产品感、AI、首英里体验与混乱中段的启示 | Scott Belsky (Adobe)
Lessons on product sense, AI, the first mile experience, and the messy middle | Scott Belsky (Adobe)
Scott Belsky: Yeah. I’ve had this conversation quite a few times over the years with founders and friends who were running a company going sideways or worse and have had this question, “Should I continue or not?” I always have the same answer. I basically say, “How much conviction do you have in the solution you’re building?” I know in the beginning, before you knew all you know now, you had tons of conviction. That’s what caused you to leave your job. Now knowing all you know, do you have more or less conviction in the problem and the solution you’re building?
And I’ll tell you, I get different answers. Some people are like, “Oh, Scott, I mean, I have more conviction. All that I’ve learned, all the validation I’ve received from customers, we just haven’t figured it out yet. It’s driving me crazy. We’ve tried three times, and it’s still like each product fails. But I have more conviction than ever before.” And for those people, I’m like, “You know what? You’re just in the messy middle. Stick with it. This is par for the course.” But oftentimes, I’ll hear, “Honestly, if I knew then what I know now, I would not have done this. Holy shit.”
I’m like, “Then, quit. Your life is short. You have a great team. Pivot. Do something completely different.” If you’ve lost conviction, you should not be doing what you’re doing in the world of entrepreneurship.
Introduction and Guest Background
Lenny: Welcome to Lenny’s Podcast where I interview world-class product leaders and growth experts to learn from their hard one experiences building and growing today’s most successful products. Today, my guest is Scott Belsky. Scott is an absolute product legend. He’s a former founder, starting a company called Behance that he sold to Adobe where he worked up the ranks to chief product officer, and more recently, to chief strategy officer and executive vice president of design and emerging products. He’s also an author of the beloved book, The Messy Middle. He’s also an angel investor in companies like Pinterest, Uber, Airtable, Flexport, Warby Parker, and many more.
In our wide-ranging conversation, Scott shares his advice on how to build product sense, why you should only build half the features that you want, what it takes to build a successful consumer product. And we spend a lot of time on how AI is likely to change the world of product and the world broadly. Scott is such an insightful and articulate thinker, and I learned a lot from this conversation. With that, I bring you Scott Belsky after a short word from our sponsors.
Braintrust charges a flat rate of only 10%, unlike agency fees of up to 70% so you can make your budget go four times further. Plus, they’re the only network that takes 0% of what the talent makes, so they’re able to attract and retain the world’s best tech talent. Take it from DoorDash, Airbnb, Plaid, and hundreds of other high growth startups that have shaved their hiring process from months to weeks at less than a quarter of the cost by hiring through Braintrust network of 20,000 high quality vetted candidates ready to work.
Wherever you work, running experiments is increasingly essential. But there are no commercial tools that integrate with a modern growth team stack. This leads to waste of time building internal tools or trying to run your own experiments through a clunky marketing tool. When I was at Airbnb, one of the things that I loved most about working there was our experimentation platform where I was able to slice and dice data by device types, country, user stage. Eppo does all that and more, delivering results quickly, avoiding annoying prolonged analytics cycles, and helping you easily get to the root cause of any issue you discover.
Eppo lets you go beyond basically through metrics and instead use your north star metrics like activation, retention, subscription and payments. Eppo supports test on the front end, on the back end, email marketing, even machine learning plans. Check out Eppo at getE-P-P-O.com. That’s geteppo.com, and 10X your experiment velocity. Scott, welcome to the podcast.
From CPO to Chief Strategy Officer
Scott Belsky: Hey, Lenny. And it’s great to be here.
How to Survive Long-Term as a CPO
Lenny: I don’t know if you know this, but it’s been a big goal of mine to get you on this podcast since the day I launched it. And so, I’m really excited that you’re here. I wanted to start with your role at Adobe. So for the longest time, you’re a chief product officer at Adobe. And then recently, I noticed you shifted to this very complicated sounding role. I’m curious what this new role is and then why you made that shift.
Scott Belsky: Well, in this new role, I’m overseeing strategy and corporate development, all of design across the company and emerging products for the business. If you look back at the last five years or so, it really has been about getting our core products to the cloud, making them collaborative, making some critical and interesting opportunistic acquisitions over the years, ensuring that we have connectivity between the products that we launched, new web apps that meet new types of creatives.
And that was a incredible five-year-old chapter. Now with the advent of AI and new and emerging fast-growing businesses we have like the 3D and immersive space, the stock business and how that whole space is being changed by new technology, the idea of bringing that into an organization and being able to focus on that full-time was really exciting to me.
The Essence of Product Sense
Lenny: So what is it that you’re doing day-to-day now, just even get it even more concrete? I’m curious what your days are looking like.
Endless Opportunities in the First Mile
Scott Belsky: Well, I think that it’s the strategy of a company always needs to be iterated. And so being tasked with developing the strategy across the entire company, there’s no shortage of opportunities and people to meet and things to think about there. Corporate development, certainly like new M&A stuff and integration, all that sort of stuff falls under me as well. And I have a lot of feelings about that having been an entrepreneur that went through integration myself. So it’s kind of fun to be on the other side and try to improve it from that vantage point.
On the design side, I spend a ton of time reviewing the design across every product and really trying to raise the bar for the experiences we’re shipping. And that’s a hard thing to do in a company that has a lot of legacy products and a lot of baggage that comes with them. And on the emerging products side, it’s really about the new products we’re bringing into the market and how to make them win.
Lenny: Something that comes up on this podcast a number of times is how CPOs rarely last at a company. They stay. Like Casey mentioned this and a few other people, they stay around for a couple years, and the best they can do is just take a few swings at how things work, improve a few things and then, the CEO’s like, “No, this isn’t great,” and then find someone else. What do you think has contributed to you surviving and lasting and thriving and taking on more and more responsibility at Adobe?
Truly Understanding Customer Context
Scott Belsky: Well, in the chief product officer role, I oversaw design, product, and engineering. And I think part of the reason I was even interested in coming into the company and taking this role is that I felt like these boundaries between these functions are at best artificial, at worst really constraining. And I always have felt like a lot of products win not because of the technology but the user’s experience of the technology.
And so, if you have an aligned team that gets that and makes decisions accordingly, I think you can ship better experiences. So a lot of the work I had to do was breaking some of these boundaries down over the years. And I think that a lot of chief product officer roles traditionally don’t oversee engineering and sometimes don’t even oversee design. And for me, that wouldn’t be interesting.
Lenny: Zooming into product, if there’s a Mount Rushmore of insightful product thinkers, I feel like you’d be on it. And part of the reason is that you have this incredible product sense, whatever that means. It’s clear that you have strong product sense. And PMs often talk about the importance of product sense and how to build product sense. And I’m curious, how do you feel like you built your product sense. And what advice would you give to younger PMs looking to build product sense?
Delivering Surprises Beyond Expectations
Scott Belsky: First of all, I think the biggest mistakes that teams make is they become very passionate about a solution to a problem they’re trying to solve as opposed to do everything they can to develop empathy for the customer that’s suffering the problem. And oftentimes, the empathy gives you the solution, whereas the passion you have for whatever you think the solution is might be 30 degrees off with the solution actually is.
And so, this development of empathy is a key part of it. And of course, as I think about the discipline of crafting product experiences, to me, it’s all about psychology. It’s about understanding the natural human tendencies that people have in their most primal moments. I talk a lot about the first mile experiences that we have across any product we use, whether we’re a consumer or an enterprise user. In the first 30 seconds of using a new product, you are lazy, vain, and selfish.
You want to get it done super quickly. You want to look good to your colleagues or to your friends. You want to feel successful very quickly by engaging in this product. You don’t want to have to watch a tour or read anything, really endure any learning curve whatsoever.
Of course, if you can get people through the first 30 seconds, you have so much opportunity to build a more lasting relationship with that customer and have them understand your mission and the full potential of your product. But we need to ground ourselves with the fact that that’s really hard to do. It’s fascinating to me that most teams spend the final mile of their time building the product, considering the first mile of the customer’s experience using the product. If you can just get more customers through that top of funnel, you are a world-class product team. Let’s anchor ourselves on just doing that, and let’s use psychology to do so.
Why Consumer Products Are So Difficult
Lenny: And just to make sure people understand, when you talk about the first mile, essentially that’s the onboarding flow maybe to the activation moment.
Super Apps and Evolving Consumers
Scott Belsky: I think that’s right. It’s the onboarding flow. It’s the initial experience. It’s the defaults that you see. It’s the orientation of where you are. So many products you actually don’t exactly know how you got to where you are and how to get home and where to get help. So I would say it’s the onboarding. It’s the orientation, and it’s the defaults.
Building Half Instead of Everything
Lenny: You’ve been a constant and early advocate of investing in that part of the funnel. And it’s interesting how often that comes up on this podcast when people think about how do we improve retention, how do we improve growth. Often, the biggest wins from stories that we get on this podcast are in that part of the flow. And so, another data point to spend more time there. And I wanted to ask you, are you finding even at the stage of Adobe, there’s still lots of opportunity in the first mile or do you find that it becomes less and less and less, and then it’s less important?
How AI Will Change the World
Scott Belsky: The answer is lots of opportunity. The reason is because the customers change. Every new cohort of new customers is different. The new customers you have in the early stages of your product are typically more willing and forgiving customers. And you might nail the onboarding process for them, and then suddenly realize that, “Wait, it’s not being as effective anymore.”
And the reason is because now you’re engaging more of those pragmatist customers, those later stage customers who are initially more skeptical, less forgiving, less willing to deal with your friction. And so, you have to reimagine the onboarding process all over again. I mean when you look at a product like Photoshop, for example, it used to cost hundreds and hundreds of dollars. Now, ow you can get Photoshop for as little as 10 bucks a month. And so of course, the funnel’s a lot larger. A Lot more people come in with creative desires without the skills or the tolerance to develop them. And so, that dictates an entire change in the onboarding experience for a product like Photoshop.
Lenny: It makes me think of something Shishir, the CEO of Coda, shared about how he’s like, “I don’t really buy this idea of product market fit because you have product market fit with your existing users that love it and know about it, and you always don’t have product market fit with the people you want to be used the product.” And it’s related to what you’re talking about. The newest people joining have no idea what you’re doing.
Flat Organizations and Cross-Functional Collaboration
Scott Belsky: I agree with that, and I actually think that the role of AI going forward will be to have applications increasingly meet us where we are. To this day, we’ve always had to generalize onboarding experiences for the most part for everyone. And I’m really excited about the day when kind of products meet us where we are based on what type of user we are.
The Superpower of Exploring Possibilities
Lenny: I have a billion AI-related questions for you. So I’m going to hold off just-
Generative AI and the Designer’s Role
Scott Belsky: No problem.
Staying Ahead in the AI Era
Lenny: … a bit. And I wanted to double click on the empathy piece. So you talk about how to become better at product sense. Empathy and understanding the user’s problems is really important. Do you have any advice for someone that wants to build that? What can they actually do to become more empathetic and build that part of their skillset?
Scott Belsky: Well, the most humbling moments for me as a product leader have always been shoulder to shoulder to customers. Watching them actually go about their day, not just use my product but go about their day because what you end up getting is context for a lot of data that you’re missing.
When customers are using your product, they’re using it amidst everything else around them. In the enterprise, it’s all their other meetings and other products and pings that they’re getting throughout the day. And as a consumer, it’s between dealing with their kids or their loved ones or watching Netflix or whatever the case might be.
And in order to really understand where the customer is and where their mentality is, you have to understand the context in which they’re using your product. So part of developing empathy is being shoulder to shoulder and just encountering that reality alongside your customer. And that time, it just gives you better intuition. It helps you understand more. And with empathy, we can then better create quote-unquote, “for ourselves” because by developing empathy for others, we’re feeling what they’re feeling. We can then be the customer. And, of course, we all know some of the best product customers, some of the best products in the world are made when we are the makers are the customer.
The Messy Middle
Lenny: It makes me think of Marc Andreessen as this awesome code that I always come back to that everyone’s time is already allocated. They don’t have time for your product. They’re not-
Merchandising Progress Through Narrative
Scott Belsky: That’s right.
Knowing When to Give Up
Lenny: How do I find a new app to [inaudible 00:15:01]
Scott Belsky: And by the way, as a related note, since I know Lenny, you talk to a lot of guests around product-led growth. And sorry, if I’m skipping around here. But-
What to Look for in Investments
Lenny: Please.
Scott Belsky: … I think it’s also relevant because everyone’s trying to get their products to grow. And the other thing that perplexes me is that product leaders expect people to talk about a product being great. And people don’t talk about a product doing exactly what they expected it to do. They talk about a product doing what they didn’t expect.
And you look at a product like Tesla. People are not going and talking about how they had a great drive today, but they’re talking about the Easter egg they discovered on the dashboard or the cool new feature that they discovered that is associated with Christmas or whatever.
And so, it always is interesting to me. In consumer and even enterprise products maybe especially so, why aren’t we optimizing for those things that people wouldn’t expect the product to do as a way to get that surprise and delight to talk about it, to develop a relationship with our products? I think that’s another piece of the puzzle.
Final Pieces of Advice
Lenny: That is really interesting, and reminds me of something I just talked about with Gustav from Spotify whose episode might come out before this or after this about how every great consumer product pulls some kind of magic trick and feels like magic to you, like Spotify as an example. And-
Scott Belsky: I like that, magic, sort of a little mystery, a little intrigue, a little surprise. It’s a classic trick that Hollywood uses all the time. Why don’t we use it in our own products?
Thoughts on Children and the Future
Lenny: So let me pull on that thread a little bit about just consumer products in general. You spent a lot of your career, maybe most of your career in consumer, imagine Adobe. There’s a lot of B2B elements now as well. And you also angel invest and you help a lot of consumer companies. And tell me if you agree, but it feels like new consumer products basically never work.
And if they do work, there’s a period where they work, be real, is going through this now clubhouse. Paparazzi went through this. And then, they fail or fade away. Maybe, they come back and then fade away again. I guess, first of all, do you generally agree that consumer is just so rarely successful in consumer products?
Scott Belsky: Uber was a consumer product, but it built a network effect that was never there before. It leveraged excess capacity that was always there, but never tapped. It did something under the hood that gave it lasting power. I think of Pinterest, and I was Ben’s first seed angel and product advisor.
And with that product, he had this unique insight into the consumer psychology where it was not as much about getting likes and portraying yourself through pictures of you and seeing pictures of friends and all of this sort of anxiety that is induced by that, but rather helping people collect and represent themselves with their interests.
And so again, that was kind of a new insight that I also think developed its own network effect that enabled it to be lasting. And there was a fascinating business component which was it drove a crapload of traffic to every source of every pin, which then got those sites to then put pin buttons themselves because they wanted more traffic.
So there were underlying things under the hood again that it’s sort of tilting the market in his favor. I think that a lot of these other more recent consumer products are just kind of clever momentary interfaces. And they are in effect at the expense of venture capitalists, R&D for the platforms that already have the network effects and already have the distribution channels and the ad sales and everything else.
And so, I think that’s why we’re seeing B-reels capabilities now also in TikTok, and you’re seeing a lot of flashes in the pan, especially in these creative consumer apps, which I’ve been paying very close attention to. They’re fun and novel. But if they really work, those features are then brought into the native Apple camera, for instance.
Favorite Products Discovered Recently
Lenny: So let’s double click on that. I know this is a big question, but just what have you found is important for a new consumer product to work? You mentioned surprise would be great, network effects, maybe a new insight. What else do you find is important for a durable new consumer product to work?
Scott Belsky: Yeah. And it’s interesting because I think my answer 10 years ago would probably be different than my answer today. I think that there is a nimbleness. And maybe, it started in China with these super apps that were able to do everything. And that changed the idea away from the atomized experiences of a decade plus ago where you wanted a specialized product that did exactly what you wanted in a very reduced way.
I think Snapchat emerged under that world. I think Instagram became valuable to Facebook because of that phenomenon. Fast forward to today where all of us are far more technologically literate and we are able to manage a lot more cognitive load in our everyday technology lifestyles. And so suddenly, we don’t mind five tabs. We don’t mind features hidden and tucked away in menus because we’re sort of used to that now.
And so, maybe that’s one of the reasons why these established platforms get away with basically copying any novel new capability as opposed to those becoming apps in and of themselves.
Closing Remarks and Wrap-Up
Lenny: So let me shift a little bit and talk about a tweet that you tweeted about one thing you’ve learned. You have this amazing thread of just things you have learned over the many years you’ve been thinking about products and consumer products. And one of them was about how you’ve learned that, you should do half the things that you want to do, half the features you plan to do, do half the features, offer half the options you want to offer, focus on half the market versus the market you’re trying to go after.
Can you just talk about maybe how you came upon that learning and then also just how do you actually do that? It’s like, “Sure, great. We’re going to do half.” But then, which half? And oh, but someone wants this feature so badly, shoot. We can’t do them all.” So do you have any advice in just how to actually execute that sort of approach?
Scott Belsky: I mean one of the first comments I’ll just make is whenever I’m asked by teams, what features need to be part of their MVP, how do they decide which features they need to ship first and whatever, I always tell them to optimize for the problems they want to have. You want the problem of customers getting through your funnel, feeling successful, using your product and getting value and then saying to you, “Oh, but I need it on this platform, or I need this capability, or I want to be able to share this.” I mean you want those problems. So don’t do those features now.
Only do the things that prevent people from getting to the point where they care enough to ask you for anything. Make sure they can get through the signup flow. Make sure they can connect their account. Make sure they can use Google login if they need to, or whatever the case may be.
So I always remind the teams, optimize for the problems you want to have, and make sure that you eliminate all the brick walls, the major catastrophe-type things that can happen. But in terms of the half, the half-half, I learned this the hard way.
When Behance was launching back in 2008, I was always trying to hedge us with product features. I wasn’t sure if people would be coming to join groups or if people would be coming for the tip exchange where creatives share best practices with one another, or if people were coming to build their portfolios or just share work in progress.
Maybe, it’s too much to build a whole project of your work. Maybe, we can allow people just to share snapshots of their work. And so, we actually launched with pretty much all of these features. And then, it was the most complicated form of Behance, was ironically at the beginning.
And then, what we realized is that some things were taking off, and some things weren’t. So I remember when we decided to kill the Tip Exchange. And suddenly, the publishing of projects in the portfolio went up. And we’re like, “Oh my gosh. Projects being published is the core metric and it’s what drives the traffic back to Behance. Let’s do this again. I don’t know, let’s kill groups.”
And so, we killed groups. And lo and behold, more people published more projects. And it was like, “Wow.” So actually if you make the whole product about one thing, everyone does that. That core crank operates at 10X the velocity and if that’s the most important metric for the business, that’s gold. And so, we basically went on a killing spree. And we just started killing things. And over the years, we have actually tried to have this sort of, and I pushed this on many products, things I worked with now whenever you’re adding things, consider what you can replace. Consider what you can also remove.
When we updated the portfolio on Behance, I remember we used to have this ability to change the colors of your portfolio in Behance. When people clicked on your profile and saw all your projects, you could control that and add your brand element to it.
And so, we know. We were like, “You know what? What would happen if we just took this away? Would people again focus more on projects?” And so, we took it away. For 24 hours, we had people reaching out to us being like, “Damn you. How could you take away these controls for color of portfolio?” After that 24 hours, we basically never heard about it again. All the portfolios look cleaner and more consistent. And people did the core metric more. And so, I just took from that, try to kill things and everything you think you need to do, you probably only need to do half of it.
Lenny: I wonder if in reality most of the time, you only realize this afterwards versus ahead of time. And that’s just the way it is. And then, it’s just the seal of sunset, things that aren’t actually important.
Scott Belsky: I do have to say though, Lenny, some of the best product leaders that I’ve worked with, I do feel like they have this great reductionist or minimalistic tendency by default. They’re just very much… They anchor themselves on the one thing they want people to do and do well. And they just are pretty ruthless about everything else, being like, “Okay, but only if we have a problem with doing this core thing. Okay, put on the back burner.” And so, it’s something I’ve tried to get better at over the years.
Lenny: What’s really interesting is this is exactly like Matt Mochary who is actually the number one most popular podcast episode talks about when you let people go. And he’s helped a lot of CEOs let people go that 100% of the time everything just starts moving faster as soon as you have fewer people. And so, it’s the same exact model in people and products.
Scott Belsky: I think that’s right. And that’s why I always feel like tough decisions almost always afterwards feel like a relief. And that’s true for the product. That’s true for people on a team as well.
Lenny: Let’s shift to talking about AI, which I’m really excited about because I know you’ve been spending a lot of time talking with people about AI, building AI products. You all launched Firefly, which a lot of people are really excited about. You also have this newsletter where you kind of just share your implications on how AI and technology is going to impact the world.
So I have a lot of questions I’m excited to ask you around this. And I’ll just start really broad and maybe this is too big of a question, but just how different do you expect the world to be in, say, five years as a result of AI, both for product builders and then just people in general?
Scott Belsky: Listen, I’m an optimist. And I feel like our human potential has always been held back by the laws of physics essentially. The mundane, repetitive labor you need to do to get anything done is what holds back our ingenuity. It’s the friction. It’s the work in workflows that wouldn’t it be great if we could just have flow and no work?
And I think that that’s what AI kind of does, is it gets us from workflow to flow. It gets us into this flow state where any idea in your mind’s eye, you can start to develop it. I was having this discussion with Howie who runs Airtable actually just earlier today where we were talking about the leader at IBM who announced that he’s not going to hire 8,000 people that he would’ve hired because AI is going to be able to do that work.
And what we were talking about was, and how he made the point, as engineers have become much more productive over the years, that doesn’t mean that companies have wanted fewer engineers. It actually just means that they demand more of their engineers. And engineers have more possibility to do more.
And so, if human ingenuity goes up, maybe we actually want to hire more people because if you have more ingenuity per human being, maybe you can actually do more as a company. And maybe, companies that used to have three products will have five products or seven products or 30 products. And maybe, that’s actually the trend that we’re forgetting is that humans bring this level of ingenuity to every problem and every opportunity. Whereas computers remember like ChatGPT is basically just giving you what it would look like if, right? It’s not truly finding edges that will become the center.
It’s actually just mining the center. And it’s trying to regurgitate the center, which is also very helpful by the way. So I’m optimistic. I think that there will be far more people engaged in delivering experiences. I’m very long the experience economy because I think that there will be some people liberated to focus more on the non-scalable things that really move the needle for experiences for customers. And then, I also am excited about humans having less grudge work to do.
Lenny: I’m also excited for that. It reminds me it might have a TikTok account, and I have this team that helps with the TikTok and we haven’t shared this, but a few of the TikToks are my voice generated with AI. And they just-
Scott Belsky: Wow.
Lenny: … read script. And it’s me reading this story. And it sounds sort of like me. And I showed it to a friend. And I was like, “Do you see anything? You feel weird about this video?” And he is like, “No, you sound great. You sound really a great speaker.” I’m like, “Okay. Say hi.”
Scott Belsky: While you were reading, instead of reading a script, you can be plotting the course of the next episode.
Lenny: Yeah, exactly. So I totally see what you’re talking about there. In the product team, which function do you think will be the most disrupted and/or the most, I don’t know, optimized through AI?
Scott Belsky: We’re entering the era where we collapse the stack in every organization where instead of having to go to someone for anything, you can kind of do more things yourself. It’s very empowering to get the answer from data as opposed to having to go to a data scientist or a data analyst in the middle.
So there’s going to be far less game of operator across the organization and far more empowerment for people to dig their own rabbit holes, answer their own questions and get things done.
I happen to believe that that’s the advantage typically of small teams, is that they’re flat. The stack is collapsed. People all can hear each other in an audible across the room, and that’s how they run circles around big stodgy old companies that are dispersed around the world. So maybe, this technology allows cross-functional work and to happen. And I’m excited about that.
Lenny: That is really interesting. So essentially, what you’re saying is a PM will be able to do more design, more engineering, more data potentially. And maybe, one day, it’ll be just as good as having a data scientist in your team. But essentially, everyone becomes kind of this unicorn cross-functional mini-team,
Scott Belsky: Which sort of suggests this idea of meritocracy. It’s almost like what if people get promoted an opportunity based on how creative and how much ingenuity they have as opposed to how many reports or bug things they’ve gone through or whatever else. So there’s something about what you’re saying that I do think, yes, it’s disruptive to the degree that, well, you need a data analyst in the loop. But I also would suggest that again, that data analyst doesn’t have to answer redundant requests all day. She can spend time on thinking of other things without the boundaries of functions like we just discussed.
Lenny:
Rows is different. It combines a modern spreadsheet editor, data integrations with APIs and your business tools and a slick sharing experience that turns any spreadsheet into a beautiful interactive website that you’ll be proud to share. If you’re writing a report on a growth experiment, you can use Rows to do your analysis on data straight from BigQuery or Snowflake. If you’re deep diving on marketing, you can import reports straight from Google Analytics, Facebook Ads, or Twitter, or if you’re working with sales, you can natively plug Stripe, Salesforce or HubSpot directly into Rows.
And when you’re done, you can share your work as a beautiful spreadsheet that’s easy to read and embed charts, tables and calculators into Notion Confluence or anywhere on the web. I’ve already moved some of my favorite spreadsheet templates to Rows. Go to rows.com/lenny to check them out. That’s rows.com/lenny. A lot of listeners are product managers. And so just going a little bit further, even within the product management function, how do you see the PM role changing in the next five years as a result of AI?
Scott Belsky: Well, let me start by saying that I think that the greatest performers I’ve ever worked with, whether they’re designers or product leaders, basically preserve the time to explore lots of possibilities. They call those possibilities down to fewer set. They get feedback on those. They refine them even further.
And then, they present to the team. These are the two or three things I think we should do. And that’s the way a great designer works, for example. That is a function of time. If you have the skills and the capabilities, it’s just how much time. How much time do you have to explore the full surface area of possibility and find the best possible option.
In my world, in my mind, generative AI and AI for all, when it talks to me about just product leaders exploring possibilities, this should expand the surface area. I was talking to a pretty well known director in Hollywood world, and he was telling me that he uses ChatGPT. I was like, “No. Are you serious? You do?”
And he was like, “Yeah, I don’t use it to write any scripts.” But sometimes when I’m developing something with a writing partner, I will ask ChatGPT, “What would you do?” And I’ll explain the full instance, the full situation in extreme detail. And it will spit out five scenarios. And I actually don’t use any of them, but it just gives me more surface area. It tells me the things that I wouldn’t want to do, which is also good data. And I just thought that response is so interesting. And so when you ask about product leaders, I think that’s what we’re going to have, is we’re going to have the superpower of exploring far more surface area in far less time.
Lenny: It reminds me of something I always share about why do you need a PM? Why do you need a designer? Why do you need a researcher? It’s not necessarily that they’re just very good at these specific skills. It’s that they just have time to do this one thing that needs to be done. You can have engineers do the PM role, but they don’t have time. They want to code and they’d rather do that. And so, this is really interesting that it connects to. It’ll give everyone a little more time to get better at the thing they want to be doing.
Scott Belsky: That’s true.
Lenny: Is there anything you’re doing with PMs at Adobe at this point that help them leverage these tools and just the ways of working that you’re actually using today?
Scott Belsky: One of my obsessions has been bringing design earlier into the process of product development. So it’s not necessarily AI yet. But it’s the idea of designers, first of all, being in the room, even being in the room with some of the customer research and some of the debates around even the value proposition to the customer and some of the things that traditionally happen only with the PMs. I just find that, again, collapsing the stack, if you will. Having the designer hear these things and contribute gives them a golden gut as they are then sitting down later and going through possible interfaces to solve the problem.
So I love bringing design upstream. In fact, that’s probably been the cheat code of my career as a product leader, has just been disproportionately empowering design throughout the process. I think what we’re going to start seeing is generative AI augmenting the designer’s work in real time.
So right now, I mean in Photoshop, we’re experimenting with instead of just reducing an image and cropping, you can also extend an image. And that’s, of course, using generative AI for out painting. And so, you can imagine as you’re doing edits in that as well as in other forms of design, getting kind of thumbnails of what you might be trying to accomplish and then touching them, almost like predictive text to go to the next step, to the next step, to the next step and take leaps in the creative process as opposed to incremental steps.
I think that that’s going to happen far more. And hopefully, product designers, product managers will be involved to some extent in some of these decision points as designers have more options to choose from.
Lenny: You threw out this term golden gut. What is that about?
Scott Belsky: The golden gut is when you’re designing an experience and a flow. You are playing around with all kinds of options. You’re moving things around. You’re saying, “Actually, that’s too complicated. Maybe I’ll separate this one page into three steps as opposed to one page with three steps in a row. How do I break this down? How do I simplify?”
You sometimes have instincts like, “Well wait, what if I just remove this all together? What if you didn’t even have this whole series of steps? What if I just had a presumptuous default instead and customers could change it if they think they need to?”
And in some of those sorts of, I wonder if, I wonder if, I wonder if, to me is the difference between a very junior product thinker and a very experienced product thinker? I think experienced product thinkers with that golden gut of, “Oh my gosh. Wait, reduction of cognitive load.” Maybe even if 10% of people get confused to get 90% of people far faster through this process is a big win and a great opportunity cost trade off. I think those sorts of little micro-decisions that we make in the process of building products, that’s the golden gut.
Lenny: I love it. I have not heard that term before. For PMs listening and they’re like, “Okay, AI’s happening. I don’t know what to do,” what would be your advice for them to stay ahead and be aware of where things are going and not be left behind?
Scott Belsky: Quite simply in one word, play. We all have to be playing with this technology. We have to find ways. The risk of becoming more experienced in your career is you get stuck in your ways. And you’re like, “Ah, no. I don’t need to have that automatic draft in my email and get ChatGPT to suggest what I want to respond with. I’m fine without that.” Make sure you try it. Make sure you play with it. Write poems for your friends. Try a lot of these various generative AI tools out there just to see what’s possible and pursue every curiosity.
The reason I started the Implications newsletters is because I was seeing this high velocity of new stuff every day. And I’m like, “I have to force myself to make sure I understand all of this and think about how these implications will change my business as well as the world that I operate in.” And there was no better way to do that than to have to write about it, and promise my readers I’ll get a monthly thing out there. So I just think we all have to do some version of that.
Lenny: Let’s plug Implications while we’re at it. How do people go subscribe or do they find it?
Scott Belsky: Yeah. No. It’s implications.com. So it’s easy to find, but it’s a monthly exercise where throughout the month, I try to capture a few things I think are important. And I really try to go deep down the rabbit hole of what the implications are for various parts of our work and life. And it’s been a fun exercise. And also, I get some good polarizing feedback in the process.
Lenny: Oh you do? Interesting. You should share that. That’d be interesting, is here’s what I’m getting in response to the stuff I’m writing. This also touches on a thread that comes up a lot on this podcast, is the power of just writing to help you think through stuff. A lot of people think my newsletters, I’m just sharing all these things I know. I’m just like, “I know it in my head. I’m just going to share it in the thing.” But it’s more. The writing helps me figure it out and gives me an excuse. And like you said, it’s a forcing function to spend the time crystallizing it. And so, that’s another reminder for that.
Scott Belsky: And capturing those things, I think, the thing I’ve kind of learned over the years with writing and also with product development is sometimes you capture these little glimpses and things or sketches, and they become relevant years later. So don’t always capture and write because of a foreseeable need for that content. Consider it almost like a back burner that you’re constantly tending to. And imagine that three years from now, the stars will align, and this will become invaluable content or some crucial idea for a problem you’re facing at the moment.
Lenny: There’s a lot of people actually in your shoes that want to write more and put content out, but that also have a full-time job with a lot of things on your plate. Any advice for actually getting it done the way you’ve been getting it done?
Scott Belsky: Listen, there’s no hack to it other than ruthlessness of time and prioritization saying no to most things. This morning, I went for a run and I was like, “I have 40 minutes exactly until I have to get in the shower and I have to be somewhere in 30 minutes from that moment.” I’m going to take those 40 minutes or at least 35 of them, and I’m going to write. I don’t care if I write five words or five pages. And it’s just a great… Without that discipline though, as you said, it’s super hard to get it in the seams of the schedule.
Lenny: Speaking of discipline, you wrote a book called The Messy Middle. And without even talking about what it is, title’s pretty… I think people feel like, “I get it.” And imagine many people listening are founders or PMs that are feeling like they’re in this messy middle. What is one piece of advice for people in this period that you think might help them through the messy middle?
Scott Belsky: The bottom line is that these years in the middle of whether it’s a venture, [inaudible 00:42:19] new startup, old turnaround within a big company, they are messy because they are full of lows. It’s very volatile. When you’re in those lows, you need to find a way to endure them. You need to endure the anonymity and uncertainty and anxiety.
I’m sure a lot of listeners, whether they’re in big companies or starting their own company, it’s hard to be doing something that no one knows or cares about. And I always like to remind myself that the life expectancy of humans a hundred plus years ago was 25 years old. So the idea of spending three to five years of your life on something, especially if it might fail, was a bad decision. And I think biologically, we feel the need for constant rewards and affirmation to stick with something long enough.
And in fact, most of your listeners were all building things that take many, many years to defy the odds. And we have to overcome our natural human tendencies in this instance by sticking together long enough to figure it out. So how do you do that?
I mean, obviously, part of it is culture, wanting to serve the customers you serve and working with the team you are working with and that being enough to kind of stick it long enough. I think part of it is short-circuiting the reward system, finding micro goals and milestones that are mutually agreed upon. We’re going to celebrate these even though in the greater scheme of things, they don’t matter much.
I think that’s a key part of keeping the team and keeping the dream alive. I always like to use the analogy of we’re driving our teams across country as product leaders with the windows blacked out in the backseat and everyone’s sitting in the backseat. And so, if they don’t know what we’re doing that we’re making progress, this traffic is clearing, we just cross state lines. If they don’t receive the narrative, they will go stir-crazy. And so there’s a lot of research around progress, be getting progress and how progress is a source of motivation. And so as product leaders, we have to merchandise progress. We have to be the steward of this narrative.
Lenny: And you touched on this a bit as you were just talking, but there’s also this moment where it makes sense to quit like you shouldn’t stay with things endlessly. And I guess any advice on just when something is like, “Okay, you should probably move on from this.” Makes me think a little bit about there’s all these companies that just keep going that maybe shouldn’t keep going because they have enough money or they’re just like, “No, founders never quit.” Any advice or thoughts that you share there?
Scott Belsky: Yeah. I’ve had this conversation quite a few times over the years with founders and friends who were running a company going sideways or worse and have had this question, “Should I continue or not?” I always have the same answer. I basically say, and I really ask, “How much conviction do you have in the solution you’re building?”
I know in the beginning before you knew all know, you had tons of conviction. That’s what caused you to leave your job. That’s what caused you to take all this risk and hire people and raise money and all this stuff. Now, knowing all you know, do you have more or less conviction in the problem and the solution you’re building? And I’ll tell you, I get different answers. So some people are like, “Oh, Scott, I mean I have more conviction. All that I’ve learned, all the validation I’ve received from customers, we just haven’t figured it out yet. It’s driving me crazy. We’ve tried three times, and it’s still like each product fails, but I have more conviction than ever before.”
And for those people, I’m like, “You know what? You’re just in the messy middle. Stick with it. This is par for the course.” But oftentimes, I’ll hear, “Honestly, if I knew then what I know now, I would not have done this. Holy shit. ” I’m like, “Then quit.” Your life is short. You have a great team. Pivot. Do something completely different. If you’ve lost conviction, you should not be doing what you’re doing in the world of entrepreneurship.
Lenny: Sometimes, there are moments of that, I imagine. And so, there’s probably some spectrum of just how little conviction and how long you felt that, right?
Scott Belsky: I think so. But at the same time, listen, we all have ups and downs. We all have good days and bad days. However, I do think that great founders are just… They absolutely know in their core that something needs to exist, and they will just be ruthless and relentless until it does. But if you lose that, I actually don’t know if you have the fuel to continue. So listen, you’re right. Don’t make a bold decision on a bad day. But if the conviction generally dissipates, be open-minded about other options.
Lenny: You do a lot of angel investing, talked to a lot of founders. What is it that you look for? What do you think is important for a startup to show you for it to feel like a good bet that it’ll likely work out? What are some of the important attributes that you look for?
Scott Belsky: I’ll talk for a few things on team and then a few things on product.
Lenny: Perfect.
Scott Belsky: On team, I really value founders who listen, who really learn, who long to shake shit up a bit, and also value the mission that they’re on more than the money that it yields because I do think that especially during a period of time where you don’t have revenue, you’re going to need to be motivated by something grander and bolder than revenue.
I also have an allergic reaction to founders that are real promoters who are constantly trying to sugarcoat the truth, who like to gloss over the hard parts. I’ve always admired leaders that are optimistic about the future but very pragmatic and somewhat pessimistic about the present. So the founders that I have a great sort of chemistry with are people who are like, “This is how big the market is. This is how amazing this is. I know this needs to exist.”
But we’ve got a lot to figure out. There are things that are not working. We don’t have these data sets. These are the major obstacles we’re struggling with. These are the things that keep me up at night. Those are real people. And you know that in that volatile messy middle that they’re going to inevitably go through that their team, their investors are going to have the real truth and they’re going to be able to engage and find solutions.
So I really love finding those types of founders, and I’m very wary of the name-dropping overly promoting folks who are unlikely to be able to partner in that way. On the product side, I’m looking for an object model way of thinking about a product that I am confident the will scale and as they solve their problem. And when I say object model, what I mean is it clear whenever you’re seeing the product, how it works, where you came from, where you’re going?
Those are the three questions I always ask when I’m doing product reviews. It’s like, “How did I get here? What do I do now? And what do I do next?” And I feel like every screen and every product experience, you should be able to answer those three questions. Sometimes, I’ll be talking to a team that says they’re design driven, says that they’re building a incredible product, and they’ll show me a demo and I’m like, “This is all over the place.” There’s no clean clear breadcrumbs and object model for how this thing works. How are they ever going to get people through their funnel? Clearly, they don’t value this as a core principle, and that’s also always a red flag. And then finally, I just obviously have to believe in the problem they’re solving. So those are some of the things I think about.
Lenny: And you focus primarily on consumer or do you invest all over the place? And I’m asking in case people want to reach out and maybe, “Hey Scott, you want to [inaudible 00:49:59].”
Scott Belsky: Yeah. No. I’m pretty agnostic. I look for product design-oriented teams making things that need to exist. Beyond that, I try not to be too prescriptive.
Lenny: Okay. Excellent. Any last words of wisdom that you think impact the way people build product in the world that tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of listeners listening? Is there anything else you want to share before we get to our very exciting lightning round?
Scott Belsky: Two quick things. One, for the moment that we’re in, and then one for why we do what we do. For the moment that we’re in, we’re in a resource-constrained environment. Let’s face it. We’re all going to have less money, fewer headcount, all that kind of stuff.
And I’ve always found that resourcefulness brings you further than resources despite the fact that over the last seven to 10 years, we’ve basically thrown resources at every problem. Oh my gosh, this is not scaling. Throw more money at servers. Oh my goodness, we need more people on the social media team. Throw more money at headcounts. We’ve had a resources way of solving our problems as opposed to a, well, let’s refactor how we run that database, or let’s refactor how that team answers customer service requests. Let’s bring a new technology to make it more efficient. Let’s leverage and play with AI to see if that can help us.
We are in this era now where we’re being forced to be resourceful and to refactor as opposed to hire and throw resources at problems. I think that’s a great opportunity. I feel like this is where the best teams are going to build that muscle, that are going to go the distance. That’s why all these VCs say it’s so cliche that the best companies are always built in errors like these.
So my point number one is capitalize on the crisis, everyone. If resources are carbs, resourcefulness is like muscle. It stays with you. It makes you stronger, and it helps you have a better intuition and better performance over time. And then, I guess taking a step back, I would just encourage folks to recognize that anything amazing in the venture world is ultimately an exception.
And with all of the best practices, Lenny, that you and I just discussed and all the stuff that we read and books and whatever else, I always try to remind myself that at the end of the day, sometimes, exceptions are the rule when it comes to doing something truly transformative and that nothing extraordinary is ever achieved through ordinary means. And so, while we should always take these best practices and, sure, listen to some of the lessons I learned the hard way and whatever else, but at the same time if everyone says you’re crazy, you’re either crazy or you’re really onto something. So take that with a grain of salt.
Lenny: Love that. Speaking of extraordinary, I thought it’d be cool to just give you a chance to talk about what you’re doing at Adobe. What are some of the products that you’re working on? What should folks know about potentially what’s happening in Adobe they may not be aware of?
Scott Belsky: Yeah. No. Thanks for asking. For us, I would say there’s really three trends that are driving or three waves of transformation, I would say, that are driving the strategy right now for us. One is just that people are becoming more creatively confident. It’s kind of wild that we’re like most confident as five-year-olds creatively when we’re drawing and our parents are like, “Oh my God, that’s beautiful. That’s amazing. Let’s put it on the fridge.” And then creative confidence kind of goes down from there for most adults, and that’s really sad.
And with generative AI and tools, we have something called the Adobe Express in market, and our generative AI offering is called Firefly. These types of tools make people feel more creatively confident right away. It’s pretty amazing to see people that would never pick up a pen and draw or suddenly feeling confident. So I would say that’s like wave number one.
Wave number two that we talked about a little earlier is the fact that creative professionals can now explore 10X the surface area of possibility. These tools are making them so much more efficient. And some people are like, “Oh my gosh, creative pros are going to be replaced.” No. No, no, no. They’re not. They’re just going to find 10X better solutions. They’re going to have that capability to explore more possibilities. And that’s what makes design great, is finding, exploring more surface area.
And then, I would say the third wave that’s fascinating to me is personalization. I think we talked about this a little bit, our apps will meet us where we are. I think that every marketing experience will be increasingly personalized for each of us. Every commerce experience, they’ll know who we are. They’ll just show us our shoe size and no one else’s.
These sorts of transformations will really change the entire world of commerce, and content, and media, and everything else. And Adobe has a big digital marketing business that is focused on enabling some of that. So those are factors of strategy that I would say are driving some of the new products we have under development. And now, it’s all about let’s talk more shit.
Lenny: I love that. You need a banner of that. It’s been amazing to watch Adobe’s rise over the last decade. It just felt like it was going nowhere. And all of a sudden, it’s a juggernaut. And so, great work, Scott and everyone else involved. But with that, we’ve reached our very exciting lightning round. I’ve got six questions for you. We’ll try to go through it pretty fast. Sound good?
Scott Belsky: Okay.
Lenny: Okay. Sound excited. Here we go.
Scott Belsky: Sounds good. Let’s do it.
Lenny: Let’s do it. What are two or three books that you’ve recommended most to other people?
Scott Belsky: First is Build by Tony Fadell. Tony is just an amazing, charismatic, deeply pragmatic, product builder. He’s been brave enough to do both Adams and Bits as he says. And his book is just chock-full of wisdom. I do appreciate some of these kind of laws of nature, laws of power type books. I love psychology books.
I’m trying to think of some offhand that have really struck me. But understanding the natural human tendencies of people, I think the laws of power talks about tons of wars over centuries and what sorts of natural human tendencies or inequalities drove massive rebellions and revolutions. These sorts of insights, believe it or not, parlay into decisions we make in products and making people feel successful and productive. So I don’t know. I love those books just because I think that they remind us of the limitations and opportunities or possibilities of humanity.
Lenny: What is a favorite recent movie or TV show?
Scott Belsky: What I love is these documentaries about the cosmos and about the edge of our understanding of black holes and what happens out there in space. So I don’t remember. I know one is called Cosmos on Netflix. There are a few of them. But in my downtime, I get lost in some series like that.
Lenny: You have kids, one or more kids.
Scott Belsky: Yes.
Lenny: What are you doing to help them plan for this future?
Scott Belsky: I think about this all the time. What are our children going to do in a world where if you believe Vinod Khosla’s prediction that 80% of the work, of 80% of jobs will be replaced by AI, what will people do? As we talked about their ingenuity will be unleashed, that’s great. But ultimately, I always revert back to this one belief that if people are passionate, they become successful in something.
So I’ve always just been focused on trying to make sure that they find something they’re super passionate about. And it doesn’t even matter if the thing they find now is the thing they do later because I do believe that passion in itself and taking initiative on your passion is a muscle memory that once you develop it… I have a daughter who loves horseback riding. I don’t know if she’s going to do horseback riding forever or whatever. But I think that the passion that she has for it, and this desire to be better and to constantly learn more and do more, that in itself is like a replicable muscle memory. So I don’t know what the future holds, but I believe that passionate people will always have a path.
Lenny: Love that. What’s a favorite interview question you like to ask when you’re interviewing people?
Scott Belsky: There’s a real one, and there’s a snarky one. So I do love trying to understand if people are introspective. And so, I like asking about something people have learned about themselves that reveal the limitation in how they work. It’s a way to test introspection. And once this person hits their limits or struggles, can they be open and introspective or are they going to blame and point fingers? So I do ask that. I also like the question, like, “Do you consider yourself lucky?” I think it’s a fascinating question because also some people who are super insecure about where they are and how they got there and might decline admitting luck, those who are comfortable should admit that they were lucky, I mean, I think the truth is we’re all very lucky and certainly privileged. And I just think that that’s always an interesting conversation.
Lenny: What’s a favorite reason product you’ve discovered, app or physical product? Anything that comes to mind?
Scott Belsky: I’ve been playing with a product called Queue. And it’s Q-U-E-U-E, I think. And it’s basically a way to keep a queue of all of this content you want to watch across every streaming platform because there’s so much content across so many streaming platforms and to make your own queue and then to see your friends queues and to see what content is in most of the people you know queues, it’s actually an incredible graph of kind of stuff that people want to watch or have liked that I think we’re going to need in this world where there is just a billion sources of content.
Lenny: I’m definitely going to check that out. I’ve been looking for an app like that of I’m sitting in the evening, “What the hell should I watch?” I’ve seen everything that exists on the internet. So that’s awesome. What’s a favorite AI tool that you’ve recently discovered or find useful that isn’t something Adobe has made?
Scott Belsky: Okay. Well, I will mention if it’s okay a product that I did invest in.
Lenny: Absolutely.
Scott Belsky: But it’s a product called Tome. And they can take a narrative that you want to put into a presentation, and with AI basically create just a draft of this presentation with imagery and compelling points. And it’s almost as if you handed this off to an intern and said, “Come back to me with something I can work with.” And suddenly, it’s instantly there. So that’s been like a fun one to play with.
Lenny: I will check that out. We’ll link to that. Also reminds me Kevin Kelly on Tim Ferriss was talking about how AI and ChatGPT is basically an intern. That’s like the level of their skill right now. They’re just this intern that’s helping out with stuff.
Scott Belsky: I think that’s right. And that’s why we have to see it as a resource but not a constraint because, again, it’s answering that question like what would it look like if as opposed to doing true distinct thinking per se.
Lenny: Scott, this is the first time we’ve ever chatted. But I feel like I know you. You are wonderful. Thank you so much for being here. Two final questions, where can folks find you online if they want to reach out, learn more? And how can listeners be useful to you?
Scott Belsky: Yeah. No. Awesome. Listen, thanks, Lenny. And your podcasts and your emails are probably among my more forwarded pieces of nuggets and resources that I send to product teams I work with. So thank you for elevating the field for all of us, I should say. And it’s an honor to be on this podcast. I’m easy to find, just scottbelsky.com or @scottbelsky on your favorite social network of choice. And implications.com is where I’m writing these days.
And then, you know what? I welcome folks to share what they’re working on. I just love taking as much data points as possible. I love connecting dots for people and making introductions. I feel like that can be a contribution to this whole world of better and better products, and I welcome you to reach out.
Lenny: Awesome. Scott, again, thank you for being here.
Scott Belsky: Thanks, Lenny.
Lenny: Bye, everyone.
Thank you so much for listening. If you found this valuable, you can subscribe to the show on Apple Podcast, 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 |
|---|---|
| Airtable | Airtable(公司名,保留原文) |
| Apple | Apple(公司名,保留原文) |
| Behance | Behance(公司名,保留原文) |
| Ben | Ben(人名,保留原文,指 Pinterest 创始人 Ben Silbermann) |
| BeReal | BeReal(产品名,保留原文) |
| breadcrumbs | 面包屑导航 |
| Casey | Casey(人名,保留原文) |
| ChatGPT | ChatGPT(产品名,保留原文) |
| cheat code | 秘籍(cheat code) |
| Clubhouse | Clubhouse(产品名,保留原文) |
| Coda | Coda(公司名,保留原文) |
| collapse the stack | 扁平化(collapse the stack) |
| conviction | 信念 |
| excess capacity | 闲置产能 |
| Firefly | Firefly(产品名,保留原文) |
| first mile experience | 首英里体验 |
| flash in the pan | 昙花一现 |
| funnel | 漏斗 |
| golden gut | 直觉(golden gut) |
| Gustav | Gustav(人名,保留原文,指 Spotify 的 Gustav Söderström) |
| Howie | Howie(人名,保留原文,指 Airtable 的 Howie Liu) |
| IBM | IBM(公司名,保留原文) |
| Instagram(产品名,保留原文) | |
| Kevin Kelly | Kevin Kelly(人名,保留原文) |
| M&A | 并购(M&A) |
| Marc Andreessen | Marc Andreessen(人名,保留原文) |
| Matt Mochary | Matt Mochary(人名,保留原文) |
| merchandise progress | 推销进展 |
| meritocracy | 精英制(meritocracy) |
| MVP | 最小可行产品(MVP) |
| network effect | 网络效应 |
| object model | 对象模型(object model) |
| Photoshop | Photoshop(产品名,保留原文) |
| Pinterest(公司名,保留原文) | |
| pivot | 转型 |
| pragmatist customers | 务实型客户 |
| privilege | 特权(privilege) |
| product sense | 产品感 |
| product-led growth | 产品驱动增长 |
| product-market fit | 产品市场契合度 |
| Queue | Queue(产品名,保留原文) |
| red flag | 危险信号 |
| seed angel | 种子轮天使投资人 |
| Shishir | Shishir(人名,保留原文) |
| Snapchat | Snapchat(产品名,保留原文) |
| stir-crazy | 闷得发疯 |
| sunset | 日落(sunset) |
| super app | 超级应用 |
| Tesla | Tesla(品牌名,保留原文) |
| the messy middle | 混乱的中段 |
| TikTok | TikTok(产品名,保留原文) |
| Tim Ferriss | Tim Ferriss(人名,保留原文) |
| Tome | Tome(产品名,保留原文) |
| top of funnel | 漏斗顶端 |
| Uber | Uber(公司名,保留原文) |
Reformatted by reformat_english.py
产品感、AI、首英里体验与混乱中段的启示 | Scott Belsky (Adobe)
Transcript
Scott Belsky: 这些年来,我和不少创始人和朋友有过很多次这样的对话——他们经营的公司正走下坡路,甚至更糟,于是来问我:“我该不该继续?“我的回答始终如一。我基本会说:“你对正在构建的解决方案有多少信念?“我知道在最开始,在你了解现在所知的一切之前,你信心满满。那正是你辞职创业的原因。那么现在,知道了你现在所知的一切,你对这个问题的理解和你正在构建的解决方案,信念是更多了还是更少了?
我会告诉你,我听到过不同的回答。有些人会说:“哦 Scott,说实话,我信念更强了。我学到的所有东西,从客户那里得到的所有验证——我们只是还没搞明白而已。这快把我逼疯了。我们已经试了三次了,每次产品还是失败。但我现在的信念比以往任何时候都强。“对于这些人,我会说:“你知道吗?你只是正处于混乱的中段。坚持下去。这是再正常不过的事。“但很多时候,我听到的回答是:“说实话,如果我当初就知道现在所知道的这些,我不会做这件事。天哪。”
我就说:“那就退出。人生苦短。你有一个优秀的团队。转型,去做完全不同的事情。“如果你已经失去了信念,在创业的世界里,你不应该继续做你正在做的事。
播客开场与嘉宾介绍
Lenny: 欢迎收听 Lenny’s Podcast,在这里我采访世界级的产品领导和增长专家,向他们学习在打造和增长当今最成功产品过程中积累的宝贵经验。今天的嘉宾是 Scott Belsky。Scott 绝对是一位产品界的传奇人物。他曾是创始人,创建了一家名为 Behance 的公司,后来卖给了 Adobe。在 Adobe,他一路晋升为首席产品官(Chief Product Officer),最近又担任了首席战略官兼设计与新兴产品执行副总裁。他还是备受欢迎的著作 The Messy Middle 的作者。他也是 Pinterest、Uber、Airtable、Flexport、Warby Parker 等多家公司的天使投资人。
在我们这次广泛的对话中,Scott 分享了他关于如何培养产品感的建议,为什么你只应该构建你想要的一半功能,以及打造一款成功的消费产品需要什么。我们还花了很多时间讨论 AI 可能如何改变产品领域乃至整个世界。Scott 是一位极具洞察力且表达清晰的思考者,我从这次对话中学到了很多。接下来,有请 Scott Belsky。
Lenny: Scott,欢迎来到播客。
Scott Belsky: 嘿 Lenny,很高兴来到这里。
Lenny: 不知道你是否知道,从我推出这个播客的第一天起,能邀请你来做嘉宾就一直是我的一大目标。所以你来了我真的非常激动。我想先聊聊你在 Adobe 的角色。很长一段时间里,你担任 Adobe 的首席产品官。然后最近,我注意到你转到了一个听起来非常复杂的职位。我很好奇这个新职位是什么,以及你为什么做了这个转变。
从首席产品官到首席战略官
Scott Belsky: 在这个新职位中,我负责战略和公司发展、公司全部的设计工作,以及面向业务的新兴产品。回顾过去大约五年,我们主要的工作是将核心产品迁移到云端,使其具备协作能力,进行一些关键且有趣的机会性收购,确保我们推出的产品之间有良好的互通性,以及为新型创意人群开发新的 Web 应用。
那是一个非常精彩的五年篇章。现在,随着 AI 的兴起,以及我们拥有的新兴快速增长的业务——比如 3D 和沉浸式领域、图库业务以及整个领域如何被新技术所改变——将这一切纳入一个组织并能够全职专注于这些方面,对我来说非常令人兴奋。
Lenny: 那么你现在日常具体在做什么?我很好奇你现在的一天是怎样的。
Scott Belsky: 我认为一家公司的战略始终需要不断迭代。所以承担起制定整个公司战略的任务,意味着机会、需要会见的人和需要思考的问题源源不断。公司发展方面,比如新的并购(M&A)事务和整合工作等等,也都归我负责。作为曾经历过整合的创业者,我对这些有很多感受。所以现在能站在另一边,尝试从那个角度来改进流程,是很有意思的。
在设计方面,我花了大量时间审查每一个产品的设计,真正致力于提高我们交付产品的体验水准。在一家拥有大量历史产品和包袱的公司里,这并不容易。而在新兴产品方面,主要是关于我们正在推向市场的新产品,以及如何让它们取得成功。
CPO 的长期存活之道
Lenny: 这档播客里反复出现的一个话题是,首席产品官(CPO)很少能在一家公司长期待下去。他们通常——比如 Casey 和其他几位嘉宾都提到过——待个两三年,最多就是尝试几次改变运作方式、改进一些东西,然后 CEO 觉得”这不太行”,就换人。你觉得是什么让你在 Adobe 不仅存活下来,而且持续发展,承担越来越多的职责?
Scott Belsky: 在首席产品官这个角色上,我负责统管设计、产品和工程。当初我有兴趣加入公司并接受这个职位,部分原因就在于,我认为这些职能之间的边界充其量是人为设定的,往坏了说则是一种真正的束缚。我一直觉得,很多产品之所以胜出,并不是因为技术本身,而是因为用户对技术的体验。
所以,如果你有一个理解这一点并据此做决策的协同团队,我认为你能交付更好的体验。所以我这些年来做了很多工作,就是打破这些边界。而很多传统的首席产品官角色并不负责工程,有时甚至不负责设计。对我来说,那样的角色没什么吸引力。
产品感的本质
Lenny: 聚焦到产品这个话题——如果有一座”产品思想家拉什莫尔山”,我觉得你一定在上面。原因之一就是你拥有那种出色的产品感,不管这个词到底意味着什么。很明显,你有很强的产品感。产品经理们经常谈论产品感的重要性以及如何培养产品感。我很好奇,你觉得自己的产品感是怎么培养出来的?对于那些想培养产品感的年轻产品经理,你有什么建议?
Scott Belsky: 首先,我认为团队犯的最大的错误是:他们对解决某个问题的方案充满热情,而不是尽一切努力去培养对正在遭受这个问题的客户的共情能力。很多时候,共情本身就会告诉你答案;而你对自认为正确方案的那种热情,可能与真正的解决方案偏差了三十度。
所以,培养共情能力是其中的关键。当然,当我思考打造产品体验这门学科时,对我来说,它归根结底就是心理学。就是理解人们在最原始、最本能的时刻所具有的自然倾向。我经常谈到我们在使用任何产品时的首英里体验——无论你是消费者还是企业用户。在使用一个新产品的最初三十秒里,你是懒惰的、虚荣的、自私的。
你想以极快的速度把事情做完。你想在同事或朋友面前显得很厉害。你想在接触这个产品后很快就获得成功感。你不想看任何引导教程,不想读任何东西,不想忍受任何学习曲线。
当然,如果你能让用户顺利度过最初三十秒,你就有极大的机会与这位客户建立更持久的关系,让他们理解你的使命和产品的全部潜力。但我们需要认清一个事实:这真的很难做到。让我感到不可思议的是,大多数团队把构建产品的最后阶段的时间花在了思考客户使用产品的首英里体验上。如果你能让更多客户通过漏斗顶端,你就是一支世界级的产品团队。让我们先锚定在这个目标上,用心理学来达成它。
Lenny: 为了确保大家理解,你说的”首英里”,基本上就是引导流程,一直到激活时刻,对吗?
Scott Belsky: 我认为是这样的。就是引导流程,是最初的体验,是你看到的默认设置,是你对自己所处位置的感知。很多产品你其实不太清楚自己是怎么走到当前位置的,怎么回到起始页,去哪里获取帮助。所以我认为它包括引导、方向感和默认设置。
Lenny: 你一直是投资漏斗这一环节的坚定且早期的倡导者。有趣的是,在这档播客上,每当人们讨论如何提升留存、如何促进增长时,这个话题频繁出现。我们在这档播客上听到的最大胜利往往就发生在流程的这一部分。所以这又是一个应该在那上面花更多时间的数据点。我想问你,即使在 Adobe 这样的阶段,你是否仍然发现首英里还有大量机会,还是你觉得机会越来越少,重要性也在降低?
首英里为什么永远有机会
Scott Belsky: 答案是,还有大量机会。原因在于客户在不断变化。每一批新客户都不一样。产品早期阶段获得的新客户通常更愿意尝试、更宽容。你可能为他们完美地打磨了引导流程,然后突然发现”等等,它不那么有效了”。
原因是你现在吸引到了更多务实型客户,那些更晚阶段的客户,他们一开始就更加怀疑、更不宽容、更不愿意忍受摩擦。所以你必须重新构想整个引导流程。以 Photoshop 这样的产品为例,它以前要花费好几百美元。现在你每月花十美元就能用上 Photoshop。所以漏斗当然大了很多。大量用户带着创意欲望进来,却没有相应的技能,也没有耐心去培养这些技能。这就决定了像 Photoshop 这样的产品的引导体验需要彻底改变。
Lenny: 这让我想到 Coda 的 CEO Shishir 分享过一个观点,他说:“我不太买产品市场契合度(product-market fit)这个概念,因为你与那些热爱它、了解它的现有用户已经有了产品市场契合度,而你与那些你希望使用产品的潜在用户之间,始终还没有产品市场契合度。“这跟你说的很相关。最新加入的人对你做的事情毫无概念。
Scott Belsky: 我同意这个看法。而且我实际上认为,AI 未来将扮演的角色就是让应用越来越多地在用户所在的地方去适配他们。直到今天,我们在大多数情况下仍然不得不为所有人设计通用化的引导体验。我非常期待有一天,产品能根据我们是什么类型的用户,在我们所在的地方来适配我们。
Lenny: 关于 AI 我有一大堆问题想问你。所以我先按住不问——
Scott Belsky: 没问题。
Lenny: ——先放一放。我想再深入聊聊共情这个话题。你谈到如何提升产品感时说,共情和理解用户的问题非常重要。对于那些想在这方面有所提升的人,你有什么具体建议吗?他们实际可以做什么来让自己更有共情能力,培养这项技能?
Scott Belsky: 对我而言,作为产品领导者,最让我谦卑的时刻总是与客户肩并肩坐在一起。观察他们如何度过自己的一天——不仅仅是使用我的产品,而是如何度过他们的一天——因为你会因此获得大量你原本缺失的上下文信息。
客户在使用你的产品时,是在他们周围一切事物的交织之中使用的。在企业环境中,是他们其他的会议、其他的产品,以及全天收到的各种消息提醒。而在消费者场景中,是在照顾孩子或爱人、看 Netflix 或其他什么事情之间进行的。
真正理解客户的上下文
Scott Belsky: 要真正理解客户所处的位置和他们的心态,你必须理解他们使用你产品时的上下文环境。所以培养共情的一部分,就是与客户肩并肩坐在一起,亲身体验他们面对的现实。那段相处的时间会让你获得更好的直觉,帮助你理解更多。有了共情,我们就能更好地——引号——“为自己”做产品,因为通过对他人培养共情,我们感受到了他们的感受。我们就能成为客户。当然,我们都知道,世界上一些最优秀的产品,正是诞生于制造者本身就是客户的时候。
Lenny: 这让我想到 Marc Andreessen 说过的那段很棒的话,我总是一再引用——每个人的时间都已经被分配完了。他们没有时间来用你的产品。他们不是——
Scott Belsky: 没错。
Lenny: ——去哪找一个新 app 来怎么怎么样的。
超越预期的惊喜
Scott Belsky: 顺便提一下,相关的一点——因为我知道 Lenny 你会和很多嘉宾聊到产品驱动增长这个话题。抱歉如果我在这里跳来跳去的,但是——
Lenny: 请说。
Scott Belsky: 我觉得这也很有关系,因为每个人都在想办法让自己的产品增长。另一件让我困惑的事情是,产品领导者期望人们会因为产品很棒而去谈论它。但人们不会去谈论一个产品恰好做到了他们预期的事情,他们谈论的是产品做到了他们没预期到的事情。
你看看 Tesla 这样的产品。人们不会跑去跟人说今天开了一趟很好的车,但他们会谈起在仪表盘上发现的彩蛋,或者发现的跟圣诞节或其他什么节日关联的酷炫新功能。
所以这件事一直让我觉得很有意思。在消费品中——甚至企业产品中也许更是如此——为什么我们不把重点优化在那些人们意想不到产品能做到的事情上,借此创造那种惊喜与愉悦,让人们愿意去谈论它,与我们的产品建立起关系?我觉得这是拼图中的另一块。
Lenny: 这真的很有意思,让我想起我刚和 Spotify 的 Gustav 聊到的一件事——他那期节目可能在这期之前或之后播出——关于每一个伟大的消费产品都会耍某种魔术,让你觉得像魔法一样,Spotify 就是一个例子。而且——
Scott Belsky: 我喜欢这个说法——魔术,带一点神秘感,一点悬念,一点惊喜。这是好莱坞一直在用的经典手法。为什么我们不在自己的产品中运用呢?
消费产品为什么如此难以成功
Lenny: 让我顺着消费产品这个话题再展开聊一下。你职业生涯的大部分时间——也许是绝大部分——都在做消费品,想象一下 Adobe 就知道了。当然现在也有很多 B2B 的成分。你同时也做天使投资,帮助了很多消费类公司。告诉我你是否同意,但感觉新的消费产品基本上很少能成功。
就算成功了,也有一段有效的时间窗口,BeReal 现在正经历这个过程,Clubhouse 也是如此。Paparazzi 也经历过。然后它们就失败或淡出了。也许还会回来,然后再次淡出。我想先问一下,你是否基本同意,消费领域的产品极少能成功?
Scott Belsky: Uber 是一个消费产品,但它构建了一个前所未有的网络效应。它利用了始终存在但从未被开发过的闲置产能。它在底层做了赋予其持久生命力的事情。再想想 Pinterest——我是 Ben 的第一个种子轮天使投资人和产品顾问。
在那个产品上,他对消费心理有独特的洞察——它不太关乎获取点赞,不太关乎通过自己的照片来展示自我、看朋友的照片以及由此引发的那种焦虑,而是帮助人们收集并用自己的兴趣来呈现自己。
所以这同样是一种新的洞察,我认为它也发展出了属于自己的网络效应,使其能够持久。而且还有一个很有意思的商业层面——它为每个 pin 的来源网站带来了海量流量,于是那些网站就开始自己放上 pin 按钮,因为他们想要更多流量。
所以这背后同样有一些底层的东西——是在让市场向有利于他的方向倾斜。我认为很多其他更近的消费品,只不过是某种巧妙的、短暂一时的界面。它们实质上是在风险投资家的资金支持下,为那些已经拥有网络效应、已经拥有分发渠道和广告销售等一切的平台做研发。
所以我认为这就是为什么我们看到 B-reels 的功能现在也出现在 TikTok 里,你会看到很多昙花一现的产品,尤其是在这些创意类消费 app 中——我一直在密切关注它们。它们有趣、新颖。但如果它们真的好用,那些功能就会被整合进比如 Apple 原生相机里。
Lenny: 那我们深挖一下这一点。我知道这是一个大问题,但你发现一个新的消费产品要成功,哪些因素是重要的?你提到了惊喜会很有帮助、网络效应,也许还有一种新的洞察。你还发现什么对一个持久的新消费产品来说是重要的?
超级应用与消费者的变化
Scott Belsky: 是的。这很有意思,因为我十年前的回答可能和今天的回答不一样。我认为现在有一种灵活性。也许这始于中国那些什么都能做的超级应用。那改变了人们的观念——不再是一个多 decade 前那种原子化体验的思维,那时候你想要一个专门化的产品,以极其精简的方式精确做你想要的事情。
我认为 Snapchat 是在那个环境下诞生的。Instagram 对 Facebook 来说之所以有价值,也是因为那个现象。快进到今天,我们所有人的技术素养都大大提高了,在日常的技术生活中能够处理更多的认知负荷。所以突然之间,我们不在乎五个标签页,不介意功能隐藏在菜单深处——因为我们已经习惯了。
所以也许这就是为什么那些成熟的平台可以直接照搬任何新颖的新功能而不会被质疑,而不是让那些功能成为独立的应用。
做一半,而不是全部
Lenny: 让我稍微转换一下话题,聊聊你发过的一条推文——关于你学到的一件事。你有一个很精彩的帖子系列,就是你多年来思考产品和消费产品所积累的经验。其中一条说到,你应该只做你想做的一半,只做你计划的功能的一半,只提供你想提供的选项的一半,只聚焦你试图触达市场的一半。
能聊聊你是怎么得出这个认知的吗?以及在实际操作中怎么做到?就像”好的,我们做一半。“但哪一半?而且有人特别想要某个功能,糟糕,我们不能全做。“对于怎么真正执行这种方式,你有什么建议吗?
Scott Belsky: 我首先要说的是,每当团队问我 MVP 应该包含哪些功能、怎么决定先上线什么功能时,我总是告诉他们:要为你”希望遇到的问题”做优化。你希望遇到的问题是——客户顺利走完漏斗,感觉产品有用、获得了价值,然后跟你说:“哦,但你们能不能支持这个平台?“或者”我需要这个功能”,又或者”我希望能分享这个”。这些才是你想要的问题。所以,这些功能现在先别做。
只做那些阻止人们到达”在意到愿意向你提要求”这一步的事情。确保他们能走完注册流程,确保他们能关联账号,确保他们需要的话能用 Google 登录,诸如此类。
所以我总是提醒团队:为你希望遇到的问题做优化,消除所有的砖墙——那些可能导致重大灾难的问题。至于”做一半”这件事,我可是吃过苦头才学到的。
Behance 在 2008 年上线时,我总想用产品功能来对冲风险。我不确定人们是为了加入小组来的,还是为了创意人互相分享最佳实践的”技巧交换”来的,还是来搭建作品集的,或者只是来分享未完成的作品的。
也许,搭建一个完整的项目展示太重了。也许,我们可以只让人们分享作品的快照。于是,我们实际上带着几乎所有这些功能一起上线了。讽刺的是,Behance 最复杂的版本恰恰是最初的版本。
后来我们发现,有些功能起飞了,有些没有。我记得我们决定砍掉”技巧交换”的时候,作品集里项目的发布量突然上升了。我们一看:“天哪,项目发布量是核心指标,正是它驱动了回访 Behance 的流量。再来一次吧,砍掉小组试试。”
于是我们砍掉了小组。果然,更多人发布了更多项目。我们就觉得:“哇。“所以实际上,如果你让整个产品只围绕一件事,所有人就都会去做那件事。那个核心飞轮的运转速度会提升十倍,如果那就是业务最重要的指标,那就是金子。于是我们 basically 开始了一轮砍杀。我们就是不停地砍功能。多年来,我们一直在践行这种做法,我也把它推到了很多产品上——现在每当我参与的产品要添加新东西时,我会考虑你能替换掉什么,考虑你还能移除掉什么。
我们升级 Behance 作品集的时候,我记得以前有一个功能,可以自定义作品集的颜色。当别人点击你的个人资料看到所有项目时,你可以控制配色,加入你的品牌元素。
所以我们想:“你知道吗?如果我们直接拿掉这个功能会怎样?大家会不会更专注于发布项目?“于是我们把它拿掉了。头 24 小时,有人联系我们说:“该死,你们怎么能拿掉作品集配色控制?“24 小时之后,我们基本上再也没听到过这件事。所有作品集看起来更干净、更统一了,人们也更频繁地去做那个核心行为。由此我得出结论:尽量砍掉东西,你认为需要做的所有事情,大概只需要做一半。
Lenny: 我在想,现实中大多数时候你是不是只有在事后才意识到这一点,而不是事前。事情就是这样。然后就是对那些实际上不重要的东西执行日落(sunset)。
Scott Belsky: 不过 Lenny,我确实要说,我合作过的一些最优秀的产品领导者,我感觉他们天生就有一种极简主义、做减法的倾向。他们就是非常……他们会锚定在”我希望用户做的唯一一件事”上,确保这件事做好。然后对其他一切都相当冷酷——“好吧,只有当我们做这个核心事情遇到问题时再加,否则先放一边。“所以这些年来我也一直在努力做得更好。
Lenny: 很有意思的是,这和 Matt Mochary——他的那期实际上是我播客最受欢迎的一期——谈到解雇人时说的完全一样。他帮助过很多 CEO 裁人,100% 的情况都是:人一少,一切就开始加速。所以在人员和产品上,是完全相同的模型。
AI 将如何改变世界
Scott Belsky: 我觉得你说得对。这就是为什么我一直觉得,艰难的决定事后几乎总会让人感到如释重负。对产品是这样,对团队中的人也是。
Lenny: 让我们聊聊 AI,我特别兴奋这个话题,因为我知道你花了很多时间和人们讨论 AI,也在做 AI 产品。你们推出了 Firefly,很多人都非常期待。你还有一个 newsletter,分享你对 AI 和技术将如何影响世界的思考。
所以我有很多问题想问你。我先从一个很大的问题开始——也许这个问题太大了——就是你觉得五年后,因为 AI 的存在,世界会有多不一样?对产品打造者来说,对普通人来说?
Scott Belsky: 听我说,我是一个乐观主义者。我觉得人类的潜力一直被物理定律所束缚。为了做成任何一件事,你需要做的那些琐碎、重复的劳动,正是阻碍我们发挥创造力的东西。它是摩擦力,是工作流程中的那些”工”——如果能只有心流、没有”工”,那该多好?
我觉得 AI 做的就是这件事——把我们从工作流带到心流。它让我们进入一种心流状态,你脑海中浮现的任何想法,都可以开始展开。我今天早些时候正好和 Howie——就是运营 Airtable 的那位——在讨论这个。我们聊到了 IBM 那位宣布不再招聘 8000 人的高管,他说因为 AI 能完成这些工作。
我们讨论中他说了一个观点:随着工程师这些年的生产力大幅提升,公司并没有因此想要更少的工程师。实际上恰恰意味着他们对工程师的要求更高了,工程师有了更多可能去做更多的事。
所以如果人的创造力提升了,也许我们反而想招更多人,因为如果每个人都能贡献更多创造力,公司也许能做到更多。也许过去只有三个产品的公司,未来会有五个、七个甚至三十个产品。也许我们正在忽略的这个趋势是:人类为每一个问题、每一个机会都带来了这种创造力。而计算机呢——比如 ChatGPT,基本上只是给你”如果怎样,大概会是什么样”的结果,对吧?它并没有真正发现那些会成为新中心的边缘地带。
它实际上只是在挖掘已有的中心,然后试图把中心吐出来给你。当然,这本身也非常有用。所以我是乐观的。我认为会有更多的人参与到体验的交付中来。我非常看好体验经济,因为我认为有些人会被解放出来,更专注于那些不可规模化但真正能推动客户体验提升的事情。同时,我也为人不再需要做那么多苦力活而感到兴奋。
Lenny: 我对此也很兴奋。这让我想到——我可能要承认一件事,我有个 TikTok 账号,有一个团队帮我运营,我们没公开过,但有几条 TikTok 的声音是用 AI 生成的我的声音。他们就是——
Scott Belsky: 哇。
Lenny: 读脚本。就是我在讲一个故事。听起来有点像我。我拿给一个朋友看,我说:“你看出什么了吗?你对这个视频有什么奇怪的感觉吗?“他说:“没有啊,你讲得很好,真是个很棒的演讲者。“我说:“好吧,跟我打个招呼吧。”
Scott Belsky: 这样你读脚本的时间就可以省下来,转而去规划下一期的方向。
Lenny: 对,完全正确。所以我完全理解你说的。在产品团队中,你觉得哪个职能会受到 AI 最大的冲击,或者说被最大程度地——我不知道怎么说——优化?
扁平化组织与跨职能协作
Scott Belsky: 我们正在进入一个组织架构被扁平化的时代——以前凡事都要找别人,现在你自己就能做更多事情。直接从数据中获取答案,而不是非要中间去找数据科学家或数据分析师,这种自主权非常强大。
所以组织内部那种”传话游戏”会大大减少,而每个人自主挖掘、自主回答问题、自主推进事情的能力会大大增强。
我一直认为,小团队的优势正在于此——他们是扁平的,层级被压缩了,所有人都能在同一个房间里听到彼此的声音,这就是为什么他们能轻松跑赢那些分散在世界各地、层级臃肿的大公司。所以也许,这项技术能让跨职能协作更顺畅地发生。我对此很期待。
Lenny: 这真的很有意思。所以你本质上是在说,产品经理将能做更多设计工作、更多工程工作、更多数据分析工作。也许有一天,效果就跟团队里有个数据科学家一样好。但本质上,每个人都变成了这种跨职能的独角兽型小团队。
Scott Belsky: 这其实暗示了一种精英制的理念。就好像,人们获得晋升和机会的依据,变成了他们有多高的创造力和独创性,而不是他们走了多少流程、提交了多少 bug 报告之类的。所以你说的这番话,我觉得确实——是的,它在某种程度上是颠覆性的,比如不再需要数据分析师参与每一个环节。但我也想说,那位数据分析师也不用再整天回答重复性需求了,她可以把时间花在我们刚才讨论的那种不受职能边界束缚的思考上。
广泛探索可能性的超级能力
Lenny: 这让我想到我经常分享的一个观点:为什么需要产品经理?为什么需要设计师?为什么需要研究员?不一定是因为他们在这些特定技能上多么擅长,而是因为他们有时间去做那件需要完成的事。你可以让工程师做产品经理的工作,但他们没时间,他们想写代码,他们更愿意做那个。所以这确实很有意思,它也呼应了——它会让每个人都有更多时间去做他们真正想做好的那件事。
Scott Belsky: 没错。
Lenny: 你们目前在 Adobe 有没有在产品经理中推行一些做法,帮助他们利用这些工具,或者你们实际在用的工作方式?
Scott Belsky: 我一直很执着的一件事,就是把设计更早地引入产品开发流程。这不一定是 AI 层面的事,而是让设计师首先参与到讨论中来——甚至参与到一些客户研究的讨论中,参与到围绕客户价值主张的辩论中,参与到那些传统上只有产品经理参与的事情中。我发现,还是那句话,扁平化——让设计师听到这些信息并做出贡献,会赋予他们一种敏锐的直觉,这样他们之后坐下来探索各种可能的界面方案来解决问题时,就能做出更好的判断。
所以我非常推崇把设计前移。事实上,这大概是我作为产品负责人职业生涯中的”秘籍”——就是在整个过程中不成比例地赋予设计更大的权力。我认为我们接下来会看到的,是生成式 AI 实时增强设计师的工作。
生成式 AI 与设计师的工作
Scott Belsky: 比如现在,在 Photoshop 里,我们正在试验——不再只是缩小和裁剪图像,你还可以扩展图像。这当然是利用生成式 AI 进行向外绘制(out-painting)。所以你可以想象,当你在进行编辑的时候,无论是在这个场景中还是其他形式的设计中,你会看到一些缩略图,预览你可能想要达到的效果,然后你触碰一下它们——几乎就像预测文本一样——跳到下一步、再下一步、再下一步,在创作过程中实现跨越式的前进,而不是一步一步地小步推进。
我认为这种情况会越来越多地发生。而且希望产品设计师和产品经理也能在某种程度上参与到这些决策节点中来,因为设计师将面临更多的选择。
Lenny: 你刚才提到了一个词——直觉(golden gut)。这是什么意思?
Scott Belsky: 直觉(golden gut)就是当你在设计一个体验和流程的时候。你尝试各种方案,移动各种元素,然后说:“实际上,这太复杂了。也许我应该把这个页面拆成三步,而不是在一个页面上排三个步骤。我要怎么拆解?怎么简化?”
有时候你会有这样的直觉:“等等,如果我干脆把这个全部去掉呢?如果根本不需要这一整套步骤呢?如果我直接设一个预设默认值,让客户觉得需要的时候再去改呢?”
那些”我在想,如果这样呢,如果那样呢,如果这样呢”的瞬间,对我来说,这就是非常初级的产品思考者和非常资深的产品思考者之间的区别。我认为资深的产品思考者拥有那种直觉——“天哪,等等,减少认知负荷。“也许即使有 10% 的人会感到困惑,但能让 90% 的人快得多地完成这个流程,这就是一个巨大的胜利,是一个非常好的机会成本权衡。我觉得我们在构建产品过程中做出的那些微小决策,就是直觉(golden gut)的体现。
如何在 AI 时代保持领先
Lenny: 太棒了。我之前没听过这个词。对于那些正在听的、觉得”AI 正在发生,我不知道该怎么办”的产品经理,你有什么建议帮助他们保持领先、了解趋势走向,不被甩在后面?
Scott Belsky: 简单来说,一个字——玩。我们所有人都必须去玩这些技术。我们必须找到各种方式去尝试。职业生涯中越有经验,风险就越大——你会固守自己的习惯。你会说:“啊,不,我不需要邮箱里那个自动草稿功能,也不需要 ChatGPT 来建议我怎么回复,我不需要也挺好。“一定要去试试。一定要去玩。给你的朋友写诗。去尝试各种生成式 AI 工具,看看有什么可能,追随每一个好奇心。
我之所以开始写 Implications 通讯,就是因为每天都有大量新东西高速涌现。我就想:“我必须强迫自己确保理解这一切,思考这些影响会如何改变我的业务以及我所处的世界。“而最好的方式就是不得不去写它,并且向我的读者承诺每月会出一期。所以我觉得我们所有人都应该以某种形式做类似的事情。
Lenny: 既然提到了,顺便安利一下 Implications。大家怎么找到它、怎么订阅?
Scott Belsky: 是的,网址是 implications.com,很容易找到。这是一个每月一次的练习——整个月里,我会试着捕捉几件我认为重要的事情。而且我真的很想深入挖掘,思考这些影响对我们工作和生活各个方面的意义。这是一个很有趣的练习。同时,在这个过程中我也会收到一些两极分化的反馈。
Lenny: 是吗?有意思。你应该分享出来。那会很有意思——“以下是我写的东西收到的反馈”。这也触及了这个播客中经常出现的一个话题:写作的力量,帮助你理清思路。很多人以为我的通讯只是在分享我知道的东西,觉得”我心里知道,写到通讯里就行”。但其实不仅如此。写作本身帮我理清了思路,给了我一个理由。正如你所说,它是一个倒逼机制,让你花时间去把东西 crystallize 出来。所以这又是一个提醒。
Scott Belsky: 关于捕捉这些想法,我觉得这些年来我在写作和产品开发中学到的一点是:有时候你捕捉到的那些小小的灵光一闪或草图,会在多年后变得相关。所以不要总是为了一个可预见的用途去捕捉和写作。把它当作一个你一直在照看的后台炉灶。想象一下,三年后,一切条件成熟,这些内容或某个关键想法就会变得无比珍贵,正好帮你解决当下面对的问题。
Lenny: 实际上有很多和你处境相同的人,他们想多写一些、多输出一些内容,但同时也有全职工作,有很多事情要处理。关于你实际上是怎么做到持续输出的,你有什么建议吗?
Scott Belsky: 听着,这没有什么诀窍,就是要在时间和优先级上极其无情,对大部分事情说不。今天早上我去跑步,然后想:“我刚好有整整 40 分钟,之后必须去洗澡,洗完 30 分钟后我得到某个地方。“我决定用那 40 分钟——至少其中 35 分钟——来写作。不管我写出五个字还是五页纸。这感觉很好……但如果没有这种自律,就像你说的,很难在日程的缝隙中把它塞进去。
混乱的中段
Lenny: 说到自律,你写了一本书叫《The Messy Middle》。甚至不用讲它具体讲了什么,光这个书名就已经……我觉得人们会觉得”我懂了”。我猜很多听众是创始人或产品经理,正感觉自己就处于这种混乱的中段。对于处于这个阶段的人,你有什么建议能帮助他们度过这个混乱的中段?
Scott Belsky: 核心就是:无论是创业项目、新初创公司,还是大公司内部的业务转型,中间这几年之所以混乱,是因为充满了低谷。波动非常大。当你在那些低谷中时,你需要找到一种方式去承受。你需要承受无人知晓、不确定性和焦虑。
我猜很多听众,不管是在大公司工作还是自己创业,做一件没有人知道也没有人在乎的事情是很难的。我总是提醒自己,一百多年前,人类的平均预期寿命只有 25 岁。所以把三到五年的生命花在一件事情上——尤其是这件事可能失败——在当时是一个糟糕的决定。我认为从生物学的角度,我们需要不断的奖励和肯定才能坚持一件事情足够久。
而事实上,你们的听众都在构建需要很多很多年才能逆势而上的东西。在这种情况下,我们必须克服人类的天性,通过团结在一起坚持足够久来找到出路。那怎么做呢?
显然,一部分在于文化——愿意为你所服务的客户服务,愿意与你共事的团队一起工作,这些就足以让你坚持下去。我认为另一部分是要缩短奖励回路,设定大家共同认可的微小目标和里程碑。我们要庆祝这些里程碑,即使从大局来看,它们并没有那么重要。
用叙事 merchandize 进展
Scott Belsky: 我认为这是维持团队、让梦想存活的关键部分。我总喜欢用一个比喻:作为产品领导者,我们开车载着团队横穿全国,而后座的车窗全部涂黑了,所有人都坐在后座上。所以,如果他们不知道我们在做什么,不知道我们正在取得进展——路况变好了,我们刚跨越了州界——如果他们接收不到这个叙事,他们会闷得发疯。关于进步感的研究很多,获得进步感以及进步如何成为动力的来源。所以作为产品领导者,我们必须推销进展。我们必须成为这个叙事的守护者。
什么时候应该放弃
Lenny: 你刚才的谈话中多少提到了这一点,但也确实存在某些时刻,放弃是合理的选择——你不应该无限期地坚持下去。对于什么时候该说”好吧,你大概应该往前看了”,你有什么建议吗?这让我想到有很多公司一直在硬撑,也许它们不应该继续了——因为它们还有足够的钱,或者它们觉得”创始人绝不放弃”。你有什么建议或想法可以分享吗?
Scott Belsky: 是的。这些年来我跟不少创始人和朋友有过很多次这样的对话,他们经营的公司要么停滞不前,要么更糟,都会问这个问题:“我应该继续吗?“我每次的回答都一样。我基本上会问——而且是很认真地问——“你对正在构建的解决方案有多少 conviction(信念)?”
我知道在最开始,在你还什么都不知道的时候,你有着无比强烈的信念。正是这股信念让你辞掉了工作,让你承担了所有这些风险、招人、融资等等。而现在,在知道了你所知道的一切之后,你对正在解决的问题和构建的方案是更有信念了还是更少了?我告诉你,我得到的答案各不相同。有些人会说:“Scott,说实话,我的信念更强了。我所学到的一切,从客户那里得到的所有验证——我们只是还没搞出来。这快把我逼疯了。我们试了三次,每次产品都失败了,但我的信念比以往任何时候都更强。”
对这些人,我会说:“你知道吗?你只是处在混乱的中段。坚持下去,这就是常态。“但很多时候,我听到的是:“说实话,如果我当年知道现在知道的这些,我不会做这件事。天哪。“我的回答是:“那就退出。“你的人生很短。你有一支优秀的团队。转型吧,去做完全不同的事情。如果你已经失去了信念,在创业的世界里你不应该继续做你正在做的事。
Lenny: 我想象中,有时候确实会有那样的时刻。所以大概存在某种光谱——信念低到什么程度、持续了多久,对吧?
Scott Belsky: 我觉得是的。但与此同时,听我说,我们都有起伏,都有好日子和坏日子。不过,我确实认为伟大的创始人……他们在骨子里绝对确信某样东西必须存在,而且他们会无情地、不屈不挠地坚持到它出现为止。但如果你失去了那股确信,我真的不知道你是否还有燃料继续前行。所以你说的对,不要在糟糕的一天做出重大决定。但如果信念总体上已经消散了,要对其他选择保持开放心态。
投资时看重什么
Lenny: 你做了很多天使投资,跟很多创始人交流过。你在寻找什么?你觉得一家创业公司需要向你展示什么,才能让你觉得这是一个可能成功的赌注?你看重哪些重要的特质?
Scott Belsky: 我从团队方面讲几点,然后从产品方面再讲几点。
Lenny: 完美。
Scott Belsky: 在团队方面,我非常看重那些善于倾听、真正在学习、渴望打破常规的创始人,同时他们要比在乎金钱更看重自己的使命。因为我确实认为,尤其在没有收入的阶段,你需要被比收入更宏大、更大胆的东西所驱动。
我对那种纯粹的推销型创始人有本能的抵触——他们总是试图粉饰真相,喜欢掩盖困难的部分。我一直欣赏这样的领导者:对未来保持乐观,但对当下非常务实甚至有些悲观。所以跟我化学反应好的创始人是那种会说:“这个市场有这么大。这件事有这么了不起。我知道它需要存在。但我们还有很多要解决的问题。有些东西不工作。我们没有这些数据集。这些是我们正在挣扎的主要障碍。这些是让我夜不能寐的事情。“这些是真实的人。你知道,当他们不可避免地经历那段动荡的混乱的中段时,他们的团队、他们的投资人会得到真实的真相,他们能够一起参与并找到解决方案。
所以我真的很喜欢发现这类创始人,而我非常警惕那些爱提名人名、过度自我推销的人——他们不太可能以那种方式合作。在产品方面,我寻找的是一种对象模型(object model)式的产品思维方式,我有信心它能随着他们解决问题的推进而扩展。当我谈到对象模型时,我的意思是:当你看到这个产品时,是否清楚它是怎么运作的、你从哪里来、你要到哪里去?
这是我做产品评审时总是问的三个问题:“我怎么到这里的?我现在该做什么?我接下来该做什么?“我觉得每一个屏幕、每一个产品体验,都应该能回答这三个问题。有时候,我会跟一个自称设计驱动、声称在构建卓越产品的团队交流,他们给我看一个 demo,我的感觉是:“这完全一团糟。“没有清晰干净的面包屑导航和对象模型来说明这东西是怎么运作的。他们怎么可能把用户引导通过漏斗?显然,他们并不把这个作为核心原则来重视,这也是一个危险信号。最后,我显然必须相信他们在解决的问题。以上就是我会考虑的一些事情。
Lenny: 你主要关注消费者领域,还是到处都投?我问这个以防有人想联系你,也许说”嘿 Scott,你想不想……”
Scott Belsky: 是的。不,我相当不设限。我寻找以产品设计为导向的团队,在创造需要存在的东西。除此之外,我尽量不做太多限定。
最后的建议
Lenny: 好的。非常棒。你还有什么最后的话想分享吗?这些话可能会影响世界上人们构建产品的方式——有成千上万、甚至数十万听众在听。在我们进入非常精彩的快问快答之前,还有什么你想分享的吗?
Scott Belsky: 简短说两点。一个关于我们当下所处的时刻,另一个关于我们为什么做我们所做的事。关于当下这个时刻,我们处于一个资源受限的环境中。面对现实吧。我们都会拥有更少的钱、更少的人手,诸如此类。
我一直发现,足智多谋比资源本身能带你走得更远——尽管在过去七到十年里,我们基本上是用砸资源的方式解决每一个问题的。天哪,这个扩容不了——往服务器上砸更多钱。天哪,社交媒体团队需要更多人——往编制上砸更多钱。我们一直用砸资源的方式解决问题,而不是去想:让我们重构一下数据库的运行方式,或者重构一下团队回复客户服务请求的流程,引入新技术来提升效率,尝试利用 AI 看看能不能帮上忙。
我们现在进入了一个被迫足智多谋、被迫重构的时代,而不是靠招人、靠砸资源来解决问题。我认为这是一个巨大的机会。我觉得最好的团队会在这段时期锻炼出这种肌肉,走得最远。这就是为什么所有 VC 都会说——虽然听起来很老套——但最伟大的公司总是诞生在这样的时代。
所以我的第一点是:抓住危机,各位。如果资源是碳水化合物,那足智多谋就是肌肉。它会一直伴随你,让你变得更强,帮助你随着时间推移拥有更好的直觉和更好的表现。然后,退一步说,我想鼓励大家认识到:在风险投资领域,任何了不起的事物,归根结底都是例外。
Lenny: 你和我刚才讨论的所有最佳实践,以及我们从书里读到的所有东西——我一直提醒自己,归根结底,有时候在做真正变革性的事情时,例外才是规律,而任何非凡的成就都不可能通过寻常的手段获得。所以,虽然我们应该采纳这些最佳实践,当然也可以听听我辛苦学到的教训等等,但同时——如果所有人都说你疯了,你要么是真的疯了,要么就是真的发现了什么。所以对这些建议要有自己的判断。
说到非凡——我觉得应该给你一个机会聊聊你在 Adobe 正在做的事情。你在做哪些产品?有什么是大家可能不知道但应该了解的 Adobe 正在发生的变化?
Scott Belsky: 好的,谢谢你的提问。对我们来说,我认为目前有三股趋势——或者说三波转型浪潮——正在驱动我们的战略。第一波是人们正变得更有创造力自信。说起来挺不可思议的,我们在五岁的时候创造力自信是最强的——画画的时候,父母会说:“天哪,真漂亮!太棒了!贴到冰箱上!“然后大多数成年人的创造力自信就从那以后一路下降,这真的很可悲。
而有了生成式 AI 和各种工具——我们在市场上有一款产品叫 Adobe Express,我们的生成式 AI 产品叫 Firefly——这些工具让人们立刻感到更有创造力自信。看到那些从来不拿笔画画的人突然变得自信起来,真的很令人惊叹。所以我认为这是第一波浪潮。
我们之前稍微聊过的第二波浪潮是:创意专业人士现在可以探索十倍的可能性空间。这些工具大大提升了他们的效率。有些人会说:“天哪,创意从业者要被取代了。“不不不,不会的。他们只会找到好十倍的解决方案。他们将拥有探索更多可能性的能力。而设计的伟大之处,就在于探索更广阔的可能性空间。
然后,我认为第三波令我着迷的浪潮是个性化。我们之前也聊过一点——我们的应用会主动适应我们的状态。我认为每一个营销体验都会越来越为每个人个性化。每一个电商体验都会知道我们是谁——只展示我们的鞋码,而不是其他人的。
这些转型将真正改变整个商业、内容、媒体等一切领域。Adobe 拥有一个庞大的数字营销业务,正致力于推动其中的一部分。这些就是我认为正在驱动我们新产品研发的战略因素。好了,现在进入快问快答环节吧。
Lenny: 喜欢这个。你需要把这句话做成横幅挂起来。过去十年看着 Adobe 的崛起真是令人惊叹。之前感觉它停滞不前,突然之间就变成了一个巨头。Scott 和所有参与其中的人,做得太棒了。那么,我们进入非常精彩的快问快答环节。我有六个问题给你。我们尽量快速过一遍。准备好了吗?
Scott Belsky: 好的。
Lenny: 来,表现得兴奋一点。开始吧。
Scott Belsky: 没问题,来吧。
Lenny: 第一题:你有哪两三本最常推荐给别人看的书?
Scott Belsky: 第一本 Tony Fadell 写的 Build。Tony 是一个了不起的、充满魅力的、极其务实的产品构建者。他足够勇敢,既做了原子层面的产品,也做了比特层面的产品——用他自己的话说。他的书里充满了智慧。我也很喜欢那种自然法则、权力法则类型的书。我喜欢心理学书籍。
关于孩子与未来的思考
Lenny: 你有孩子,一个或几个。
Scott Belsky: 是的。
Lenny: 你在做什么来帮助他们为这个未来做准备?
Scott Belsky: 我一直在想这个问题。如果你相信 Vinod Khosla 的预测——80%的工作、80%的职位将被 AI 取代——那我们的孩子们将来做什么?正如我们讨论过的,他们的创造力将被释放出来,这很好。但归根结底,我始终回到一个信念:只要一个人有热情,他就能在某件事上取得成功。
所以我一直专注于确保他们找到自己超级热爱的事情。甚至他们现在找到的东西是不是以后做的那个,都不重要——因为我相信,热情本身,以及对热情采取主动性,是一种肌肉记忆,一旦你培养出来……我有一个女儿热爱骑马。我不知道她会不会一辈子骑马什么的。但我认为她对骑马的热情,以及变得更好、不断学习更多、做更多的渴望——这本身就是一种可复制的肌肉记忆。所以我不知道未来会怎样,但我相信有热情的人永远会有出路。
Lenny: 说得好。你面试别人时最喜欢问的一个问题是什么?
Scott Belsky: 有一个正经的,还有一个有点刻薄的。我很喜欢了解一个人是否有内省能力。所以我喜欢问人们关于他们对自己了解到的一些东西,这些要能揭示他们工作方式中的局限。这是一种测试内省能力的方式。当这个人碰壁或者遇到困难时,他们是能坦诚地自我审视,还是会去指责别人、推卸责任?所以我确实会问这个问题。我还喜欢一个问题:“你觉得自己幸运吗?“我觉得这是个很有意思的问题,因为有些人对自己的处境和一路走来的经历非常不自信,可能会不愿承认运气的成分;而那些内心自在的人会承认自己是幸运的。我的意思是,我觉得事实是我们都非常幸运,当然也拥有很多 privilege。我一直觉得这总是能引出一段有趣的对话。
最近发现的最爱产品
Lenny: 你最近发现的最喜欢的产品是什么,app 或者实体产品都行?有什么想到的吗?
Scott Belsky: 我最近在玩一个叫 Queue 的产品。拼法是 Q-U-E-U-E。它基本上是一个让你把所有想看的内容排队的方式,跨所有流媒体平台,因为现在内容太多了,分散在太多平台上了。你可以建自己的队列,也可以看朋友的队列,还能看到你认识的大多数人的队列里都有哪些内容。这实际上形成了一个很棒的图谱,展示了人们想看或喜欢的内容。在当今这个内容来源无数的世界上,我觉得我们会非常需要这样的东西。
Lenny: 我一定要试试这个。我一直在找这样一个 app——晚上坐在那里,“到底该看什么?“网上的东西我都看遍了。所以这太棒了。你最近发现的、觉得好用的 AI 工具是什么?不是 Adobe 做的那种。
Scott Belsky: 好的。如果可以的话,我想提一个我投资过的产品。
Lenny: 当然可以。
Scott Belsky: 这是一个叫 Tome 的产品。它可以把你想要放入演示文稿中的叙事内容,通过 AI 基本上自动生成一份演示文稿的草稿,配上图象和有说服力的要点。就好像你把这件事交给一个实习生,说”给我带回一份我可以在此基础上修改的东西”——然后瞬间就出来了。所以这个玩起来很有意思。
Lenny: 我去看看。我们会附上链接。这也让我想起 Kevin Kelly 在 Tim Ferriss 的播客上说过,AI 和 ChatGPT 基本上就是一个实习生。大概就是它们目前能力的水平。它们就是帮你干活的实习生。
Scott Belsky: 我觉得说得对。正因如此,我们必须把它视为一种资源而非一种约束,因为这又回到了那个问题——如果 AI 代替你去做,而不是你自己做真正的独立思考,那会是什么样子。
结束语
Lenny: Scott,这是我们第一次聊天,但我感觉像已经认识你了一样。你太棒了。非常感谢你来参加节目。最后两个问题:大家想联系你、了解更多的话,可以在哪里找到你?听众怎样能帮到你?
Scott Belsky: 好的。太棒了。谢谢,Lenny。你的播客和邮件大概是我转发给我合作的产研团队最多的干货和资源了。所以谢谢你为我们大家提升了这个领域的水平,我应该这么说。很荣幸能上你的播客。我很好找,scottbelsky.com 或者你喜欢的社交网络上 @scottbelsky 都行。我现在写东西的地方是 implications.com。
还有,你知道吗?欢迎大家来分享他们在做的事情。我就是喜欢尽可能多地收集信息点,喜欢帮人把点连起来、做介绍。我觉得这可以算是对这个越来越好的产品世界的一种贡献。欢迎大家来找我。
Lenny: 太好了。Scott,再次感谢你的到来。
Scott Belsky: 谢谢,Lenny。
Lenny: 大家再见。
非常感谢你的收听。如果你觉得这期节目有价值,可以在 Apple Podcast、Spotify 或你喜欢的播客 app 上订阅。也请考虑给我们评分或留言,这对其他听众发现这个播客真的很有帮助。你可以在 lennyspodcast.com 找到往期所有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 |
|---|---|
| Airtable | Airtable(公司名,保留原文) |
| Apple | Apple(公司名,保留原文) |
| Behance | Behance(公司名,保留原文) |
| Ben | Ben(人名,保留原文,指 Pinterest 创始人 Ben Silbermann) |
| BeReal | BeReal(产品名,保留原文) |
| breadcrumbs | 面包屑导航 |
| Casey | Casey(人名,保留原文) |
| ChatGPT | ChatGPT(产品名,保留原文) |
| cheat code | 秘籍(cheat code) |
| Clubhouse | Clubhouse(产品名,保留原文) |
| Coda | Coda(公司名,保留原文) |
| collapse the stack | 扁平化(collapse the stack) |
| conviction | 信念 |
| excess capacity | 闲置产能 |
| Firefly | Firefly(产品名,保留原文) |
| first mile experience | 首英里体验 |
| flash in the pan | 昙花一现 |
| funnel | 漏斗 |
| golden gut | 直觉(golden gut) |
| Gustav | Gustav(人名,保留原文,指 Spotify 的 Gustav Söderström) |
| Howie | Howie(人名,保留原文,指 Airtable 的 Howie Liu) |
| IBM | IBM(公司名,保留原文) |
| Instagram(产品名,保留原文) | |
| Kevin Kelly | Kevin Kelly(人名,保留原文) |
| M&A | 并购(M&A) |
| Marc Andreessen | Marc Andreessen(人名,保留原文) |
| Matt Mochary | Matt Mochary(人名,保留原文) |
| merchandise progress | 推销进展 |
| meritocracy | 精英制(meritocracy) |
| MVP | 最小可行产品(MVP) |
| network effect | 网络效应 |
| object model | 对象模型(object model) |
| Photoshop | Photoshop(产品名,保留原文) |
| Pinterest(公司名,保留原文) | |
| pivot | 转型 |
| pragmatist customers | 务实型客户 |
| privilege | 特权(privilege) |
| product sense | 产品感 |
| product-led growth | 产品驱动增长 |
| product-market fit | 产品市场契合度 |
| Queue | Queue(产品名,保留原文) |
| red flag | 危险信号 |
| seed angel | 种子轮天使投资人 |
| Shishir | Shishir(人名,保留原文) |
| Snapchat | Snapchat(产品名,保留原文) |
| stir-crazy | 闷得发疯 |
| sunset | 日落(sunset) |
| super app | 超级应用 |
| Tesla | Tesla(品牌名,保留原文) |
| the messy middle | 混乱的中段 |
| TikTok | TikTok(产品名,保留原文) |
| Tim Ferriss | Tim Ferriss(人名,保留原文) |
| Tome | Tome(产品名,保留原文) |
| top of funnel | 漏斗顶端 |
| Uber | Uber(公司名,保留原文) |
此文档由 AI 分片翻译(translate_long_document)