1) To be good at innovation, a company must be good at product development and execution. This requires having a strong product discipline that can operate independently from other departments. 2) Most companies are only good at some aspects of product development, rather than having a holistic product discipline. To truly excel at innovation, a company needs to develop a product team that can work autonomously. 3) When pursuing new products and innovations, companies should focus on solving high-value problems that people truly care about, rather than low-value or superficial issues.

1. I n n o v a t i o n & P r o d u c t
C o n s i d e r a t i o n s

2. 2
You can’t be good at innovation without being good at
product. Trying to innovate without being good at
product is just an exercise in ideation. You will come up
with a lot of potential ideas, with some of them actually
being good. However, without the ability and discipline
to execute, the ideas will either remain ideas or you will
consistently fail to deliver any meaningful results from
your pursuit of the ideas.
Being good at product and having a product discipline
provide the foundation to execute and deliver the value
and impact potential of your innovation pursuits.
Being good at innovation means
being good at product

3. 3
Most companies are now good at components of product,
but not holistically good. Being good at design and
development isn’t enough. You must have a product
discipline that owns and managers products and that
operates independently from any other company
discipline.
Product collaborates with and leverages development,
marketing, design, legal, etc., but product needs to be it’s
own discipline and able to operate autonomously from
other company disciplines just as the other disciplines
currently do.
The only way to become world-class at product and
innovation, is to develop a holistic product discipline.
Develop a holistic product
discipline

4. 4
It takes the same time, energy, resources, and money to
solve low or medium-value problems as it does high-
value ones. Low and medium problems get our attention
because of impatience and the desire for quick wins. It is
sometimes possible to evolve a low-value problem into a
high-value one, but it is rare.
Once you’ve validated that you are pursuing a high-value
problem, you need to validate that people care about it.
Too many products are created chasing problems that
aren’t high-value and that people don’t care about. You
need both for a product to provide value to both you and
your customers/users.
Solve a high-value problem
people care about

5. 5
Deeply understand the high-value problems you pursue.
Your intent should be to understand problems at an
expert level. Understand problems deeply and become an
expert by asking questions of customers/users until you
can’t ask anymore questions. When you run of out
questions, you know you are at the core of the problem.
Truly understanding a problem means you get intimately
involved where, when, and with whom the problem
occurs. The front lines at the moment of truth. Sure, you
can do some research, surveys, focus groups and other
understanding activities, but nothing replaces putting
yourself in the shoes of the people affected and
experiencing the problem.
Truly understand the problem

6. 6
Customers/Users need to be at the center of any new
product or innovation initiative. This seems obvious, but
we still see too many initiatives where this isn’t the case.
Sure this requires an investment of time, energy, and
money, but the alterative is to build something based on
your biased and uninformed position or based on what
customers/users are experiencing and want.
User centered design and design thinking are fancy terms
to facilitate the customer/user being at the center of an
initiative. It doesn’t matter what you call it as long as you
are doing it and have the intent and act with the
customer/user at the core.
Customers/Users at center

7. 7
We’re wired to believe we are smart and capable when
we have answers. This is actually counterintuitive, as our
stakeholders expect us to have answers around what we
should know. We get ourselves in trouble when we stop
asking questions and think we have the answers.
The truth is we demonstrate more expertise through
questions than answers. Asking good questions
demonstrates we have context of the situation for the
other party and that we are empathetic to their current
state. Deeply understanding a problem begins and ends
with asking great questions of customers/users.
Questions Demonstrate More
Expertise than Answers

8. 8
Humans are problem-solvers. Someone brings us a
problem and we want to solve it as quickly as possible.
This isn’t fundamentally a bad trait, but when it comes to
product and innovation, it is.
We also often create solutions in search of a problem.
This almost never works.
Coming up with solutions before truly, deeply
understanding the problem causes us to miss the mark
and not solve the problem. Take enough swings and
misses and projects get defunded, people get moved
around, and innovation/product initiatives come to a
screeching halt.
Solutions before understanding
produce failure

9. 9
If you race to a solution before understanding and
validating you are solving a high-value problem, you are
likely to roll out a surface-level solution that will only
solve a surface-level problem. Surface level problems are
typically not worth the time and energy to solve, even if
you get it right.
It is easy to fall into this trap. The tendency is to fall back
on things you’ve already done (regardless of
effectiveness) or rely on what is trending. The chances of
what you’ve done in the past or what is trendy hitting the
mark are low and don’t turn a surface problem into a
high-value one anyway.
Surface solutions, solve surface
problems

10. 10
Arbitrary anything is a recipe for failure of a product and
an initiative. Everything can and should be validated by
customers/users. Anything less is laziness and
incompetence.
Validating everything takes time, but moving forward
based on assumptions and what you believe or think is a
recipe for failure. What you believe and think inform
your hypothesis, but should never go beyond that. What
you believe and think are from a biased perspective, and
ultimately, from a less valuable position than your
customers/users.
Validate everything

11. 11
What customers/users say and what they do are often
different. You should value actions over words.
Customer/user actions should drive your product
decisions and actions. You accomplish this by including
analytics with every version of the product you put in the
hands of customers/users. Powerful analytics are worth
the time and effort because of the insights you garner
about how the product is actually being used, as
compared to what customers/users say they will do.
Without deep, powerful analytics, you will make product
decisions from a less informed position and are more
likely to get it wrong.
Action drives action

12. 12
You should seek for customers/users to kill your idea,
product, and functionality. “Seeking no” keeps us
grounded and our egos in check as we are creating
something.
“Seeking no” and letting customers/users know that “no”
is an acceptable, if not even preferred, response
empowers them to be comfortable and honest.
Seeking no also empowers you. No is powerful. The
clarity of what we shouldn’t be working on is just as
valuable and as knowing what we should be working on
because the no’s help us identify the yes’.
Seek no

13. 13
Creation is hard. Creating inside of an existing
environment with established procedures, policies, and
culture is harder. The process of creation is not an
exercise in perfection, but progress. There is no finish
line for innovation and products, only milestones and
markers along the way.
We want things to be tidy and we like to be able to
definitely say something is complete. There. Done.
Products have lifecycles certainly, but the lifecycles are
typically longer and more complex than we can originally
see and comprehend.
Progress, not perfection

14. 14
New product and innovation teams should look like Navy
Seals. A highly trained, multi-disciplinary team of
experts focused on a high-value, urgent mission that
requires laser focus and unwavering commitment.
Average won’t do with the Navy Seals and it won’t do for
your new product and innovation teams. The process of
creating a new product that innovates and disrupts is too
hard & important. It can only be accomplished with the
best of the best.
The team can be made up of people from outside your
company and often this is best as others probably have
more experience in being Navy Seal like.
Teams Should Be Like Navy
Seals

15. 15
A product can have code that is fast and scalable, but still
not be successful. Similarly, a product can have the
world’s best user interface and not be successful. There is
so much more to successful products.
Successful products are a bridge between the business
outcomes a company wants and the value
customers/users need. As a result, successful products
are not only fundamentally sound and capable products,
but everything associated to the product reinforces the
bridge between company and customer/user. This
include pricing, support, branding, messaging, and more.
This is often referred to as product market fit, but we
think it goes even deeper than that to product love and
obsession.
Good products & successful
products aren’t necessarily the
same

16. 16
Adopting and implementing a methodology, process, and
system doesn’t mean you are now great at product or
innovation. Methodologies, processes, and systems can
be crutches that make us believe we have moved from
bad/poor to good/great. It doesn’t.
For instance, we all know companies that have
implemented agile, but aren’t any better at product and
innovation than they were before. Methodologies,
processes, and systems do not inherently make you great.
They can be components of being great, but they don’t in
and of themselves make us great.
Methodologies, processes, &
systems can be crutches

17. 17
Why are startups better at product, innovation, and
disruption than large companies with more resources of
every type? In part because of those very resource
constraints.
Resource constraints drive focus and urgency. A startup
is laser focused on solving one high-value problem and
they become obsessed with working with customers to
solve it.
Startups build nimble, highly productive teams because
they have to. A startup doesn’t have unlimited time,
energy, and money. All will run out at some point if they
don’t solve the problem in a way customers care about
and will pay for within a short timespan. Even startups
that are venture backed still have to operate with a hyper
focus and sense of urgency.
Constraints force focus

18. 18
Enterprise companies struggle with innovation and
product because they are slow, but another significant
factor is risk aversion. Risk aversion manifests in many
different ways, but the most impactful is being too safe.
Enterprises are structured for safety and security. All of
the policies and procedures are about protection. This
permeates into innovation and product by pursing
initiatives that aren’t disruptive to a company’s way of
doing business and how customers and the market
perceive the company.
Because of the safety first culture, enterprise’s end up
with efficiency innovations, which can have positive
impacts on how the company performs what it currently
does, but these aren’t disruptive and innovative. Getting
better at what you are already doing isn’t true innovation.
Big equals safe

19. 19
We often focus on labels too much. It doesn’t matter
what you call a new product, whether that’s MVP, Alpha,
Beta, or Version 1.
It doesn’t matter because we end up twisting what the
definitions of things really are to fit our own use.
It also doesn’t matter because our intent matters more
than any label.
The intent should be to solve a high-value problem
people care about in the simplest and most elegant way
possible.
Labels are irrelevant

20. 20
Easy or hard shouldn’t affect what you do and when you
do it. Everything should be judged through the lens of
what matters and what matters most right now.
This may mean that something that will take 6 months to
complete needs most, if not all, available resources today
and for the the next 6 months should be done over many
things that could be done in that timeframe that are of
lower value to customers/users.
Hard or easy doesn’t matter

21. 21
This is one area where human nature harms us. When
creating a new product, something that does 1,000
things in an average way is never better than something
that does five things kickass. It just isn’t. Yet, we will
justify why the version 1 of a new product needs more.
The product doesn’t need more, we need more. We need
the product to do and be more because it makes us feel
better about the product, and more importantly, to our
egos.
Define the five things your product has to be world-class
at and send anything that doesn’t support these to the
product roadmap for a future version. Less is always
more when it comes to new products.
More isn’t better

22. 22
It is easy to fall into the trap of seeing what new,
disruptive products and companies are doing and to
want apply what they are doing to your company and
industry. Don’t. It’s a cop-out. You can do better.
Being the Uber of trash of trash collection or whatever
other similar analogy you can come up with doesn’t make
you innovative. This kind of reference is easy and makes
us feel like we’re being innovative because it
demonstrates we know how the X of Y is disrupting a
space, but copying someone else’s innovation doesn’t
make you innovative.
Certainly there are things that can be learned by studying
those who are doing innovative and disruptive things, but
must take the learnings and apply them to your own
unique situation and not just be a copy cat.
Don’t be the X of Y

23. 23
When we avoid getting new products in front of the
customers/users, it is because of fear. It might manifest
as something that appears to be rational and logical, but
is is fear. One more feature. One more polish of the UI.
One more review of the UX.
The fear of rejection and people not liking our product
and therefore us keeps us from doing what we know we
should should…get a product in front of users.
Regardless of how much we have accomplished
individually, as a team, or a company, we are susceptible
to the fear of rejection and inadequacy around what
we’re working on.
Fear drives, not shipping

24. 24
Many of the considerations in this document are about
our egos as people and companies. You can’t be great at
product and innovation without being aware of the
effects ego has on our beliefs, decisions, and actions
maround new products and innovation.
New product failures and a lack of innovation are often
more about our self-imposed limitations than any market
or competitive force.
Ego causes us to look inwardly and to believe we have the
answers, rather than being customer focused and centric.
Ego prevents us from being vulnerable and open to new
ways of thinking and doing things. True innovation and
disruption starts with being able to admit you don’t know
what to do and that’s okay.
Ego is your enemy

25. 25
None of us wants to or should intend to fail. The fail fast
mantra fosters the wrong perspective. Our intent should
be to learn and iterate fast, not to fail fast.
If you put the customer/user at the center, with enough
time and the right mindset, success is inevitable. New
products and innovations often fail because the people
behind them believe failure is a badge of honor and is the
objective. It isn’t and never should be.
Having a series of failed initiatives and products should
never be a badge of honor in an of themselves. With that
said, you will have setbacks and you will get things
wrong, but as long as you are learning from it and
evolving you haven’t failed, you just haven’t succeeded
yet.
Failing fast is BS