2. Inspirations and Initial Draft of the Ladder

When developing the first version of the product ladder, it was essential to check that we weren't heading in a direction that diverged significantly from the rest of the industry. We did our homework by looking at ladders from companies we had previously worked for, as well as ladders publicly available from tech companies with robust product teams. There is a wealth of content out there, and we used it to understand how these companies structure their ladders, which competencies they evaluate, and the levels they define.

Our goal in looking at the market was not to simply adopt these references but rather to ensure we weren't missing anything fundamental. As it turned out, Memed's needs weren't radically different, but doing this exercise helped us confirm we were on the right track.

The version of the ladder we built and presented wasn't meant to be final because this is an ongoing process. As we began using it with our product team—in 1:1 sessions, within the trio of GPMs, or with the Head of Product and Technology—discussions naturally arose about competencies that perhaps weren't explicitly listed or that needed reworking. These discussions were welcome and necessary to reflect the company's evolution and our growing understanding of product management.

Structure of the Ladder

The product ladder was organized into four main pillars: Execution, Insights, Strategy, and Influence. Why structure it this way? Was it simply because it’s common practice? No, there was a clear rationale. Given the number of competencies we considered necessary, grouping them into pillars made sense.

Initially, we detailed eleven different competencies. However, using eleven distinct competencies alone was impractical for day-to-day conversations. We wanted clarity and simplicity. Remembering and addressing all eleven competencies every time we evaluated performance or growth would be overwhelming. The grouping into these four pillars was meant to synthesize the framework into something more digestible.

Defining Competencies for Memed's Needs

Many of the competencies listed in the ladder will look familiar to those working in product management, but Memed being a healthtech company required some particular emphasis. For example, Industry Knowledge was critical for us. Understanding the highly regulated healthcare market and its peculiarities was a key competency we included in the ladder. This competency might not be relevant to every company, but for Memed, it was a priority.

Similarly, Managing Up was another competency we added. Given the composition of our Senior Management Team and the type of relationships we valued, managing upwards was essential. This could have been part of a broader "stakeholder management" competency, but we chose to highlight it separately to emphasize its importance.

We also decided that People Development would be a required competency for our senior product managers. Even in a technical ladder, we wanted to make it clear that senior PMs were responsible for developing others, even if they were not formally managing people. This was a deliberate choice to foster a culture of mentorship and growth.

Competencies We Left Out

During discussions, some competencies were left out—like Communication and Collaboration. These competencies often appear in other ladders, but in Memed's case, we saw them as fundamental elements that supported all other competencies rather than standalone categories. For instance, building a product vision without collaboration or effective communication would be impossible. Thus, we decided to incorporate these attributes into other competencies rather than treat them separately, simplifying our framework.

Another example was Recruitment for senior roles. At that point, we had just gone through a significant hiring process, and there were no plans for a similar expansion in the near future. Therefore, adding recruitment as a competency didn't make sense at that time.

We also chose not to include Employer Branding or Evangelism competencies, which often focus on promoting the company externally. We felt that we needed to prioritize building a solid product foundation before moving on to brand promotion activities.

Lastly, behavioral aspects were not included in the product ladder. Memed already had a cultural code that addressed the behavioral expectations for all employees. If we hadn’t had this cultural code, perhaps we would have incorporated these elements into the product ladder as well. Since we had it, we focused the ladder solely on technical competencies.

Levels and Guidelines

The ladder provided a clear path for career progression across three levels: Product Manager I, Product Manager II, and Product Manager III. Each competency had different expectations for each level. For example, a PM I might be expected to have a "low" proficiency in Stakeholder Management, while a PM III would need a "high" level of proficiency.

It was essential that these expectations were guidelines, not rigid checklists. We did not want people to feel they had to tick off a set of boxes to earn a promotion. Instead, it was more about continuous growth and conversation—something that could evolve over time based on discussions between PMs and their managers.

Encouraging Collaboration and Growth

The ladder also supported self-assessment and growth planning. Product Managers would evaluate themselves against the guidelines, and this would form the basis for meaningful conversations with their managers. It was not about providing a definitive rating but about having an open discussion to align expectations, identify areas for growth, and help PMs move to the next level.

To make this framework even more practical, we categorized competencies under the four pillars. For example, instead of tracking eleven individual competencies, we discussed broader strengths and areas for improvement within each pillar, such as Execution or Strategy. This approach kept the conversation focused and aligned with our core principles of clarity and simplicity.

The ladder was not just a document saved on Google Drive; it became part of our regular discussions, a useful tool for PMs and their managers to gauge growth, set goals, and ensure alignment.

Example Ladder Memed

The image contains a framework for evaluating competencies in product management, divided into four main categories: Execution, Insights, Strategy, and Influence. Each of these categories is associated with specific skills and examples that illustrate the role of product managers in each area.

Execution

Insights

Strategy

Influence

This framework is used to outline what is expected from product managers in terms of competencies and behaviors within a product development environment. It provides clear pillars that help PMs understand their responsibilities, growth areas, and how their performance is evaluated across different levels of product management roles.