “Oh my god, I really need to get this right so much because I’m just like, I’m personally feeling responsible for the quality of this stuff and it’s like it’s on my shoulders to make this awesome.” And so, I think that’s probably why a lot of the best stuff is led by a singular leader or singular opinion or singular person. A lot of the best startups are just someone’s vision is like, “Here, this is what we’re going to do,” and then the more it becomes a community-driven thing, the less often it ends up being successful.
Jason Shah: I feel like you’re totally right, especially, I mean this is the natural progression, but it doesn’t have to be that way right? And I think to your point, I think a lot of leaders focus on accountability in an organization once they get large, and so, you see things like performance reviews and things like this. It’s a very top-down approach to trying to drive results, but is opposed to a sense of accountability if you drove a sense of responsibility. If people felt like this is my company too, this is my product, this is my office floor. I don’t want trash on the floor. I’m going to pick it up and throw it there. Even if we have somebody whose job it supposedly is to clean that up, it’s like I take pride of ownership in this and I’m connected to it, and I think that makes all the difference in terms of… At Airbnb, I think people who felt that way were willing to push back on certain things, or they’re willing to propose new ideas because they felt invested in the company.
I see it at Alchemy all the time. I see an engineer hop in and fix something at 3:00 AM because they feel committed to the code base, and it’s not a thousand-person engineering organization where my only job is to make the iOS app 2% more effective at engaging users.
Lenny: So, you touched on the skill of pushing back on a founder or CEO, and I know that’s something you’re really good at. I’ve seen you do this. I’m curious what you’ve learned about how to effectively do that as a PM at a company pushing back on a CEO or founder when you disagree.
Jason Shah: I mean, I think this is one of… I actually think it’s one of the most misunderstood terms in a sense because I think language like we were talking about earlier is so important, and yet what you call something ends up defining I think 90% of what people understand about a concept, right? And so, pushback is, I couldn’t imagine a word more viscerally that makes you feel like you’re sort physically going against what somebody else wants, and it gears people into a mindset of then, well, how should I push back. It starts from a place of I need to disagree, I need to say no. It’s a very negative mindset, purely based on the word that has come to label a behavior that alternatively could be about how do I shift the direction on something, or how do I help the business actually succeed when I disagree with somebody about something, and that’s a very different mindset.
And so, the two things that I’ve seen be most successful would be, I think number one is actually understanding what a goal is or what somebody’s kind of issue is with something, and then actually aligning those things in some way. So, in coming back to Airbnb, I remember Airbnb had bought a company, Luxury Retreats. There was a goal to integrate that business and that product into the full Airbnb suite, and there was a lot of potential with that, but I remember that there was part of the product experience that was oriented around chatting with somebody and the idea that the business had had a very large team of wonderful people who helped you as concierges basically for your trip, and so, this was a team that I was on that, to be honest, had fairly low morale. It’s always difficult to integrate an acquisition with a company, especially when we were based in different places, et cetera.
Jason Shah: I remember hearing from a leader who had been at Airbnb for a while who’s very effective at persuading senior leadership, and they understood why this was a problem because this chat product was growing in complexity. You’d have to build all these features into it, and nobody could successfully shift the direction, and as a result, it was just this… It was a mess as a result, and there was very low morale because we were taking on too much scope, people weren’t sure it was the right product, it was being built up as one giant launch as opposed to an iterative thing. And what was really interesting was that this leader was very effective at understanding that the goal wasn’t about building a bunch of features. It was about, as often discussed at Airbnb, a magical experience.
And so, when we took a step back, it was reimagined as trip designers, not concierges, and their goal was to design your trip, and part of that meant a very elegant, simple chat experience so that you could have a efficient, fast, positive experience with that trip designer and move on. And it shifted the pushback of like, “We can’t build this thing, it’s too many features, we don’t have enough time, we don’t have enough resources” to, “Oh, we all want a really elegant, really smooth, slick experience for our customers. How do we do that? What’s a trip design or a new concept that is actually going to elevate things? We’re not telling you we want a payback scope. We’re not saying we want to settle for less. We’re actually just not only going to call it something different, but also envision a simpler experience which is more elegant. It’s more on brand with luxury.”
Boom, all of a sudden, everybody gets what they want. It’s a better customer experience, less scope, and it wasn’t about saying no. It was about understanding what we’re all actually sharing as a goal which was a great simple customer experience and then actually building that. So, I saw that to be really effective and I think that that’s something I try to bring into my career. I have a couple other examples if it’s useful, but that was a big one that I learned from Airbnb.
Lenny: Yeah, another example would be great. One thought there though is do you think it was mostly the name and the concept or was it that it was a bigger idea? What do you think it was about reframing it that way that got people, “Oh wow, okay, now I’m really excited about it again”?
Jason Shah: That’s a great point. I think it was a big idea, right, with a good reframing, and I think it’s like many things where there’s the substance of something and then there’s the communication of it. And so, this is true often, for example, if a company is changing strategy. Oftentimes people might walk away feeling like, “Yeah, I guess I kind of agree with the strategy, but the way was communicated was really poor,” or vice versa, like, “Yeah, they told us in advance and they sat us down all hands, but I really disagree with this strategy and I’m going to be dug into my heels and not disagree and commit now.”
So, in this case, I think you’re totally right. If it was just window dressing of… Founders are too smart, especially at all these companies we’ve talked about, to be fooled with a simple renaming of something. But I think the combination of a bigger idea, more exciting idea that was at the heart of what we were all going after together, combined with a simple way of communicating it because I’ve also seen big ideas that are poorly communicated fall flat on their face and not achieve the intended outcome. Those two together, I think were a really potent combination.
Lenny: Awesome. I’d love to hear another example.
Jason Shah: Yeah, for sure. So, a recent example at Alchemy actually, right? We’re growing, we’re hiring, but there are a lot of roles, especially being in Web3 that are not yet created. For example, there’s traditionally growth, product growth marketing, we’ve created new area around growth operations which I’d be happy to talk about if we want to get into it. But it’s a really interest interesting area, and we were going back and forth on should we hire for this role, it’s not even a real thing. We’ve looked at some candidates, we’re not so sure about them. And when I realize with our founders who are incredibly smart, very talented, have built the company over so many years now, they want to win. That’s what they care about at the end of the day. They are so driven to win at the end of the day.
And so, ultimately, it wasn’t like, “Let me make some rational argument about the role of growth operations or let me defend some issues with this person’s resume that maybe you’re spotting when we make this hiring decision,” but, “Oh, you want to win? Oh, we want to grow faster? Awesome. This is the way to do it, and that’s how we’re going to actually become the generational company we want to be.” Again, a reframing in this case around, yeah, we might disagree or squabble about certain things at a detail level, but I understand what we all came here to do and let’s focus on that and how this is a part of that versus just focusing on maybe the means to an end versus the end itself, and the end always brings a lot of clarity in my experience.
Lenny: What’s cool about both these examples, and another guest touched on this, when you’re trying to influence the CEO or the founder, coming back to your working backwards concept, you almost want to work backwards from what are they excited about, how do they see the world, what’s important to them, and then pitch it that way. So, in the first example, I imagine they were pitching to Brian and he’s like, “Yeah, drip design, that sounds like something Brian would love.” Then in the second example, “Yeah, we’re going to win. Here’s how we win.” So, that’s a really interesting takeaway there.
Jason Shah: I mean, I think we all forget that we’re all just humans, and at the end of the day, we all are busy, et cetera. It reminds me of a lot of sales, right? I was very unsuccessful when I was trying to do outbound sales in the early days of my last startup do.com because I didn’t understand this. I’m a product person. I’m not a sales person. I didn’t listen to what people cared about. I didn’t kind of work backwards from what a CRO or head of people that we might have been selling to cared about. I was just about features and here’s what we can do for you and this and that. But all they cared about were one or two things, right? Maybe the CRO’s growing revenue. Maybe the head of peoples worried about culture or scaling their talent organization, and we were nowhere near that list.
And so, I think it’s similar for CEOs, and there’s a huge disconnect when say a PM walks into a meeting with the CEO and they’re talking about something that CEO is 10 miles away from thinking about, and certainly even the mindset that they’re bringing to the conversation is totally different. I think Casey made a lot of great points about this in the recent podcast as well.
Lenny: Sweet. Casey Winters, podcast plug. Okay, so something else that you’re really good at is you don’t kind of focus career-wise on working your way up the ladder and being like the top PM, and you seem to be really good at kind of following with what’s interesting to you and your interest and your curiosity. Is there something that you’ve learned there, something you could share for folks that are just like, “Oh my gosh, should I just keep in with this job and work my way up? Should I try something new?” What have you learned about that sort of thinking?
Jason Shah: There’s the framework I like is ladder versus map, and I think that you can be either person that any point in your life. Sometimes there’s a bit of a set mindset that somebody might have one way or another, but I like ladder versus map. Ladder is about moving up. It’s more influence, more power, a higher title, things like this, whereas map is I just want to go wherever’s interesting, right? I literally think of it, I think of my career very similar to travel. I want to go to Greece. I want to be hungry, walking around in India, sweating in a hundred degree weather. I want to go to Australia and kind of get locked out of my hotel and see what that’s like.
I’m okay with discomfort because it’s interesting. Sometimes, for better or worse, maybe this is a privilege, it’s certainly a privileged thing to say, but I care more about living a really interesting life than let’s say a good or comfortable life. I think that’s where the growth comes from. That’s where the stories come from. That’s to me the things that I’ll remember the most.
And so, when I think about product and I’m on my deathbed, I’m going to care about the products I built and how they affected people. Nobody’s really going to be looking at my LinkedIn, hopefully for their sake and mine, at my funeral. Sorry, it’s a very morbid analogy, but I think thinking of the future provides a lot of clarity about what am I going to care about a long time from now, and I think that applies to all facets of life. That’s how I thought about my life partner. That’s how I think about my career. That’s how I think about where I want to live, San Francisco. San Francisco, a lot of people like to talk negatively about it, but I believe in the community. I believe in the place I’m interested in the long term, even if you know the short term it has some challenges to it.
So, I personally believe really strongly in this kind of ladder versus map distinction, and I think a lot of people are very intentional in the micro. They think about their next job, their next title, how much salary and equity there is. In good ways too, they think about the team that they’re going to work on next with, but they’re very unintentional about the macro. What’s the big picture? What do I care about as an individual? There’s not a lot of classes for that. There’s not a lot of blog posts in the product management field about the touchy-feely side of this, and who are you as a person, where do you get energy from. So, for me, I found that really clarifying and it makes career decisions that have seemed risky to other people seem inevitable to me.
Lenny: Is there a story of or example of how you use this approach to make a decision at where you end up going, and/or or is there something that you maybe regret or are really happy with in terms of the kind of the fork in the road, looking back, using this way of thinking?
Jason Shah: A few concrete examples, actually. I’ll keep them brief though. One is when I first moved to San Francisco, and I had mentioned I did a small sale of that education company, and I could have done a lot of more productive things with my career in the short term. I had all my peers from college who had gone off to their great jobs at Google or whatever. I said, “I’m looking to move to San Francisco and work at my dining table, and I have a little bit of savings from this, so why not? Let’s see. It’s going to be super interesting.” I mean, it was also very boring at times, and so, I didn’t want a lot on the sort of micro level, but I built five or six products. I became much better at programming as a result.
I remember one time, it’s kind of a goofy story, but I was working at my dining table, and I saw Ron Conway on the street. I was disheveled because I was just working from my apartment and I wanted to go pitch Ron Conway on this terrible idea for a startup, and so went out there, and maybe it was fortunate to not shove me to the side, and he listened to me for a minute and then I emailed him after. These are random things that happen that over time I think make us who we are. Are you the sort of person who’s going to hustle and do that? When I was building that education company, I went and put flyers in people’s cars in various high schools, and I was trying to get things started, and coming back to leadership, that would be below most people. It’s like, “Wait, you own a company and you’re sticking flyers in people’s windshields?” It was like, “What’s wrong with you?”
So, anyway, I think that was an example of time where it was like, “Okay, if I’m on the ladder,” I’m like, “I got to get the best entry-level job or whatever.” Even if I had been an entrepreneur before that, I would’ve thought about my structure in my career, and I was more like, “This is going to be interesting. I’ll figure it out. I believe in myself enough that I’ll figure it out.” So, I did that. Yammer and leaving Yammer was similar where I could have stayed. My equity was finally worth something. I could have learned a lot even I’m sure from the Microsoft structure, but I was bored and I had been talking to a couple angel investors who were willing to put money into whatever the thing was going to be, and I felt like raising money’s actually going to be really hard for me. This is going to make my life a lot easier and I can focus on product and so on and so forth.
That was a really hard four years. Things like an M&A offer falling through the day before your wedding, or chewing glass and submitting to the Apple iStore and being a featured app and then resubmitting because we wanted to fix a bug, and then actually now it crashes 90% of the time. It’s Memorial Day weekend and you can’t get in touch with the Apple business development manager who can help you out to reapprove something. It was a really stressful four years, but using the map analogy, that’s like getting lost in Croatia and having to find your way out or getting lost to to your hotel in Australia or getting bitten by a dog in Thailand, which actually did happen to me. But these are interesting experiences that I think build characters.
So, I’ll pause there, but I think there are a lot of career decisions I’ve made. Do I have regrets? At times, for sure because you see what would’ve happened if you had joined a different company at that time and it would’ve been like, “Oh, I would’ve met so many great people. I would’ve worked on these products. I mean, my equity would’ve been worth more,” whatever. But I think you only lived once, and I think that these rare experiences have been very true to me and taught me things that I wouldn’t learn otherwise.
Lenny: What’s really cool about that analogy, ladder versus map, is a lot of times you think you’re climbing a ladder and you think it’s innately going to be great, and sometimes that ladder falls over and the company doesn’t go anywhere and/or the job sucks, your ladder’s heading to some terrible place. And what I find in my experience is anytime I try something totally new and take a risk, especially following things that give me energy, and I’m just like, “Let’s just take a leap on this thing,” in my experience at least, it’s always led to better opportunities and much more interesting work. And so, it’s kind of this get off the ladder to get on a different ladder, and sometimes you think you’re on a nice ladder and it’s not going to get you anywhere anyway. So, explore other ladders. So, I’m kind of picturing a Chutes and Ladders.
Jason Shah: Totally.
Lenny: There’s many ladders and you want to explore the different ladders across the map. How about that?
Jason Shah: I mean, I think you’re totally right, and the only brief thing I would add to the way that you put it which I think captures the essence here is I think we all have a lot of false precision about what we think a given career move is going to lead to or what it’s going to be like, and we forget that a lot of career decisions are made out of maybe 10 hours cumulatively talking to a team and getting signals.
So, I think that that false precision sometimes gives us comfort in making certain decisions and folds us back from a bolder decision that might be better, but maybe the ladder is just hidden behind some fog if you really want that, and you can get both. Maybe you can go to the most interesting place in the world, and have the success in life and progress and so on and so forth. It’s just that I think a lot of people think it’s totally either/or. They think that they’ve already figured out the precise outcome that’s going to happen, and to your point, the ladder often does fall over. If that’s what all your hopes are pinned on, it’s a very fragile career decision I think is really difficult to navigate.
Lenny: The flip side, you also don’t want to be bouncing around over and over and over. As much as I talked about how I shifted and tried new things, I’m a very serial monogamous in terms of work. My first job, I was there nine years, then a startup for a year and a half, and then Airbnb for seven years, and then what I’m doing now may be forever. And so, there’s a lot of value to sticking around and kind of seeing things through. And so, I guess, I don’t know if you’ll have an answer to this, but do you have any wisdom on when to stick with it and keep exploring opportunities at a place you’re at versus trying something new?
Jason Shah: My hope is that there’s a balance here in the sense that the map shouldn’t give the impression of 180 countries, let’s do 180 tech companies and shorten the tenure from two years down to a month, and we’ve just created a generation of job hoppers which is even easier because we’re all on Zoom. It’s a good point and I really respect people like you who have stuck it out through the ups and the downs and somebody sees seven years on paper, but I mean, seven years, I don’t know. How many chapters of Airbnb, how many crises moments?
Lenny: Felt like 300.
Jason Shah: There you go. So, I think there’s a balance, right? For example, I want to be in Web3 for more than a decade. I want to stay at Alchemy for a very long time and help build the company. So, I guess when I think of map, maybe an important way to think about it is maybe when somebody is 50 or 60 or 70 and they might choose to stop working, a lot of people when they start their career actually have 30 years to play with or 40 years or 50 if they’re lucky. That’s a lot of chips you can play. You could do five, 10 year rounds, right? And so, I think that in terms of sticking it out, maybe I’m biased, I think that some of the absolute sort gems, if you will, in Silicon Valley and tech are the teammates that are willing to stay around for 4, 5, 6, 7 years, and they have institutional knowledge that nobody has. They have a positive impact on the culture that is impossible if there’s constant employee turnover.
So, to me, I think that you could simultaneously be somebody who’s committed to companies, stays for a very meaningful amount of time, but zooms out and looks at their career. Actually, I think maybe this was even more, right? You’re now a famous podcaster. You were a successful startup founder. You were a product leader. All these things form a map and I think a really interesting career and life, frankly, that’s pretty full with a lot of really interesting milestones and learnings and networks and people that you get to interact with.
Lenny: Yeah. To your point about how long a career is, when I thought about it recently, this is my fourth career. First it was an engineer, then it was a founder, then a product manager when I got to Airbnb, and now this weird thing that I do, and there’s so much time to explore and try new things. I will say though, I feel like the early things you do seem really important. Airbnb for me was not early, so maybe I’m wrong, but it feels like you want to work at a company where people look at that on your resume and are like, “Oh, okay, this person’s probably good.” So, I feel like there’s that piece you got to get right at some point.
Jason Shah: Yeah, I totally agree with that. For example, I think for let’s say a new grad who’s thinking about a product career, and let’s say on the spectrum there is maybe Goldman Sachs because that’s what a lot of people are doing. They’re like, “Yeah, I want to do product, but I also feel like I need this gold star or whatever.” And then in between is you could join a hypergrowth company of some sort where they definitely have good product people you can learn from, but definitely still room for you to do more than what a very junior person would be assigned to be doing. And then on the other end of the spectrum is I’m going to have no job, I’m just going to completely bounce around from my own projects or just work with a new startup every two months.
Personally in that spectrum, I tend to be more towards the middle of that where build a track record, build a network. I mean, it’s crazy. Even just this week, next week I’m seeing maybe five people that I know from my Yammer days, and to your point on formative nature, some of those people, that’s how I learned how to do product. That’s how I learned things like AB testing. It’s how I had the first angel investors in my next company. That’s how I hire. I still hire people, maybe much to their chagrin, they still get LinkedIn messages for me trying to push them for the next thing.
So, I totally agree that those early days are really formative, and there’s maybe a balance between nobody wants to be a job hopper, but at the same time maybe there’s ways to also not just be a career person who spends kind of 30 years working up the ladder or is fixated on I need to be CPO but is willing to give up a director title to go be a hustler at some startup because they really believe in it and they want to take a bet or risk in their career.
Lenny: You touched on hiring, and that’s something I wanted to ask you. So, you’re in my Talent Collective. You’re a company that’s hiring, Alchemy, and I was looking at the stats recently, and you’re one of the most successful companies at getting candidates to talk to you, and generally I think you’re just really good at hiring. So, I’m curious what you can share with folks about hiring.
Jason Shah: I appreciate that, and I get a lot of value out of meeting some really talented people from the Collective. I think hiring, it’s funny, it reminds me of sort of push back in a sense of what you call it has such an impact on how people think about it. It’s hiring, recruiting, but if people reframe it as the people you are going to work with every day or the people who make the company what it is, it shifts the mindset. It’s like how is that not the most important thing to be thinking about as a leader or as a founder. A lot of people have benchmarks. I think maybe on the Google podcast I talk about 30%, 40% of a founder’s time maybe spent on recruiting because I think deep down everybody understands that that’s incredibly valuable.
Jason Shah: I think that for me personally, I was reflecting ahead of the podcast on how I approach things now after different stages of hiring, and for context, for what it’s worth, I’ve been at the zero person startup. It’s just me and I’m trying to convince some Google engineer to come join us which is incredibly hard and has a low hit rate, to a place like Amazon or Airbnb where you have a large world-class recruiting organization that is effectively doing sourcing for you and setting up interviews and such things like this, and there’s formal calibrations and interview panels, to a place like Alchemy where it’s very sort of scrappy. We need to figure out who we even want to hire. The founders still meet with every candidate. It’s a really different environment.
So, this is kind of the spectrum that I’ve seen, and I was reflecting what do I think works the best, and I like to think of it in very similar motions to a business where I think there is a marketing aspect to it, there was a sales aspect, and there is a product aspect to it. What I mean by that is that on a marketing level, I think what has a person heard about your company. Do they know anybody who works there? Do they read your LinkedIn post about things and already know that you’re a known quantity before they even step in the door to interview? Are they even willing to interview based on what they know about the company? And so, I think that the marketing aspect in it, and I mean it’s sort of lower case marketing in this sense of course because I think a hard sell of any sort or anything that’s not authentic is probably going to fail ultimately, but it’s about developing a really positive kind of brand and reputation for a company but also as an individual.
And then if you pass that threshold, I feel like there’s a sort of a sales process, and we were talking about how bad of a salesperson I am, for example, because I didn’t listen to people’s pain points and understand the one or two things that were most important to them. I think similarly in this context, if they’re an engineer, do they want to work in a world-class engineering organization? If they’re a product person or they’re just really excited about crypto and they want to find a way in, a place like Alchemy’s the best place for them to learn that is how to think about it, and it’s not about misdirecting on or matching whatever they say, but it’s about really understanding who they are and what motivates them and what they’re excited about because I’m as concerned about the kind of post-hiring step as I am the pre-hiring and want them to work out and be happy and be effective.
And then lastly, I think there’s a product angle to it that not a lot of people think about or talk about a lot because I think the product, it’s one of those rare cases where job descriptions are almost like product specs, right? They’re here’s what the responsibilities are, here’s what we need you to do, here’s the qualifications we’re looking for. And what’s really funny about that is that product is very iterative, but somehow we just write a job description, and then it’s bait, it’s done, it’s posted, and nobody thinks about it again until the person’s hired and then they take it down.
I think taking a product mindset where I meet people all the time now where I don’t really know exactly what role they’re necessarily going to fill, I’m not really sure about exactly their seniority, maybe they don’t have a lot of experience, but maybe they would just totally be a rockstar on our product team. And looking at a product that we can mold flexibly and think of the same way if at Airbnb, if we were going to build Airbnb Plus, if we just kind of came back to the Amazon working backwards and just wrote a document and it was over, that’s one thing, but we didn’t do that, right? We went and actually built rooms and homes that were supposed to be Airbnb Plus, and then we iterate on it and we changed the pillows and we changed the entrance and we changed the scent that you feel when you walk in. We coach host and learned about that.
So, I think a product mindset on hiring and iterating on it based on the candidates you’re meeting, the needs of the business. So this kind of marketing, sales, product combination has been what I’ve found to be really effective at getting people excited, understanding who they are and what they need, and then crafting a role that actually makes the person successful, rather than just checks a box in your recruiting software as some new headcount that was hired.
Lenny: One last question before we get to our lightning round. For PMs that are listening to this maybe early in their career, what skill have you found to be most important in helping you and helping PMs in general advance in their career?
Jason Shah: Yeah, this is a really important question, like the others, but I think that understanding and defining what problem matters is the most important skill that I think I’ve taken away, and it applies to so many things. It can apply to a specific product we’re building. It can apply to what a company’s mission is. I think I’ve found it really effective because it affects pretty much everything. It affects what we’re going to build. It affects is the team motivated by what we’re doing. So, specifically for example, at a place like Alchemy where, yeah, we’re a developer platform, but should we build an SDK so there’s abstraction that is easier for developers to use? Should we build an NFT API because we think that’s a really important stack to move into and an important use case to support?
Well, the question is what problem are we solving? It’s not this versus that just in a vacuum. It’s is the problem developer experienced and we want to make things easier to develop. Is the problem that an NFT marketplace, a whole suite of them are trying to grow and need more support from us, and not understanding these problems clearly? And it goes back to my first company. It was an education company, and the problem was that low-income students didn’t have access to the same resources to get into college as other students, and that guided everything. That guided the pricing model which was basically free for a long time, and then we monetize on sponsorships from colleges, right? The problem matter, whereas the problem solve was there’s not a… A different problem was there’s just no good college readiness program. Fine, then you focus manically on the pedagogy and the curriculum and so on and so forth, rather than say the business model and an initial product that you think can work.
So, that’s what I’ve found to be the most useful, and I can give her other examples if it’s helpful, but understanding what problem we’re actually trying to solve and really getting crystal clear about it, I think has been incredibly useful to me and energizing as well.
Lenny: It’s such a good reminder, even though it’s such a cliche of product managers being, “Well, what problem are we trying to solve here?” People hate that, but Michael Paul, and I mentioned this on a different podcast too, he makes this point that when you do drugs sometimes, you have these epiphanies that you come out and you’re like, “Love is all you need, man.” It’s like, okay, yep. But it feels so right. You really feel it. The reason that it’s such a cliche is because people have found it to be so true for so long that it’s annoying now, but it also tells you how true it is. And so, I think it’s a really good reminder of yes, it’s annoying to ask that question, and people make fun of PMs for that, but that’s because it’s so damn important.
Jason Shah: Just a brief kind of additional, what you share there, I mean, I completely agree. I think it’s very true in life, right? It’s like, well, what matters? And it’s like, well, your health, your family, your sense of purpose. It’s like nobody’s unfamiliar with the answer, but like most things, it’s about the application of it and about the nuance of it, and I think that’s what product is ultimately sort of all about too.
Lenny: Awesome. Are you ready for our lightning round where I’m just going to ask you five quick questions, tell me what comes to mind and we’ll have some fun. Does that sound good?
Jason Shah: That sounds great. Ready.
Lenny: Okay, cool. I think I’m going to start adding music to these things. I got to figure that out. For now, no music. Okay. What book do you recommend most to other PMs?
Jason Shah: The Hard Thing About Hard things.
Lenny: Can you add why?
Jason Shah: I think it teaches product managers to chew glass and care about outcomes the way that a CEO has to, and I think that’s a really useful mindset to have.
Lenny: Man, this chew glass metaphor, I don’t like the sound of that.
Jason Shah: I saw you cringe. I was a little worried about that.
Lenny: Oh my god. What a great job we have here, chewing glass. Okay. Other than Alchemy, what’s a company you recommend most to PMs to go look for new gigs if they’re looking around?
Jason Shah: I would suggest Polygon, Salon, or MoonPay. I know it’s three, but I wanted to give some breath in the Web3 space that might be exciting to people.
Lenny: Great, great choices. What’s a favorite TV show or movie that you’ve recently watched?
Jason Shah: The Ken Burns Vietnam War series. I’m really into documentaries and history, and it’s a really kind of compelling version of history that I’ve never seen before.
Lenny: Awesome. Love that. Okay. Favorite interview question that you like to ask.
Jason Shah: What is a risk you regret not taking, why, and what did you learn about yourself?
Lenny: What do you look for in an answer there?
Jason Shah: I think the biggest thing I look for is a growth mindset, to be able to reflect on an experience like that and be vocally self-critical without unproductively being hard on one’s self, and I think that the dimension of asking about risk gets at their psychology and how do they think about not only their career, but if they were to work with me, how would they approach problem solving and taking bets on the business.
Lenny: Awesome. Okay, final question. What’s your least favorite vegetable?
Jason Shah: Broccoli. I just removed some from a pizza last night that I really didn’t want to eat.
Lenny: Wow. Oh wow, okay. Even like steamed, cook, all the things?
Jason Shah: There are no circumstances under which I’m excited about broccoli.
Lenny: Oh man, you got to eat those veggies.
Jason Shah: I know. I’m working on it.
Lenny: Okay, Jason, this was amazing. Lived up to what I was hoping our second episode would be. Definitely better than our first which we’ll leave on the cutting room floor. Two last questions. Where can people find you online? I assume Alchemy’s hiring, so maybe pointing people there. And then how can listeners be useful to you?
Jason Shah: Yeah, definitely. So, if you’re interested in Alchemy and Web3, go to alchemy.com and click through to our jobs page from there. I’m online @0xShah. That is my crypto pseudonymous handle and happy to engage with folks there. And in terms of being helpful to me, I would love any feedback on anything that came up. I would love any products that people are working on. I also invest, and we also partner with a lot of products and teams at Alchemy, and I would love to meet anybody that’s listening on the podcast too because I know Lenny’s all about community and has kind of given so much back over the years that I would love to meet folks that are out there and get a chance to spend time talking about the products that you’re all building.
Lenny: Awesome. Thanks, Jason.
Jason Shah: Thanks, Lenny.
Lenny: Thank you so much for listening. If you found this valuable, you can subscribe to the show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your favorite podcast app. Also, please consider giving us a rating or leaving a review as that really helps other listeners find the podcast. You can find all past episodes or learn more about the show at lennyspodcast.com. See you in the next episode.
Glossary
| English | 中文 |
|---|---|
| 11-star experience | 11-star 体验 |
| acqui-hire | 人才收购 |
| Airbnb Plus | 保留原文 |
| Alchemy | 保留原文 |
| Amazon | 保留原文 |
| Annie Duke | 保留原文 |
| Arielle Jackson | 保留原文 |
| AWS | 保留原文 |
| being vocally self-critical | 坦诚自我批评 |
| Bored Ape Yacht Club | 保留原文 |
| Brian | 保留原文 |
| Casey Winters | 保留原文 |
| CDP | CDP(Customer Data Platform,客户数据平台) |
| chew glass | 嚼玻璃(比喻承受痛苦的磨砺) |
| Coinbase | 保留原文 |
| concierge | 礼宾 |
| Creative Selection | 保留原文(书名) |
| CRO | CRO(Chief Revenue Officer,首席营收官) |
| crypto winter | 加密寒冬 |
| David Sacks | 保留原文 |
| disagree and commit | disagree and commit(虽然不同意但仍然承诺执行) |
| do.com | 保留原文 |
| Emily Kramer | 保留原文 |
| full bleed image | 全出血图片 |
| Gemini | 保留原文 |
| go to market | 市场进入策略 |
| Gokul | 保留原文 |
| growth mindset | 成长型思维 |
| growth operations | 增长运营 |
| hackathon | 黑客松 |
| Jackie Bavaro | 保留原文 |
| Jason Shah | 保留原文(非国际知名人物) |
| Jeff Bezos | 保留原文 |
| Jim | 保留原文 |
| Joe | 保留原文 |
| John Cutler | 保留原文 |
| Ken Burns | 保留原文 |
| Ken Kocienda | 保留原文 |
| ladder versus map | 梯子与地图 |
| Layer 1 | Layer 1(区块链一层/基础层) |
| Layer 2 | Layer 2(区块链二层扩展技术) |
| leadership principles | 领导力原则 |
| Lenny | 保留原文 |
| Luxury Retreats | 保留原文 |
| M&A | 并购(Mergers and Acquisitions) |
| magical experience | 令人惊叹的体验 |
| Marily Nika | 保留原文 |
| Maven | 保留原文 |
| metaverse | 元宇宙 |
| Michael Paul | 保留原文 |
| Microsoft | 保留原文 |
| MoonPay | 保留原文 |
| NFT.NYC | 保留原文 |
| Nikil | 保留原文 |
| Nir Eyal | 保留原文 |
| one-pager | 保留原文 |
| OpenSea | 保留原文 |
| ownership | 主人翁精神 |
| Polygon | 保留原文 |
| product market fit | 产品市场契合 |
| product review | 产品评审 |
| Project Purple | 保留原文 |
| pseudonymous | 化名/匿名的 |
| pushback | 反驳 |
| question mark emails | 问号邮件 |
| Ron Conway | 保留原文(知名天使投资人,但非国际公认中文译名广泛使用,建议保留原文) |
| Salon | 保留原文 |
| Sanchan | 保留原文 |
| SDK | 保留原文(Software Development Kit,软件开发工具包) |
| Second Life | 保留原文 |
| Shishir | 保留原文 |
| Shreyas | 保留原文 |
| Steve Jobs | 保留原文 |
| The Hard Thing About Hard Things | 《创业维艰》(Ben Horowitz 著) |
| trip designers | 行程设计师 |
| Uniswap | 保留原文 |
| Whole Foods | 保留原文 |
| working backwards | 逆向工作法 |
| Yammer | 保留原文 |
Reformatted by reformat_english.py
建设有意义的职业生涯 | Jason Shah(Airbnb、Amazon、Microsoft、Alchemy)
文字稿
Jason Shah (00:00:00): “Pushback”(反驳)这个词,我想不出还有哪个词能让人如此本能地感到自己似乎在身体上与别人的意愿对抗。它会让人进入一种”那我该怎么反驳”的思维模式。它的起点就是”我需要反对,我需要说不”。这是一种非常消极的心态,纯粹是因为这个用来描述某种行为的词本身带来的。而同样的行为,换一个角度,可以是”我如何改变某件事的方向”,或者”当我在某件事上与他人意见不同时,我如何帮助业务真正取得成功”,这就完全是另一种心态了。所以,我见过最成功的两种做法,我认为第一点是真正理解目标是什么,或者某个人对某件事的核心关切是什么,然后以某种方式将这些对齐。
Lenny (00:00:53): 欢迎收听 Lenny’s Podcast。我是 Lenny,我的目标是帮助你更好地掌握构建和增长产品的手艺。我采访世界级的产品领导者和增长专家,从他们在构建和扩展当今最成功公司过程中积累的宝贵经验中学习。今天的嘉宾是 Jason Shah。我很幸运在 Airbnb 期间与 Jason 共事过。当我开始做这档播客时,我就知道一定要邀请 Jason 来。他实际上是我这档播客预录阶段的第一位嘉宾,但正如你将在我们对话中听到的,我们决定重新录一次,原因你很快就会明白。
本期内容概要
Lenny (00:01:28): 在这一期中,我们聊了作为 Web3 PM 是什么样的体验,以及随着加密寒冬回归,这一切发生了怎样的变化;如何带领团队度过起起落落——这是 Web3 领域的领导者们再熟悉不过的课题,包括在周围一切都在剧变的情况下,如何保持士气和让团队保持专注。我们还深入探讨了大量关于领导力、招聘、向 CEO 表达反对意见、working backwards(逆向工作法)、职业晋升等精彩建议,以及更多干货。Jason 是一块宝石,我真的非常兴奋能与你分享这一期。话不多说,有请 Jason Shah。
Coda 赞助
Lenny (00:02:05): 本期节目由 Coda 赞助。Coda 是一款多合一文档,将最好的文档、电子表格和应用程序整合在一个地方。我实际上每天都在使用 Coda。它是我组织 Newsletter 写作的大本营。我在这里规划内容日历、收集研究资料、撰写每一篇文章的初稿。它也是我管理付费 Newsletter 订阅者私人知识库的地方,同时也用来管理这档播客的工作流程。多年来,我看到 Coda 从一个让团队更高效的工具,发展成为一个能够将科技行业最佳实践落到实处的平台——Coda Doc Gallery 中拥有极其丰富的模板和指南合集,包括本播客许多嘉宾的资源,包括 Shreyas、Gokul 以及 Coda 的 CEO Shishir。一些最顶尖的团队,如 Pinterest、Spotify、Square 和 Uber,都在使用 Coda 高效运转,并公开了他们的模板供所有人使用。
Lenny (00:03:03): 如果你还在大量文档和电子表格之间来回切换,那就让生活更好一点,开始使用 Coda 吧。初创公司可以享受限时特惠。前往 coda.io/lenny 注册,即可在第一份账单上获得 1000 美元额度。也就是 C-O-D-A.io/lenny,注册后你的账户将获得 1000 美元额度。
Amplitude 赞助
我非常高兴能与播客赞助商 Amplitude 的我的朋友 John Cutler 聊一聊。嗨,John。
John Cutler (00:03:36): 嗨,Lenny。很高兴来到这里。
Lenny (00:03:37): John,给我们讲讲 Amplitude 的幕后故事吧。大多数人想到 Amplitude 时,想到的是产品分析,但现在你们也进入了实验领域,甚至刚推出了 CDP。这背后的思考过程是什么?
John Cutler (00:03:49): 嗯,我们一直将 Amplitude 视为支撑完整产品循环的工具。想一想:收集数据、指导决策、上线实验并从中学习。这就是我们对增长的核心理解。所以,最大的启发是看到有多少客户在用 Amplitude 分析实验、用细分群体做触达,以及将数据发送到其他目的地。Experiment 和 CDP 正是源于对我们客户的倾听和观察。
Lenny (00:04:09): 而支撑增长与学习一直是 Amplitude 的核心关注点,对吧?
John Cutler (00:04:14): 是的。所以 Amplitude 努力在客户所在的地方与他们对接。我们刚推出了 starter templates,还有一个面向初创公司的优质奖学金项目。当下是增长最重要的时刻。
Lenny (00:04:22): 完全同意。谢谢你来参加,John,前往 amplitude.com 开始使用吧。
Jason Shah 访谈
Jason,欢迎来到播客。
Jason Shah (00:04:34): 非常感谢,Lenny。很高兴今天能和你聊天。
Lenny (00:04:36): 听众不知道但我们知道的一件事是,你我之间其实在四月份就录过一期。那实际上是我做这档播客以来的第一期节目,当时还没有正式上线,算是上线前的预录。有意思的是,等播客正式上线准备播出的时候——让我再补充一个细节,我们当时主要聊的是 Web3。所以我们大部分对话都是关于 Web3 的状况以及 Web3 中的 PM 工作,而等到节目准备播出的时候,Web3,Web3 世界已经发生了变化,所以内容感觉有点过时、脱节了,于是我们决定重新来一次。所以,你对此感觉如何?
Jason Shah (00:05:15): 我很感激,Lenny。很荣幸你能让我回来。我要把这算作个人纪录——两次登上 Lenny’s Podcast,哪怕全世界只知道是一次。
Lenny (00:05:26): 哇,说得好。好的,第一位嘉宾,也是第一位两次返场的嘉宾。太厉害了。好,为了让听众对你的背景和职业经历有个了解,你能不能给我们一个 60 秒的概览,讲讲你的背景、职业历程,以及你是如何走到今天这一步的?
Jason Shah (00:05:45): 当然,没问题。再次感谢你的邀请,Lenny。我的职业生涯一直围绕着以独特的方式解决重要问题。我想后者是因为我作为家里最小的孩子,总觉得自己要特别,要跟别人做得不一样;而前者则是确保我的时间花得有价值,毕竟我们每个人的时间都是有限的。所以,严格来说,我 15 岁就开始涉足科技领域了。我创办了自己的第一家公司,和很多青少年一样,是做考试备考、帮人准备上大学的。那是我第一次接触到用技术规模化地帮助他人,从那以后我就一发不可收拾了。
Jason Shah (00:06:20): 于是,我经营那家公司七年,一直贯穿上学期间。幸运地通过一次小型收购,卖给了我们一直合作的伙伴。然后我就彻底上瘾了,我搬到了旧金山,没有工作。当时我非常狂妄,我说”我永远不会为任何人工作”,结果 Yammer 出现了,我非常兴奋,我之前实际上一直在做一个同领域的产品。所以那实际上是我第一个正式的产品管理岗位。我留在了 Yammer,经历了 2012 年被 Microsoft 收购,一路留了下来。结果你猜怎么着,我身处世界上最大的生产力公司 Microsoft,而我感觉那里大多数人其实极其低效,我自己也没产出多少东西。于是我又开始心痒了,又创办了一家公司叫 do.com,经营了大约四年。最终,我们找到了一个更好的归宿——Amazon。他们当时正在扩展 AWS 的 SaaS 产品线。所以我们与他们合作,做了一次小型的 acqui-hire(人才收购),帮助他们在那里搭建团队和产品,待了一年多。
Jason Shah (00:07:18): 然后,说实话,我又开始感到无聊了,同时被 Airbnb 正在做的事情以及他们关于”归属感”的使命所吸引。这就是为什么我很幸运地遇到了你,以及许多其他真正出色的产品领导者——说到底,他们本质上都是非常优秀的人。为了先简短带过,我在那里参与了很多非常令人兴奋的产品和业务,但最终,在作为远观的旁观者和投资者之后,我对 Web3 也开始心痒了,我想成为 Web3 中的建设者。对我来说,Web3 是一个更好的互联网版本的新愿景,对此我非常兴奋。所以,过去一年我一直在 Alchemy,这是一家区块链基础设施公司,对所有机会都感到非常兴奋。我有幸参与开发的产品已经成为大多数人日常生活的一部分,我也希望我们能通过 Web3 和 Alchemy 做到同样的事情。
Lenny (00:08:05): 太棒了。你在聊天的时候我刚意识到,do.com,我很确定我当年用过。我想我刚刚才意识到这一点。
Jason Shah (00:08:12): 希望如此。这将会是一个新的——我要把这个加到我的第二个播客成就里:如果能让 Lenny 用过我做的产品,尤其是一家创业公司的产品。
Lenny (00:08:20): 哇,真酷。好的,那我们稍微倒回你的职业生涯,从 Web3 开始聊起。我们不会把大部分时间花在 Web3 上,但觉得聊一聊这些话题还是挺好的,部分原因是你客座撰写了有史以来在线newsletter中第六受欢迎的文章,目前排第六,内容是关于如何在 Web3 中做 PM。基本上标题叫《The Product Manager’s Guide to Web3》。所以我想就这个聊几个问题。首先就是,你怎么描述 Web3 目前的状态?我们是在七月底录制这期节目的,所以等播出的时候再看吧。但我很好奇,作为一个身处其中的人,经历了繁荣和萧条——不是萧条,是我们现在多少正在经历的寒冬——你目前怎么看?
Jason Shah (00:09:01): 当然。虽然我是一个技术乐观主义者,但我也是一个现实主义者。话虽如此,我真心认为 Web3 目前处于有史以来最强劲的位置。我觉得需要记住的是,Web3 这个词进入大众流行语汇才勉强一年。作为技术,加密货币(crypto)当然已经存在十多年了,某种程度上也可以说是一种金融工具,但具体来说,我看到的正在成立的公司数量、开始真正实现某种早期产品市场契合(product market fit)的产品数量、一些开始规模化增长的产品——当然,价格确实出现了大幅下跌,也确实有一些重大的金融丑闻以及由此引发的连锁反应。
Jason Shah (00:09:46): 但根据我的经验,很多新技术都不是直线上升的,而 Web3 在这一点上尤其具有挑战性,因为很多东西从一开始就被金融化了。一般来说,你会看到创业公司或新技术经历多年才成熟,无论是互联网本身、人工智能、二维码,还是各种经历了不同采纳周期的事物。所以我觉得我们正在看到——以太坊交易量创纪录、新的 Layer 2 技术不断推出帮助扩展 Layer 1 区块链、Solana 发布了他们的手机,这将是第一款 Web3 原生手机。所以有这么多令人兴奋的新产品进展和新用户涌入这个领域,尽管价格下降了,我对 Web3 的状态还是非常乐观的。
PM 在寒冬中保持团队士气
Lenny (00:10:32): 我在想的一点是,作为一个在这个领域工作的 PM,经历这种对 Web3 兴奋感的转变——我想这会考验 PM 的一些核心技能,比如让大家保持专注、有效地排列优先级、维持士气。如果人们都在说”天啊,我的加密货币都在跌”——我很好奇你是如何运用这些技能的,以及你从这段经历中学到了什么,比如让人保持专注、维持士气、有效排列优先级之类的。
Jason Shah (00:11:00): 好问题,这确实非常重要。因为在这个领域我们看到了这些周期,我认为士气和持续构建的能力是决定长期成功的关键。如果每个人都拿着球回家,那个不确定的未来就不一定会实现。所以在我看来,我认为维持士气唯一的方式就是取得进展。我觉得没有什么演讲,也没有什么外在激励——比如”我们给大家发点免费加密货币来保持动力”之类的——真正管用。我认为人们看到进展时才会真正兴奋起来。
Jason Shah (00:11:37): 举个例子,在 Alchemy,我们平台上的开发者比以往任何时候都多,而且我们一直在交付——我们刚刚上线了 Solana 支持,人们会说”这是真的”。我们确实在做事、在构建东西。我们刚让团队去了 EthCC,这是在巴黎举办的一个以太坊社区的大型会议,到场的人数之多简直疯狂,各种产品在构建。几乎每个加密货币会议都有黑客松(hackathon),这让构建的精神始终保持着旺盛的活力。
Jason Shah (00:12:03): 所以在 Alchemy,以及我过去作为领导者所处的其他情境中,我认为一切的核心是专注于进展和前进。我们在 Airbnb 也经历过类似的情况,当时业务收入大幅下滑,我知道你最近和 Sanchan 聊过这个话题,对吧?收入下降了 85%、90%,而且你不知道什么时候会好转。这不像”哦,六个月就会恢复的,我们继续往前冲就行”那种情况。但我认为有效的做法是取得进展,真正专注于产品和你的客户。最终,如果你招聘了正确的人、他们出于正确的原因而被激励,我认为这个组合能让人们保持高度的动力和高效,为最终好转时做好准备。
Web3 中 PM 角色的演变
Lenny (00:12:44): 你写的关于在 Web3 中做 PM 的那篇文章中,最有意思、可能也最令人意外的一个观点是:对 PM 的需求其实少得多,尤其是在早期阶段的 Web3 中。但感觉你刚才说的那些东西恰恰说明 PM 在这方面是很有帮助的。所以我很好奇,这方面有没有什么变化?你对 Web3 中的 PM 的看法有没有改变?然后你怎么看产品管理在 Web3 中的发展方向?
Jason Shah (00:13:09): 我确实看到很多事情在发生变化。在 Web3 中,如果说能学到一件事,那就是要有能力承认自己错了或者情况变了。所以我看到的恰恰就是这样。具体来说,我注意到很多团队在招聘产品负责人、更多的产品经理。这些产品经理现在实际上越来越多地以一种比较传统的产品管理方式在工作,同时也保留了我们在文章中讨论的一些不同之处,比如社区管理和在营销中的角色等等。具体来说,Uniswap 刚从 Meta 挖了一个重要的人。我看到 Gemini 也做了同样的事。我们也看到 OpenSea 在这方面招聘了大量人才,即使他们的业务经历了起起落落。而且是在各个层级——无论是产品经理、高级产品经理、总监、VP 还是 CPO,你都能看到全面的需求。
Jason Shah (00:14:03): 所以我认为这部分原因是你在看到产品的成熟化,对吧?也许早期你可以靠几个工程师和一个社区管理者就能让事情运转起来,但最终产品更加成熟、复杂度不断增长,产品经理的角色就变得有用得多,他们能发挥区分度。我也认为市场竞争越来越激烈。所以,有很多 NFT 市场,有很多 Layer 1 和 Layer 2 区块链。因此我认为产品始终是一种竞争优势,对吧?如果做得好,它能提升战略、提升执行力,也能提升团队协作。也许之前这种差异化没那么关键,因为那时候这些团队不需要那么强的竞争优势——可能他们发了一个 token,token 一路暴涨,于是就有一大堆人开始使用这个产品,但这只能持续一段时间,第一性原理最终还是会回到视野中,不管是一天后还是一个月后。
PM 价值的持续增长
Jason Shah (00:15:00): 所以我确实看到了这种转变。在我观察到的案例中,这确实带来了巨大的积极变化,而我的直觉是这种趋势只会持续,因为随着用户采纳的增加会带来新的挑战,对于所有那些正在成长并获得某种程度采纳的参与者来说,产品复杂度只会不断增加,而有一个能帮助带领团队、帮助在所有可以构建的产品和可以追求的战略之间做优先级排序的人,其重要性只会越来越大。
Lenny (00:15:27): 我知道我们像是做 PM 的人在谈论 PM 的价值,但我发现一个现象:那些反对设 PM 或者不觉得自己需要 PM 的人,在我看来通常只是没跟过一位优秀的产品经理。因为根据我的经验,一旦你遇到一位优秀的 PM,他们就是能让一切变得更好。所以听到你说的这些并不令人意外——人们正在逐渐发现引入产品经理的价值,即使工作主要是工程层面的。这让人很受鼓舞。我也在想,这是否就是一个新领域的自然演进——人们先是觉得”这个领域不需要 PM”,然后发现”好吧,我明白了,这些事情都没人做。我们需要有人来帮忙。谁来做呢?也许是个 PM。”
Jason Shah (00:16:06): 是的,这个观察很好。我认为一方面是对某种角色的直接需求出现了,另一方面是如果一个人要么有过糟糕的经历,要么根本没接触过能担当这个角色的人——这在 Web3 中非常普遍,尤其因为很多人职业起步不久,考虑到这个领域的门槛较低,而且坦率地说,年轻的人对空间本身有一种更敏锐的直觉理解,因为他们不那么固守成规。所以这一点说得很好,也正因如此,Web3 中出现越好的 PM,希望其价值随着时间推移会自我证明。
Lenny (00:16:41): 也希望他们做得好,这样人们就不会一直被糟糕的 PM 折磨得精疲力竭。
Jason Shah (00:16:45): 我们为所有 PM 加油,当然也包括 Web3 的 PM。
Web3 中最令人惊讶的事
Lenny (00:16:49): 是的。作为 PM 在 Web3 工作,最让你惊讶的是什么?
Jason Shah (00:16:53): 我想,尽管我们刚才说了那么多,但最让我惊讶的是,一些产品在没有传统产品经理角色、也没有过去 20 年互联网中我们习以为常的那些方法论的情况下,竟然能发展到如此大的规模。比如,Uniswap 在某些天的日交易量超过了 Coinbase,而 Uniswap 大约只有一百人,Coinbase 却有五千多人,对吧?这对我来说非常令人震惊。
Jason Shah (00:17:21): 我还想到很多 NFT 系列和社区的发展。我最近在 NFT.NYC 上和很多这样的团队交流过,其中很多——撇开价格投机这类事情不谈——实际上已经在构建东西了。Bored Ape Yacht Club 确实在做一个 metaverse(元宇宙)项目,看起来比我过去用过的 Second Life 之类的数字游戏还要好。当然,已经过去了很长时间,所以有更深厚的技术基础可以依托,而且他们也在和一个合作伙伴一起开发那个产品,但在没有传统产品架构或专门人员的情况下,取得了大量进展。所以再说一次,我认为 PM 确实扮演着非常重要的角色,但在没有那些在过去 10 年或 20 年互联网行业工作的人所习惯的产品方法论和资源的情况下,产品居然能走到这么远,这确实极其令人惊讶。
职业经历对产品理念的影响
Lenny (00:18:11): 太好了。好的,我们要从 Web3 话题转一转,聊聊你其他一些职业成就和你工作过的公司。你之前提到了 Yammer、Microsoft、Amazon、Airbnb。我很好奇这些公司中哪一家对你做产品、打造产品和带团队的方式影响最大,因为它们的运作方式截然不同,我一直很好奇哪家公司是你的成型经历——就是那种让你觉得”这就是我最喜欢打造产品的方式”的公司。我知道总是多种经历的综合,但你怎么看这个问题?
Jason Shah (00:18:39): 是的,确实是综合性的,但如果非要选一个的话,Amazon,尽管我在那里只待了大约一年,是在收购之后。我这么说是因为那里有一种产品和商业思维的融合,这种融合在那里尤为突出。人们说 Google 是工程文化,人们说 Facebook 是产品文化,Airbnb 或 Pinterest 有时被称为设计文化之类的,而我认为 Amazon 是一个你不能把商业和产品割裂开来的地方。你不可能做一个产品经理却不思考收入增长,不思考 go to market(市场进入策略),我非常喜欢这一点,因为作为一个创业创始人,在大公司做产品,这让我有机会锻炼很多这方面的能力。
Jason Shah (00:19:24): 实际上这和我在 Alchemy 现在的感受非常相似——我记得第一个月的时候有人问我感觉怎么样,我说,“我觉得自己像个运动员,我又活过来了。“我可以一天做 M&A(并购),下一刻做产品,再下一刻去想”哦,我们需要招第一个律师来给员工写入职计划”。不像有时候产品角色那样被局限在一个狭窄的领域里。所以我觉得我去 Amazon 是去学习和理解的。我最大的目标就是——这是一家了不起的公司,它涉足了……Whole Foods 的收购就发生在我任职期间,我很想知道同一家公司如何在零售领域取胜的同时,又做出了 AWS,又去做了影视工作室。我认为 Amazon 的文化——尤其是关于 ownership(主人翁精神)和 being vocally self-critical(坦诚自我批评)这样的 leadership principles(领导力原则)——最终比其他任何东西都重要。所有这些结合在一起,创造了一种非常独特的文化。
Jason Shah (00:20:12): 所以我会说 Amazon 对我的影响最大,当然我也从你提到的所有这些地方汲取了一些经验教训,但 Amazon 绝对是给我对产品和领导力的看法留下最大印记的地方。
Lenny (00:20:26): 你在那里只待了一年,却是对你影响和塑造最大的经历,这还挺令人惊叹的。你觉得人们应该尝试去 Amazon 工作作为 PM 的训练场吗?你会鼓励 PM 去尝试吗?
Jason Shah (00:20:37): 总的来说,我确实有一段很好的体验,但我认为正如你所知,我也确信你给过无数人建议,这很大程度上取决于具体情境。你是在学习从零到一吗?还是在学习从一到规模化?你的志向是什么?是有人最终想要创业,还是想在产品领导的晋升路线上往上走?所以,我确实非常享受那段经历,而且我觉得你说得对,我们传统上认为关联的因素之间,往往存在非线性的对应关系,对吧?所以,我在那里的时间是最短的之一,但我的收获却是最大的之一,因为我是真正带着目的去的,也可能是因为那个时间节点以及我想要从中获得什么。
公司规模与文化体感的错位
Jason Shah (00:21:17): 同样值得一提的是,当我们谈论这种脱节的时候,我去 Yammer 的时候,也面试过一些……那还是 TaskRabbit 的时代。我跟 Square 也聊过,我记得人们总说,“你想在什么阶段加入——种子轮、A 轮、B 轮?“而有趣的是,Yammer 当时已经超过一百人了,到被收购时增长到了五百人,但它的文化是如此紧密,以至于在某些时候感觉就像一家种子阶段的公司,尽管后来它变得有点……好吧,一旦被 Microsoft 收购,我们就只能说它不再像一家种子阶段的公司了,但它比我待过的很多实际上更小的公司感觉还要小。所以,我觉得这是我注意到的一个现象——很多代理指标在某些情况下并不一定匹配内部的真实状况。
逆向工作法与 PRFAQ
Lenny (00:22:01): 你提到从这些公司中学到了一些具体的方法和经验教训。有没有一个具体的流程或方法,是你从 Amazon 或其他公司带走并一直铭记于心、喜欢跟人分享的?
Jason Shah (00:22:14): 当然有。我觉得 Amazon 很有名的一个就是 working backwards(逆向工作法)。对于那些不了解的人来说,核心思想是尝试定义一个理想的终态——有趣的是,这和我们俩在 Airbnb 经历并带走的一些经验非常相似。通常的实现机制就是所谓的 PRFAQ,即新闻稿和常见问题解答,它迫使你必须达到一定程度的清晰度——必须为你最终要发布的产品写一篇新闻稿。
Jason Shah (00:22:44): 每个员工入职 Amazon 后实际上都要上一门商务写作课。他们会给你一张小卡片,上面有五条关于用词简洁和具体的建议,让你放在桌上。例如,在 Amazon 的新闻稿中你永远不应该写”great”这个词。你应该写”在 X、Y、Z 方面对用户友好,每天将为顾客节省 20 分钟时间”。它的目的是让内容非常具体,避免那种浮夸空洞——说起来也好笑,当人们试图从幻灯片转向文档时,他们其实只是把做幻灯片时的思维模式照搬过来,只不过现在用了更多字而已。
Jason Shah (00:23:22): 所以我认为 working backwards(逆向工作法)通过新闻稿和 FAQ 这样的机制来确立长期目标,其中每个字都有分量。值得一提的还有,FAQ 分为两部分——外部 FAQ,比如作为附录包含的内容;以及内部 FAQ,旨在降低上线风险,或者提出房间里的大象,或者 Amazon 经常喜欢说的”没有叫的狗”。所以这是一个非常有帮助的流程,也非常符合我自己喜欢的生活方式,而且非常实用。
Amazon 的写作准则
Lenny (00:23:55): 关于不使用”great”这个细节太有意思了。关于如何有效写作、沟通和发布,还有什么其他你可以分享的吗?有没有类似的小窍门?
Jason Shah (00:24:07): 好问题。除了不使用”great”以及类似含义主观或模糊的词之外,一定要多用数字少用形容词。严格精简——我会反复修改这些文档无数遍。有一句话,我不记得是 Mark Twain 还是另一位著名作家说的——“杀死你的挚爱”,对吧?删、删、删,不断裁减。所以我觉得这对我至今写邮件或写文档都非常有用——反复审阅,不是因为省几个字能省墨水,而是因为它迫使思维变得清晰。字数越少,每个字的分量就是十磅而不是一磅,这意味着你做出的决策、取舍都更加深思熟虑。以”great”为例,如果你说”某个东西很棒,因为我们会在两小时内送达”和”Amazon 很棒,因为选择非常丰富”,两者对战略的指向完全不同。所以,这就是语言非常具体和明确的好处之一。
逆向工作法的模板
Lenny (00:25:12): 我本来没打算在这个话题上聊这么深,但之前还没有人在这个播客上讲过 working backwards(逆向工作法),所以多聊一点还挺有意思的。它具体是怎么运作的?你是坐下来,把要发布的东西写成一篇新闻稿?有没有什么模板?对于想尝试的人,你有什么可以分享的吗?或者能给他们指个方向?
Jason Shah (00:25:36): 当然有。这确实是个好问题。确实有模板。它结合了内部培训——你必须写一份这样的文档。你会审阅好的、差的、中等的版本。它通常用于——比如有人提议一个新产品,甚至提议收购一家公司——这有助于真正模拟那将会是什么样。
Jason Shah (00:25:56): 关于模板,我记得通常是一段开头,直接切入要点。你说明要发布什么。然后用一段话描述问题,语言要非常清晰。同样,所有写作都是这种风格。接着是解决方案,简要描述产品。之后总是一段客户引言。这就是 Amazon 闻名的 customer obsession(客户至上)的一个例证——很多公司喜欢这样说或者效仿,但我觉得如果你审视它们实际使用的机制,比如产品规格文档里既没有客户数据也没有客户引述之类的东西,那可能并不是真正的 customer obsession(客户至上)。所以,有一段客户引言,你必须真正把自己放在……比如假设你要发布 Prime。把自己放在旧金山 Lenny 的角度。当他可以使用这个产品时,他到底会说什么?这和他现在的生活有什么不同?他会用什么词?
Lenny (00:26:52): 你不能用”great”。
Jason Shah (00:26:53): 我的意思是,如果”great”是你最喜欢的词之一,也许你可以勉强用一下,但我认为如果你和 Amazon 的同行们坐在一个房间里,他们可能会用红笔把你用到的”great”全部划掉。所以我觉得这非常有帮助,它也有助于打破产品经理、产品领导者容易陷入的一个框框——总把自己当成客户,有点思想上的偷懒,想着”对,我会喜欢 Prime 的,所以让我来写我会喜欢什么”,但也许我只是我们整个可触达市场中很小的一个细分群体。
Jason Shah (00:27:26): 总之,有一段客户引言,然后还有一段领导层引言,同样是表达这个产品达成了某个互补性的目标——比如它如何融入我们的战略,以你可以对外公开的方式来表述,但同时又忠于内部的真实考量和机制。最后是行动号召,而且不只是”在此下载”,而是”此产品将于下月向客户开放。他们可以在这些 Whole Foods 门店的这些端口访问。“这再次迫使你在思维上保持清晰——不仅针对上线计划,更是退一步来看:当你读完这份文档时,你是否真的想要这个产品?你会去用吗?所以我发现这个结构非常有帮助。
Lenny (00:28:05): 你能再快速概括一下吗?
Jason Shah (00:28:07): 当然。PRFAQ 文档的结构一般是:一段导言,宣布你要发布的产品,问题、解决方案、客户引言、领导层引言,以及行动号召。
Lenny (00:28:17): 这和 one-pager 真的很相似,很有意思。你在说的过程中我还有一个想法——Airbnb 的方法是从理想状态往回推,Brian 谈过这个,就是 11-star 体验;而 Amazon 的方法则不一定是理想状态,只需要是一次出色的发布。这是一个很有意思的差异,两种方式各有所长。
Jason Shah (00:28:37): 我觉得人们看到这两家公司都有某种逆向工作法的思维时,往往会把二者混为一谈——一方面是逆向工作法,另一方面是 11-star 体验。听你这么描述,我几乎想这样来区分:Amazon 是从一个时间节点或一次发布往回推,而 Airbnb 是从一个质量标准——某种意义上的 11-star 体验——往回推。
有效领导力的观察
Lenny (00:28:59): 换个稍微不同的方向,我想聊的一件事是你曾在这么多不同的公司工作过,它们有不同的领导风格和领导方式。所以我很好奇,在观察了这么多优秀的操盘手之后,你对有效领导力有什么心得?在你的经验中,是什么把他们和那些可能没那么有效的领导者区分开来的?
Jason Shah (00:29:18): 这是个好问题。简要回顾一下,我有机会近距离看到像 David Sacks 这样的人——他曾是 PayPal 的 CEO,后来又是 Yammer 的创始人,之后还做了很多事情。我也在远处观察过 Jeff Bezos,我显然和他不算亲近,也没机会和他共事,但能感受到他对组织的影响。当然,我也亲眼见证了 Brian Chesky 的领导力,从 IPO 之前的日子,到 COVID 起起伏伏的时期。还有现在在 Alchemy,我们的联合创始人 Joe 和 Nikil 也是对我影响很深的领导者。当然我自己也算一个,但我也在起初经历过糟糕的领导方式,并从中学习。
Jason Shah (00:29:57): 我觉得这件事非常值得反思。对我个人来说,有三点印象最深。
第一,没有什么事是他们不愿意亲自做的。无论是 Brian 关心首页全出血图片的细节,还是 Jeff Bezos 著名的做法——他会收到客户邮件,阅读其中很多封,然后转发出去。他最出名的是”问号邮件”——为了节省自己的时间,他只把一封邮件转发给某位领导者,加上一个问号,你就得自己去搞清楚怎么回事,然后在 24 小时内汇报处理结果。但核心是,没有什么事是他们觉得”低于自己身份”的。而很多创始人、很多 CEO,甚至 CPO 和其他领导者,觉得到了某个层级之后,就不需要看产品规格文档了,不需要自己去跑 SQL 查数据了。我认为这在很多方面都是一个错误——无论从人们最终尊敬谁的角度,还是从个人工作效能的角度来看都是如此。
Jason Shah (00:30:51): 另外两点,第二是他们沉浸于细节。这和”没有什么事低于自己”有点不同,更像是 Amazon 出了名的对细节进行审计。比如当我们准备发布 Prime 的时候,他们会下单买一堆 Prime 的东西,看看会发生什么,真正去测试,然后在周六写一封长长的反馈邮件,确保事情在推进。
Jason Shah (00:31:12): 所以我认为,在我看来看,最优秀的领导者都如此。David Sacks 也是这样做的。他亲自主持产品评审。是公司的 CEO 在做产品评审,而不是某个中间层的产品总监。他们深度参与,当然也有可以委派和推动的事情,但 Sacks 介入所有细节,亲自主持产品评审,直接和产品经理对话。我觉得这非常有影响力。而且从问责和文化的角度来看,当你作为一个 PM 和 CEO 对话、在产品评审上做汇报时,那种感觉是完全不同的。它带来了一定程度的责任感和质量标准,我认为这非常重要。同时,对那些领导者来说,这也是一种辅导方式,能真正在组织上留下自己的印记。
Jason Shah (00:31:59): 最后一点,他们会适应变化。我见过很多领导者说,“我花了 20 年才以这种方式成为一个领导者,我有一套方法论”,要么基于过去的经验,要么基于他们长期形成的某种理念,觉得自己在某种程度上要忠于那套东西。但回想这些例子——看 Brian 如何带领团队走过 COVID,或者看 Joe 和 Nikil 在这个加密寒冬中如何调整方向,弄清楚我们在继续建设核心业务的同时,还可以怎样借势适应面前独特的机遇——我觉得这非常有力。所以,我的观察是:没有什么事在他们之上,他们沉浸于细节,他们根据新信息和新情况做出调整。这就是我从那些最优秀的领导者身上——无论是观察还是近距离合作——所感受到的。
Lenny (00:32:46): 太棒了,非常有意思。前两点其实是相互关联的,这很有意思,也让我想到 Brian 对每件事都极其注重细节。他以前会审查每一次产品发布的每一个屏幕、每一个新产品。我们必须给他展示”这是我们这周要发布的”,然后他就一屏一屏地过,要么否掉,要么放行。我还记得创始人们在设计办公空间的时候,就看 Airbnb 上的房源照片……因为 Airbnb 的办公室会议室是照着 Airbnb 上的房源来设计的,Jim 就是翻看团队拿来的几百个房源,然后挑出他想变成会议室的那些。当然还有 Steve Jobs。这是优秀领导者身上一条非常有趣的共同线——就是这种对细节的极度关注。而且可能有一种规律:一旦他们放手,事情就开始走下坡路。你也是这样认为的吗?
Jason Shah (00:33:39): 是的,这点说得太好了。你提到了 Jobs 的例子,有一本很棒的书你大概读过,或者在你的社区里见过,我相信书名叫 Ken Kocienda 写的《Creative Selection》,讲的是 iPhone 早期开发的故事,项目代号好像是 Project Purple 之类的。你说得完全正确。没有幻灯片,完全没有这些东西。他们把原型机带到每次评审会上,像小屏幕上怎么打字啊、那些早期的键盘设计啊、怎么做自动补全啊——从 Ken 在书中的讲述来看,Jobs 完全沉浸在那些细节中。
Jason Shah (00:34:10): 所以我完全同意你的看法,这也是人们容易忽视的一点,因为大多数人对领导者的了解来自 YouTube 视频或全员大会,所以他们其实并没有真正看到领导者的那一面。而且我觉得,从自尊心的角度来说,人们也不希望领导力是关于这些的。他们希望领导力是关于做重大决策、指挥一大群人,但我觉得没有这些基础要素,是很难做到那一步的。
Jason Shah (00:34:34): 还有一点我想简要补充,呼应你说的它们之间的关联——这个观点非常好,表面上看它们几乎像是同一件事。但有一点值得单独指出,就是”没有什么事在某人之上”或者说”一个人不凌驾于事情之上”这个观念。我从中最大的收获是谦逊——没有什么事”不是我的工作”,对吧?任何事情都一样,可以是把地上的纸捡起来扔进垃圾桶,也可以是评审一份产品规格文档,不管是什么。然后,沉浸于细节在我看来是关于技艺(craft),对吧?是真正从底层理解事物,这样你才能进行推理、做出好的决策,就像 Brian 对待首页那样,或者 Bezos 在某些情况下深入到客户流程的细节中去。我认为这两者结合在一起——谦逊加上对技艺的精通——是一种非常强有力的组合,尤其是当你再加上最后那一点——能够适应任何情况。
Lenny (00:35:29): 这真的很有意思。这也让我想到,为什么很多东西质量不够好——往往是因为没有一个在最顶层的人对细节极度关注。我发现写 newsletter、做播客以及其他事情也是如此——没有人会像你自己那样在乎。没有人会说:“天哪,我一定要把这个做到极致,因为我内心觉得对这个质量负有责任,做好这件事就落在我肩上。“所以我觉得这可能就是为什么很多最优秀的东西都是由一个单一的领导者、一个单一的观点、一个单一的人来主导的。很多最成功的创业公司就是某一个人的愿景:“就这样,我们要做这个。“而当它越来越变成一个社区驱动的事情时,往往就不那么容易成功了。
赞助商播报
Lenny (00:36:16): 本集节目由 Maven 赞助。我从第一天起就是 Maven 的投资人、顾问和用户。我甚至在 Maven 上教过我的产品管理课程。Maven 是一个基于社群的学习平台,你可以和同伴一起学习,并与讲师直接互动。Maven 上有大量面向产品经理、创始人和高管的高质量课程,帮助他们在各个方面提升自己。来自 Airbnb、Coinbase、Google 到 Tesla 的超过一万人,已经参加了由真正的专家和从业者教授的课程——他们在各自领域深耕数十年。作为 Maven 刚刚推出的秋季季度的一部分,未来几周内有超过 100 门新课程即将开课。我播客里的很多嘉宾也在上面授课,比如 Jackie Bavaro 教产品战略,Arielle Jackson 教创业品牌,Emily Kramer 教 B2B 营销,还有 Annie Duke 教决策、Nir Eyal 教行为设计,以及 Marily Nika 教如何进入产品管理领域。查看我最推荐的课程,了解更多请访问 maven.com/lenny。
关于如何反驳创始人
Jason Shah (00:37:19): 我觉得你说得完全正确,尤其是——当然这是一个自然的发展趋势,但不一定非得如此。我觉得正如你所说,很多领导者在组织变大后会把重心放在问责上,所以你会看到绩效评估之类的东西。这是一种非常自上而下的驱动结果的方式。但相对于一种”被问责”的感觉,如果你能激发一种”责任感”——如果人们觉得”这家公司也是我的,这个产品也是我的,这间办公室的地板也是我的。我不想看到地上有垃圾,我要把它捡起来扔掉。“即使我们有专门负责打扫的人,那也是——“我对这里有主人翁般的自豪感,我和这里是连在一起的。“我认为这才是关键的区别……在 Airbnb,我觉得有这种感觉的人愿意去反驳某些事情,或者愿意提出新的想法,因为他们觉得自己对公司有投入感。
Jason Shah (00:38:12): 在 Alchemy 我也经常看到。我看到一个工程师凌晨三点跳起来修一个东西,因为他们觉得自己对代码库负有责任。这不是那种一千人的工程组织,每个人的工作只是让 iOS 应用的用户参与度提高 2%。
Lenny (00:38:27): 你提到了反驳创始人或 CEO 的技巧,我知道这是你非常擅长的事情。我亲眼见过你这么做。我很好奇,作为公司里的 PM,当你和 CEO 或创始人意见不同时,你学到了什么关于如何有效反驳的经验?
Jason Shah (00:38:40): 我觉得这是……实际上我觉得这是被误解最深的概念之一,因为就像我们之前说的,语言非常重要,然而你给一样东西取的名字,往往决定了人们对这个概念 90% 的理解。“Pushback”这个词——我想不出还有哪个词能如此本能地让你觉得自己在身体上对抗另一个人想要做的事情。它把人们带入一种心态——“那我该怎么 pushback 呢?“这从一开始就站在了一个”我需要反对、我需要说不”的立场。这是一种非常消极的心态,完全源于那个被用来给一种行为贴标签的词——而这种行为,换个角度来看,其实可以是”我怎样改变某件事的方向”,或者”在我和某人不一致的时候,我怎样帮助业务真正取得成功”。那是一种完全不同的心态。
Jason Shah (00:39:34): 所以,我见过最成功的做法有两点。第一点,我觉得是真正理解一个目标是什么,或者某个人对某件事的顾虑是什么,然后把这些东西以某种方式对齐。回到 Airbnb 的例子,我记得 Airbnb 收购了一家公司,叫 Luxury Retreats。当时有一个目标,是要把那个业务和产品整合到完整的 Airbnb 产品体系中,这里面有很大的潜力。但我记得产品体验中有一部分是围绕和某人聊天来设计的,因为原来的业务拥有一支非常庞大的优秀团队,他们在你的旅程中基本上担任礼宾(concierge)的角色。我当时就在这个团队里,说实话,士气相当低落。把一家被收购的公司整合进来本来就很难,尤其我们还在不同的地方,等等。
Jason Shah (00:40:26): 我记得听一位在 Airbnb 工作了很久、非常擅长说服高层领导的人说过,他理解问题出在哪里,因为那个聊天产品在复杂性上不断膨胀。你得往里面加各种各样的功能,却没人能成功改变方向,结果就是……结果一团糟,士气也非常低落,因为我们承担了太多的范围,大家不确定这是不是对的产品,而且它是作为一个巨大的单次发布来推进的,而不是迭代式地做。真正有趣的是,这位领导非常善于理解一点:目标不是堆一堆功能。目标——就像在 Airbnb 经常讨论的那样——是一种 magical experience(令人惊叹的体验)。
Jason Shah (00:41:06): 于是,当我们退后一步重新审视时,角色从礼宾被重新想象为”行程设计师”(trip designers),他们的目标是为你设计行程,而其中一部分意味着一个非常优雅、简洁的聊天体验,这样你就能和行程设计师有一次高效、快速、愉快的互动,然后继续你的行程。它把那种”我们做不了这个,功能太多了,时间不够,资源不够”的反驳,转变成了”哦,我们都想为客户提供一个非常优雅、非常流畅、非常精致的体验。我们该怎么做?什么样的行程设计或者新概念才能真正提升体验?我们不是要你缩减范围,我们不是要你将就。我们实际上不只是换了个叫法,而是构想了一个更简洁、更优雅的体验。它更契合奢侈品的品牌调性。”
Jason Shah (00:41:51): 砰,突然之间,每个人都得到了自己想要的。客户体验更好了,范围更小了,而这不是靠说”不”做到的。靠的是理解我们所有人真正共享的目标——一个出色的、简洁的客户体验——然后真正把它做出来。所以我觉得那个做法非常有效,也是我在职业生涯中努力带入的东西。如果有用的话,我还有几个其他的例子,但那个是我从 Airbnb 学到的一个很重要的经验。
Lenny (00:42:16): 好的,再来一个例子会很棒。不过我有个想法——你觉得主要靠的是名称和概念的改变,还是因为它是一个更大的 idea?你觉得重新框架这件事的什么方面让大家觉得”哦哇,好的,现在我又真的兴奋起来了”?
Jason Shah (00:42:30): 这一点很好。我觉得它确实是一个更大的 idea,配合一个好的重新框架,而且我觉得就像很多事情一样,一件事有它的实质内容,然后还有它的传达方式。举个例子,这在公司调整战略时经常出现。很多时候人们走出会场可能会觉得,“嗯,我大概同意这个战略,但传达的方式太差了”,或者反过来,“嗯,他们提前告诉我们了,也开全员会坐下来讲了,但我真的不同意这个战略,我要死守立场,不会 disagree and commit(虽然不同意但仍然承诺执行)。”
Jason Shah (00:42:58): 所以在这个案例中,我觉得你说得完全对。如果只是表面功夫的话……创始人都太聪明了,尤其是在我们讨论过的所有这些公司里,不会因为简单地给某个东西改个名字就被糊弄过去。但我觉得,一个更大的、更激动人心的 idea——一个切中我们所有人共同追求的核心的 idea——再配上一种简洁的传达方式,这两者结合在一起,我认为是一个非常有力的组合。因为我也见过很大的 idea 因为传达不当而不了了之,没能达到预期的效果。这两者加在一起,我觉得才是一个真正有效的组合。
Lenny (00:43:28): 太棒了。很想再听一个例子。
在 Alchemy 的另一个例子
Jason Shah (00:43:30): 好的,当然。实际上,最近在 Alchemy 就有一个例子。我们在增长,在招人,但有很多角色——尤其是在 Web3 领域——还尚未被定义。比如,传统上有增长(growth)、产品增长营销,而我们围绕增长运营(growth operations)创建了一个新领域,如果我们想深入聊的话,我很乐意展开讲。这真的是一个非常有趣的领域,而我们在是否要为这个角色招人这个问题上来回犹豫——它甚至还不算一个真正存在的岗位。我们看过一些候选人,但不太确定。而我们的创始人非常聪明、非常有才华,多年以来一直在打造这家公司,他们想要赢。说到底,这是他们最在乎的事情。他们骨子里就是要赢。
Jason Shah (00:44:10): 所以最终,重点不在于”让我对增长运营这个角色做一个理性的论证”或者”让我为你在这个人简历上看到的问题辩护”,而是”哦,你想赢?哦,我们想增长得更快?太好了。这就是实现它的方式,这就是我们如何真正成为我们想成为的那家划时代的公司。“同样是一种重新框架——我们可能在细节层面有分歧、有争论,但我理解我们所有人来这里是为了什么,让我们聚焦于那个目标,看看这件事如何成为那个目标的一部分,而不是只盯着达成目的的手段而非目的本身。而目的,在我的经验中,总是能带来很多清晰度。
Lenny (00:44:49): 这两个例子有一个很棒的地方,另一位嘉宾也提到过——当你试图影响 CEO 或创始人时,回到你之前说的逆向工作法,你几乎要从一个逆向的角度出发:他们兴奋的是什么,他们怎么看世界,什么对他们来说重要,然后以那种方式去提案。所以在第一个例子里,我猜他们是向 Brian 提案的,而他大概会说,“嗯,行程设计,听起来像 Brian 会喜欢的东西。“在第二个例子中,“对,我们要赢。以下是我们如何赢。“所以这是一个很有意思的收获。
影响力与销售思维
Jason Shah (00:45:15): 我的意思是,我们常常忘记我们都只是人,说到底,大家都很忙,等等。这让我想起销售中的很多事情。在我上一家创业公司 do.com 早期,我尝试做外呼销售时非常不成功,因为我不理解这一点。我是做产品的人,不是做销售的人。我没有去听别人关心什么,没有从一个逆向的角度出发——去想一个 CRO(首席营收官)或者人力负责人(head of people)可能在关心什么。我只是讲功能和”这是我们能为你做的”之类的。但他们关心的只有一两件事。也许 CRO 关心的是增长收入,也许人力负责人担心的是文化或扩展他们的人才组织,而我们离那张清单还差得十万八千里。
Jason Shah (00:45:56): 所以我觉得对 CEO 来说也是类似的。当一个产品经理走进和 CEO 的会议,却在谈论一件 CEO 距离十万八千里的事情,甚至双方带入对话的思维方式都完全不同,这就是一个巨大的脱节。我觉得 Casey 在最近的播客里对此也有很多精彩的观点。
关于职业发展:不要只想着往上爬
Lenny (00:46:16): 不错。Casey Winters,播客安利一下。好的,你还有一个很擅长的事情——在职业发展上,你并没有那种专注于一步步往上爬、成为顶级产品经理的思路,你似乎很擅长追随自己的兴趣和好奇心。在这方面你有什么心得可以分享吗?给那些正在想”天哪,我是该留在这个岗位上继续往上爬,还是该试试新东西”的人?关于这种思维方式,你学到了什么?
Jason Shah (00:46:46): 我很喜欢一个框架,叫做梯子与地图,我认为在你人生的任何阶段,你都可以选择成为其中任何一种人。有时候一个人可能会在某种心态上有点固化,但我喜欢梯子与地图这个区分。梯子是关于往上爬的——更多的影响力、更大的权力、更高的头衔,诸如此类。而地图则是:我只想去任何有趣的地方,对吧?我真的就是这么想的,我把我的职业看成和旅行非常相似。我想去希腊。我想在印度饿着肚子四处走,在一百度的高温里汗流浃背。我想去澳大利亚,被锁在酒店外面,体验一下那是什么感觉。
Jason Shah (00:47:23): 我能接受不适,因为那很有趣。有时候,不管好坏,也许这是一种特权——说出这种话本身确实是一种特权——但我更在乎过一种真正有趣的生活,而不是一种好的或舒适的生活。我觉得成长就来源于此。那些故事就来源于此。对我来说,那才是我会最珍视的记忆。
Jason Shah (00:47:42): 所以,当我思考产品的时候,当我躺在临终病床上,我会关心的是我建造了哪些产品,它们如何影响了人们。没有人会在我的葬礼上翻看我的 LinkedIn——希望他们不会,我也希望如此。抱歉,这个比喻有点阴暗,但我觉得想象未来能带来很大的清晰度——很久以后我会关心什么?我认为这适用于生活的方方面面。我就是这样思考我的人生伴侣的,也是这样思考我的职业的,也是这样思考我选择住在哪里的——旧金山。旧金山,很多人喜欢说它的坏话,但我相信这个社区。我相信这个地方的长期前景,即使短期内它确实面临一些挑战。
Jason Shah (00:48:21): 所以,我个人非常坚信梯子与地图这个区分。我觉得很多人在微观层面非常刻意——他们会思考下一份工作、下一个头衔、薪资和股权有多少。好的方面来说,他们也会思考下一个要合作的团队。但他们在宏观层面非常随意。大局是什么?作为一个人,我真正在乎什么?这方面没有太多课程可以学。产品管理领域也没有太多博客文章讨论这些感性的一面——你作为一个完整的人是谁,你的能量从哪里来。所以对我来说,这种思维框架让一切变得很清晰,也让那些在别人看来冒险的职业决定,对我来说似乎是必然的。
Lenny (00:49:03): 有没有什么故事或例子,说明你是如何用这种方式做出决定,最终去了某个地方的?或者有没有什么你回过头来看——用了这种思维方式之后——觉得后悔或者特别满意的人生岔路口?
Jason Shah (00:49:18): 确实有几个具体的例子。不过我会简短地说。一个是我刚搬到旧金山的时候。我之前提到过,我把那家教育公司小规模卖掉了,我本可以在短期内用我的职业做很多更”有产出”的事情。我大学里的同龄人都去了 Google 或其他地方的大公司。而我却说,“我想搬到旧金山,在餐桌上办公,我有一点积蓄,为什么不呢?试试看。肯定特别有意思。“当然,有时候也非常无聊。所以在微观层面上我并不追求什么,但我做了五六个产品,编程水平也因此大幅提升。
Jason Shah (00:49:56): 我记得有一次,有点滑稽——我当时在餐桌上工作,在街上看到了 Ron Conway。我蓬头垢面,因为我就是从公寓里干活的,但我想去向 Ron Conway 推销一个糟糕透顶的创业点头,于是我就跑出去了。他也许算是幸运地没有把我推到一边,听我说了一分钟,然后我事后给他发了邮件。这些都是随机发生的事情,但随着时间推移,我认为正是这些事塑造了我们。你是那种会拼命去做这种事的人吗?当我做那家教育公司的时候,我去各个高中往人们车里塞传单,想启动业务。回到领导力的话题,这可能是大多数人不愿意做的事情。“等等,你拥有一家公司,却在往别人的挡风玻璃上贴传单?“就好像,“你有什么毛病?”
Jason Shah (00:50:40): 所以,我觉得这就是一个例子——如果我是在爬梯子,我会想,“我得去最好的入门级工作什么的。“即使我之前已经创过业,我也会用一种结构化的方式来思考我的职业。而我当时更多的是想,“这会很有趣。我会搞清楚的。我对自己的能力有足够的信心,我能搞定的。“所以我就这么做了。Yammer 以及离开 Yammer 也是类似的。我本可以留下。我的股权终于值点钱了。我肯定也能从 Microsoft 的体系中学到很多,但我感到无聊,而且我已经和几个天使投资人谈过,他们愿意为我的任何新项目投钱。我觉得融资对我来说会很困难,这会让我的生活轻松很多,我可以专注于产品,等等。
Jason Shah (00:51:25): 那真是艰难的四年。比如,一项并购(M&A)收购方案在你婚礼前一天告吹了。或者咬牙啃玻璃般的痛苦——提交到 Apple App Store,被选为推荐应用,然后因为想修一个 bug 重新提交,结果新版本 90% 的时间都崩溃。那是阵亡将士纪念日长周末,你联系不上能帮你重新审批的 Apple 商务拓展经理。那真是压力山大的四年,但用地图的比喻来说,那就像在克罗地亚迷路然后找到出路,或者在澳大利亚找不到回酒店的路,或者在泰国被狗咬——这确实发生在我身上。但正是这些有趣的经历塑造了我们的性格。
Jason Shah (00:52:05): 我先说到这里。我觉得我做了很多这样的职业决定。我有遗憾吗?当然有,因为你会看到如果你当时加入了另一家公司会发生什么——“哦,我会遇到那么多优秀的人,会做那些产品,我的股权会更值钱”,等等。但我觉得人只活一次,而这些独特的经历对我来说非常真实,教会了我在其他地方学不到的东西。
Lenny (00:52:28): 梯子与地图这个比喻真正厉害的地方在于,很多时候你以为自己在爬梯子,你以为爬梯子天然就是好的,但有时候梯子倒了,公司也没有任何起色,或者工作糟透了——你的梯子通向了一个可怕的地方。而根据我的经验,每次我尝试全新的事物、冒险,尤其是追随那些给我能量的事情——“就在这件事上放手一搏吧”——至少在我的经历中,它总是导向了更好的机会和更有趣的工作。所以,这就像是先下了一架梯子才能上另一架梯子。有时候你以为自己在一架好梯子上,但它其实哪里也带不了你。所以,去探索其他梯子吧。所以我脑海里浮现的是那种滑梯与梯子棋盘游戏。
Jason Shah (00:53:15): 完全同意。
Lenny (00:53:15): 有很多架梯子,你想去探索地图上不同的梯子。这样说怎么样?
虚假精确与职业决策
Jason Shah (00:53:20): 我觉得你说得完全对,关于你的表述我只想简短补充一点——我觉得你的表述已经抓住了本质——就是我们所有人对于某个职业选择会导向什么、会是什么样,都有一种虚假精确感,我们忘了大量的职业决策,其实不过是累计大约十个小时和团队交流、获取信号后做出的。
Jason Shah (00:53:44): 所以,我觉得那种虚假精确有时让我们在做某些决定时感到安心,却也让我们退缩于一个可能更好、更大胆的选择。但也许那架梯子只是藏在雾后面——如果你真的想要的话,你是可以兼得的。也许你可以去世界上最有趣的地方,同时拥有成功、进步等等。只是我觉得很多人认为这完全是非此即彼的。他们觉得自己已经算出了精确的结果,而正如你所说,梯子经常是会倒的。如果你把所有希望都押在上面,那这是一个非常脆弱的职业决策,我觉得真的很难驾驭。
坚持与探索的平衡
Lenny (00:54:19): 反过来说,你也不想一次又一次地跳来跳去。虽然我谈了很多自己如何转换、尝试新事物,但在工作方面我是一个非常”连续专一”的人。第一份工作干了九年,然后创业公司一年半,然后在 Airbnb 七年,然后现在做的事情可能是一辈子的。所以坚持留下来、把事情做透是很有价值的。所以,我不知道你对这个问题有没有答案,但你有没有什么智慧:什么时候应该坚持、在你所在的地方继续挖掘机会,什么时候应该去尝试新的东西?
Jason Shah (00:54:54): 我希望这里存在一种平衡,意思是,地图不应该给人一种”有180个国家,那我们就去试180家科技公司,把两年任期缩短到一个月”的印象——那样我们只不过是创造了一代跳槽者,而且在大家都用 Zoom 的时代,这变得更容易了。这一点说得很好,我非常尊敬像你这样经历起起落落坚持下来的人。别人在简历上看到七年,但七年里面——我不知道——Airbnb 经历了多少个篇章、多少个危机时刻?
Lenny (00:55:26): 感觉有三百个。
Jason Shah (00:55:27): 这就对了。所以我觉得需要平衡,对吧?比如,我想在 Web3 领域待超过十年。我想在 Alchemy 待很长时间,帮助建设这家公司。所以,当我想到地图的时候,也许一个重要的思考方式是——当一个人到了50岁、60岁或70岁,可能会选择停止工作——很多人在开始职业生涯时,其实有30年可以运作,或者40年,幸运的话50年。你有非常多的筹码可以打。你可以玩五轮、每轮十年,对吧?所以,关于坚持这件事,也许我有偏见,但我认为硅谷和科技行业里那些真正的瑰宝,正是那些愿意留下来四、五、六、七年的队友。他们拥有其他人没有的组织知识。他们对文化产生的影响,在员工频繁流动的情况下是不可能实现的。
Jason Shah (00:56:19): 所以对我来说,你可以同时做一个对公司忠诚、停留很长时间的人,同时又退后一步审视自己的职业生涯。实际上,我觉得也许更进一步,对吧?你现在是一位著名的播客主持人。你曾经是一位成功的创业公司创始人。你曾经是一位产品负责人。所有这些东西构成了一幅地图,也构成了——坦率地说——一个真正有趣的职业和人生,里面装满了非常有趣的里程碑、学习、人脉,以及你有机会互动的人。
Lenny (00:56:47): 对。说到职业生涯有多长这一点,我最近回想的时候发现,这是我的第四个职业了。先是工程师,然后是创始人,然后到 Airbnb 做产品经理,再到现在我做的这个奇怪的事情。有那么多时间去探索和尝试新事物。不过我想说的是,我觉得你早期做的事情似乎非常重要。Airbnb 对我来说不算早期,所以也许我错了,但感觉你需要找到一家公司,让人们看到你简历上那段经历时会想,“哦,好的,这个人应该不错。“所以我觉得在某个时刻你得把这一块做对。
早期职业的光谱
Jason Shah (00:57:21): 对,我完全同意。比如,假设一个刚毕业、想从事产品工作的新人,在这个光谱的一端可能是 Goldman Sachs,因为很多人就是这么做的——他们说”嗯,我想做产品,但我也觉得自己需要这么一颗金星之类的”。光谱中间是加入一家高速增长的公司,那里确实有优秀的产品人可以学习,但也确实还有空间让你做比一个非常初级的人被分配到的更多的事情。光谱另一端则是完全没有工作,纯粹自己做项目跳来跳去,或者每两个月换一家新创业公司。
Jason Shah (00:57:58): 个人而言,在这个光谱上,我倾向于偏向中间的位置——建立履历,建立人脉。说起来很疯狂,就在本周、下周,我要见大约五个 Yammer 时期认识的同事。正如你所说的早期经历的塑造力,那些人中的一些人——我就是跟他们学会了怎么做产品,学会了 A/B 测试这些东西。我的下一家公司的第一批天使投资人就是这么来的。我的招聘也靠这些人。我至今还在招他们——也许他们很烦,但还是会收到我在 LinkedIn 上发消息,试图把他们拉去做下一个项目。
Jason Shah (00:58:27): 所以我完全同意那些早期经历确实非常有塑造力。这里也许有一个平衡:没有人想做跳槽者,但同时,也许也有办法不做一个在梯子上爬30年的职业人,或者执着于”我必须做到 CPO”却不愿意放弃总监头衔去某个创业公司做一个拼命干活的人——因为他们真心相信这件事,想在职业生涯中押上一注、冒一次险。
招聘的本质
Lenny (00:58:50): 你提到了招聘,这正是我想问你的。你加入了我的 Talent Collective,你的公司 Alchemy 在招人,我最近看了数据,你们是最成功的吸引候选人来面试的公司之一,而且总体来说我觉得你真的很擅长招聘。所以我很好奇你能和大家分享什么关于招聘的心得。
Jason Shah (00:59:10): 谢谢你的肯定,我也从 Collective 里遇到的一些非常有才华的人那里获得了很多价值。我觉得招聘这件事,有趣的是,它让我想起 pushback 的情况——你怎么称呼它,会极大影响人们怎么看待它。它叫招聘、recruiting,但如果人们把它重新框定为”你每天要一起工作的人”或”决定这家公司是什么样的人”,心态就变了。这就变成了——作为领导者或创始人,怎么可能不把这当作最重要的事情来思考?很多人有基准。我想也许在 Google 的播客里我谈到过,创始人 30%、40% 的时间可能应该花在招聘上,因为我觉得每个人内心深处都明白这件事极其有价值。
招聘的三个维度
Jason Shah (00:59:53): 我个人来说,在播客之前我回顾了自己在不同招聘阶段的做法。作为背景,我经历过零人创业公司——只有我自己,试图说服某个 Google 工程师加入我们,这极其困难,成功率很低;也经历过像 Amazon 或 Airbnb 这样拥有大型世界级招聘团队的地方,他们基本上替你做寻源、安排面试等事情,还有正式的校准和面试小组;再到像 Alchemy 这样比较灵活、朴素的阶段。我们需要弄清楚到底想招什么样的人。创始人仍然会和每位候选人见面。环境差异很大。
Jason Shah (01:00:34): 这是我所见过的光谱。我在反思什么方式效果最好,我喜欢把它类比为一个业务,其中包含营销层面、销售层面和产品层面。我的意思是,在营销层面,一个人对你公司听说过什么?他们认识在那里工作的人吗?他们会看你的 LinkedIn 帖子,在还没走进门面试之前就已经觉得你是一个靠谱的存在吗?基于他们对公司的了解,他们甚至愿意来面试吗?所以我认为这其中有一个营销层面——当然我说的不是大写的营销,因为任何硬性推销或不真实的东西最终大概都会失败——而是关于为公司也为个人建立一个真正正面的品牌和声誉。
销售层面:理解候选人
Jason Shah (01:01:26): 然后如果你通过了那个门槛,我觉得就进入了一个销售过程。我们之前聊到我是一个多么糟糕的销售——因为我没有去倾听别人的痛点,理解对他们最重要的那一两件事。类似地,在这个情境下,如果他们是工程师,他们是否想在一个世界级的工程组织中工作?如果他们是产品人员,或者只是对 crypto 非常兴奋想找到切入点,像 Alchemy 这样的地方就是他们学习这些的最佳场所——应该这样来思考。这不是说去迎合或附和对方说的任何话,而是真正理解他们是谁、什么驱动他们、他们对什么感到兴奋,因为我对入职后的事情和入职前的事情一样关心,希望他们能成功、快乐、高效。
产品层面:迭代式招聘
Jason Shah (01:02:12): 最后,我觉得还有一个产品角度,很多人不太去想或谈论它。因为产品这件事,职位描述几乎就像是产品规格说明书,对吧?这里是职责范围,这里是你需要做的事情,这里是我们要求的资质。有趣的是,产品本身是高度迭代的,但我们写了一份职位描述,然后它就像诱饵一样,完成了,发出去了,直到招到人把它撤下来之前没人再去想它。
Jason Shah (01:02:41): 我觉得应该带着产品思维来看待这件事。我现在经常遇到一些人,我不太确定他们具体要填补什么角色,不太确定他们的资历,也许他们经验不多,但也许他们会是我们产品团队里的一颗明星。用一种可以灵活塑造的产品视角来看待这件事——同样的道理,在 Airbnb,如果我们要做 Airbnb Plus,如果我们只是回到 Amazon 的逆向工作法写了一份文档就结束了,那是一回事,但我们没有这样做。我们实际去打造了应该是 Airbnb Plus 的房间和房源,然后不断迭代——换枕头、改入口、调你走进门时闻到的气味。我们辅导房东,从中学习。
Jason Shah (01:03:21): 所以我认为用产品思维来看待招聘,根据你遇到的候选人、业务的需求来不断迭代。这种营销、销售、产品的组合,是我发现非常有效的方式——让人兴奋,理解他们是谁、需要什么,然后打造一个真正能让这个人成功的角色,而不是仅仅在招聘软件里勾选一个新增人头的框。
PM 最重要的技能
Lenny (01:03:45): 在进入快问快答之前还有最后一个问题。对于正在收听的、可能处于职业早期的 PM,你觉得什么技能对你个人以及 PM 群体的职业发展最为重要?
Jason Shah (01:03:59): 这个问题和其他问题一样非常重要。我认为理解和定义什么问题最重要,是我收获的最关键的技能,而且它适用于太多场景。它可以适用于我们正在打造的具体产品,也可以适用于公司的使命是什么。我发现它非常有效,因为它几乎影响一切。它影响我们要打造什么,影响团队是否对我们做的事情有动力。举个具体的例子,在 Alchemy 这样的地方,我们是一个开发者平台,但我们应该构建一个 SDK 来提供对开发者更友好的抽象吗?我们应该构建一个 NFT API 因为我们认为那是需要拓展的重要技术栈和需要支持的重要用例吗?
Jason Shah (01:04:45): 关键在于,我们要解决什么问题?这不是在真空中比较这个和那个。问题到底是开发者体验,我们想让开发变得更简单?还是 NFT 市场——一整批 NFT 市场在试图增长,需要我们更多支持?如果不清楚这些问题的本质,就会迷失方向。这让我回想起我的第一家公司。那是一家教育公司,问题是低收入学生没有和其他学生同等的获取大学资源的渠道,这指导了一切。它指导了定价模式——基本上长期免费,然后我们通过大学的赞助来变现。问题决定了方向。而如果换一个问题——没有一个好的大学预备课程——那你就疯狂地专注于教学法和课程设计等等,而不是商业模型和你认为可行的初始产品。
Jason Shah (01:05:34): 所以这是我发现的 最有用的东西。如果需要我可以再举其他例子,但理解我们到底要解决什么问题,并且真正把它想得极其清晰,这对我来说一直非常有用,也很让人有动力。
老生常谈之所以是老生常谈
Lenny (01:05:48): 这是一个很好的提醒,虽然这已经是产品经理的陈词滥调了——“我们要解决的到底是什么问题?“人们讨厌这句话。但是 Michael Paul——我在另一个播客里也提到过他——他有一个观点:当人们嗑药的时候,有时会有一些顿悟,出来说”爱就是你需要的一切,伙计。“就像,好吧,嗯。但感觉就是那么对。你真的能感受到。它之所以成为陈词滥调,是因为人们长期以来发现它如此正确,以至于现在变得烦人了,但这也恰恰说明了它有多真实。所以我觉得这是一个很好的提醒——是的,问那个问题很烦人,人们也因此嘲笑 PM,但那正是因为它实在太重要了。
Jason Shah (01:06:28): 再简要补充一点你刚才说的,我完全同意。我觉得这在生活中也是如此,对吧?比如问什么才是重要的?答案就是——你的健康、你的家庭、你的使命感。没有人不知道这个答案,但就像大多数事情一样,关键在于如何践行它、如何把握其中的微妙之处,我觉得做产品归根结底也是这么回事。
Lenny (01:06:48): 太棒了。你准备好进入快问快答环节了吗?我会问你五个快问快答的问题,告诉我你脑海中浮现的第一反应,我们轻松一下。听起来怎么样?
Jason Shah (01:06:58): 听起来很棒。准备好了。
Lenny (01:06:59): 好,酷。我觉得我应该开始给这些环节加点音乐了。我还得研究一下怎么弄。暂时先没音乐。好,你向其他 PM 推荐最多的一本书是什么?
Jason Shah (01:07:07): 《The Hard Thing About Hard Things》(创业维艰)。
Lenny (01:07:10): 能说说为什么吗?
Jason Shah (01:07:11): 我觉得它教会产品经理像 CEO 那样去嚼玻璃、去关注结果,我觉得这是一种非常有用的思维方式。
Lenny (01:07:21): 天啊,这个嚼玻璃的比喻,我光听着就不舒服。
Jason Shah (01:07:24): 我看到你皱眉头了。我还真有点担心。
Lenny (01:07:27): 天哪。我们这份工作多棒啊,嚼玻璃。好,除了 Alchemy,你会推荐 PM 去哪家公司看看新机会?
Jason Shah (01:07:37): 我会推荐 Polygon、Salon 或 MoonPay。我知道这是三家,但我想在 Web3 领域多给一些选择,大家可能会觉得有意思。
Lenny (01:07:45): 好,很好的选择。你最近看过的最喜欢的电视剧或电影是什么?
Jason Shah (01:07:48): Ken Burns 的越战系列纪录片。我很喜欢纪录片和历史,这是我所见过的最引人入胜的历史叙事方式之一。
Lenny (01:07:58): 太好了,喜欢。好,你最喜欢问的面试问题是什么?
Jason Shah (01:08:02): “你后悔没有冒的一个风险是什么,为什么,你从中学到了什么关于自己的东西?”
Lenny (01:08:08): 你在回答中寻找什么?
Jason Shah (01:08:10): 我觉得我最看重的是成长型思维(growth mindset)——能够对这样的经历进行反思,能够坦诚自我批评,但又不会毫无建设性地苛责自己。而且我觉得关于”风险”这个维度,能触及一个人的心理状态和思维方式——不仅是对待职业的方式,还有如果他们和我一起工作,会如何解决问题、如何对业务下注。
Lenny (01:08:33): 太好了。好,最后一个问题。你最不喜欢的蔬菜是什么?
Jason Shah (01:08:36): 西兰花。我昨晚还从披萨上把西兰花挑掉了,我真的不想吃。
Lenny (01:08:41): 哇,天哪。就算是蒸的、炒的,各种做法都不行?
Jason Shah (01:08:45): 在任何情况下,我都不会对西兰花产生兴趣。
Lenny (01:08:49): 天哪,你得多吃蔬菜啊。
Jason Shah (01:08:51): 我知道,我在努力了。
收尾与联系方式
Lenny (01:08:52): 好,Jason,这次太棒了。完全达到了我对第二期节目的期望。绝对比我们第一期好——那一期我们就留在剪辑室的地板上了。最后两个问题。大家在网上哪里可以找到你?我猜 Alchemy 在招人,所以也许可以指引大家去那里。然后,听众怎么能帮到你?
Jason Shah (01:09:08): 当然。如果你对 Alchemy 和 Web3 感兴趣,去 alchemy.com,从那里点击进入我们的招聘页面。我在网上的账号是 @0xShah,这是我的加密领域化名(pseudonymous)身份,很乐意在那里和大家交流。至于如何帮到我,我很欢迎大家就今天聊到的任何内容给我反馈,也很想了解大家正在做的产品。我也做投资,我们在 Alchemy 也和很多产品及团队有合作,我很希望能和播客的听众见面交流,因为我知道 Lenny 一直很重视社区,多年来回馈了很多,所以我希望能认识大家,有机会聊聊你们正在构建的产品。
Lenny (01:09:46): 太好了。谢谢,Jason。
Jason Shah (01:09:48): 谢谢,Lenny。
Lenny (01:09:50): 非常感谢收听。如果你觉得这期节目有价值,可以在 Apple Podcasts、Spotify 或你喜欢的播客应用上订阅。也请考虑给我们评分或留下评价,这对其他听众发现这个播客非常有帮助。你可以在 lennyspodcast.com 找到所有往期节目或了解更多关于这个节目的信息。下期见。
术语表
| 原文 | 中文 |
|---|---|
| 11-star experience | 11-star 体验 |
| acqui-hire | 人才收购 |
| Airbnb Plus | 保留原文 |
| Alchemy | 保留原文 |
| Amazon | 保留原文 |
| Annie Duke | 保留原文 |
| Arielle Jackson | 保留原文 |
| AWS | 保留原文 |
| being vocally self-critical | 坦诚自我批评 |
| Bored Ape Yacht Club | 保留原文 |
| Brian | 保留原文 |
| Casey Winters | 保留原文 |
| CDP | CDP(Customer Data Platform,客户数据平台) |
| chew glass | 嚼玻璃(比喻承受痛苦的磨砺) |
| Coinbase | 保留原文 |
| concierge | 礼宾 |
| Creative Selection | 保留原文(书名) |
| CRO | CRO(Chief Revenue Officer,首席营收官) |
| crypto winter | 加密寒冬 |
| David Sacks | 保留原文 |
| disagree and commit | disagree and commit(虽然不同意但仍然承诺执行) |
| do.com | 保留原文 |
| Emily Kramer | 保留原文 |
| full bleed image | 全出血图片 |
| Gemini | 保留原文 |
| go to market | 市场进入策略 |
| Gokul | 保留原文 |
| growth mindset | 成长型思维 |
| growth operations | 增长运营 |
| hackathon | 黑客松 |
| Jackie Bavaro | 保留原文 |
| Jason Shah | 保留原文(非国际知名人物) |
| Jeff Bezos | 保留原文 |
| Jim | 保留原文 |
| Joe | 保留原文 |
| John Cutler | 保留原文 |
| Ken Burns | 保留原文 |
| Ken Kocienda | 保留原文 |
| ladder versus map | 梯子与地图 |
| Layer 1 | Layer 1(区块链一层/基础层) |
| Layer 2 | Layer 2(区块链二层扩展技术) |
| leadership principles | 领导力原则 |
| Lenny | 保留原文 |
| Luxury Retreats | 保留原文 |
| M&A | 并购(Mergers and Acquisitions) |
| magical experience | 令人惊叹的体验 |
| Marily Nika | 保留原文 |
| Maven | 保留原文 |
| metaverse | 元宇宙 |
| Michael Paul | 保留原文 |
| Microsoft | 保留原文 |
| MoonPay | 保留原文 |
| NFT.NYC | 保留原文 |
| Nikil | 保留原文 |
| Nir Eyal | 保留原文 |
| one-pager | 保留原文 |
| OpenSea | 保留原文 |
| ownership | 主人翁精神 |
| Polygon | 保留原文 |
| product market fit | 产品市场契合 |
| product review | 产品评审 |
| Project Purple | 保留原文 |
| pseudonymous | 化名/匿名的 |
| pushback | 反驳 |
| question mark emails | 问号邮件 |
| Ron Conway | 保留原文(知名天使投资人,但非国际公认中文译名广泛使用,建议保留原文) |
| Salon | 保留原文 |
| Sanchan | 保留原文 |
| SDK | 保留原文(Software Development Kit,软件开发工具包) |
| Second Life | 保留原文 |
| Shishir | 保留原文 |
| Shreyas | 保留原文 |
| Steve Jobs | 保留原文 |
| The Hard Thing About Hard Things | 《创业维艰》(Ben Horowitz 著) |
| trip designers | 行程设计师 |
| Uniswap | 保留原文 |
| Whole Foods | 保留原文 |
| working backwards | 逆向工作法 |
| Yammer | 保留原文 |
此文档由 AI 分片翻译(translate_long_document)