3. Bad vs. Good Product Teams

The main focus of this discussion is to understand the difference between bad product teams and good product teams. Let's dive into the observations from companies with both kinds of teams.

1. Mercenary Teams vs. Missionary Teams

In bad product teams, members behave like mercenaries. They are only there for the paycheck and do what they're told without questioning or caring about the business or its objectives. They are often more concerned about the technology, the programming language, or the framework being used rather than the business problem that needs solving. They just execute tasks without questioning their value or impact.

In contrast, missionary teams are passionate about the products they are building. They truly want to make an impact and improve the product. These team members will question solutions, even those proposed by senior leadership, and seek to understand the why behind every decision. They are driven to find better solutions and make meaningful contributions to the business and its metrics.

2. Waterfall Disguised as Agile vs. True Dual-Track Agile

A common trap for bad product teams is following a waterfall process disguised as agile. Many teams claim to be agile but take months to deliver something, which contradicts the agile philosophy. These teams are heavily reliant on roadmaps, where solutions are predefined, and the requirements come exclusively from stakeholders. Often, the team only sees the prototype during planning sessions to estimate the effort, and they haven’t been involved in the discovery process before that. There’s no real collaboration between stakeholders and the development team.

In contrast, good product teams follow the dual-track agile model, where discovery and delivery happen in parallel. The entire team, including developers, participates in the discovery process to understand business needs, user goals, and technical feasibility from the beginning. This allows them to test ideas quickly and refine solutions before development begins, fostering innovation and reducing risks early.

3. Confusion vs. Clear Direction

In bad product teams, there is often no clear direction. Team members are confused, and each person is working in isolation, focusing on features without understanding the bigger picture. They’re just ticking boxes, building features, and moving on without knowing how their work contributes to the overall business objectives.

In contrast, good product teams have a clear vision and are committed to achieving their goals. They know where they need to go as a team and have a well-defined path to get there. Their work is driven by hypotheses, and they learn from failures. They continually test new ideas and iterate based on what they’ve learned.

4. Output vs. Outcome Focus

Bad product teams are focused on output—delivering features for the sake of delivery. An example from Marty Cagan’s book "Inspired" highlights this mindset: a top-down directive might be “integrate with PayPal,” without considering what impact that integration is meant to have on the business. This is purely an output-oriented task with no clear business objective in mind.

Good product teams, on the other hand, are focused on outcomes. They are data-driven and aim for results, such as “increase checkout conversion by 20%.” This outcome can be achieved through many means, not just by integrating PayPal. The team is free to experiment and find the best way to achieve the desired business results, rather than blindly following orders.

5. Big Bang Releases vs. Continuous Delivery

Bad product teams often rely on big bang releases, where months of work culminate in a massive, risky deployment. These releases are prone to failure, and by the time the features are delivered, they may no longer be relevant to the business.

Good product teams prefer continuous delivery. They are constantly iterating, learning, and releasing new features frequently. This iterative approach allows for faster feedback loops, quicker learning, and reduced risk.

6. Fear of Failure vs. Failing Fast

In bad product teams, failure is feared. The mindset is to avoid failure at all costs, leading to an over-reliance on risk mitigation early in the process. However, you can’t predict everything, and once the solution is deployed, you may find that it doesn’t fit the business needs anymore.

Good product teams embrace the idea of failing fast. They understand that mistakes will happen and that learning from failure is crucial to success. Through rapid iteration, they can quickly identify what works and what doesn’t, allowing them to pivot and adjust as needed.

7. High Dependency vs. Autonomous Squads

Bad product teams tend to have a high dependency on other teams, creating bottlenecks and slowing down delivery. They are unable to function independently because they rely on other teams for key aspects of their work.

Good product teams, however, are autonomous squads. Each squad has its own goals and can achieve them without heavy dependencies on other teams. They build interfaces for communication with other teams, minimizing the need for constant collaboration, allowing each squad to move forward at its own pace.

Summary: Bad vs. Good Product Teams

Creditas Case Study: Challenges with Scaling

At Creditas, we implemented many of these changes to improve our product teams. Initially, we worked with four squads, and now we have sixteen squads. As we scaled, we faced new challenges, such as balancing between chaos and bureaucracy. While chaos can foster creativity and innovation, too much of it can lead to disorganization. On the other hand, bureaucracy can stifle innovation if taken too far. We're constantly working to find the optimal balance between these extremes.

References

By learning from these models and continually refining our processes, we can build good product teams that are passionate, driven, and capable of delivering real business value.