For this reason it is actually hard to be drawn on the detail of the latest set of 'cut backs' at the BBC. We've been there before. Many times.

What do I mean?

Simply. How can you address the BBC's primary concern of maintaining relevance in the digital age then cut 25% of your digital operation?

The answer? You can't. Or, even if you can, what would ever possess you to?

The BBC has reverted to previous form and cut the flab in the wrong places. We all know that some of the BBC digital services are chaff. However, isn't chaff a weakness of strategy? not execution. Why is their digital department suffering so late in the game because the strategists failed and fail to use digital resources at their privileged disposal to focus on less output at higher quality?

If I were Director General for the day I wouldn't be focusing my cost saving attention on areas of digital expertise within the BBC. I'd be looking far far closer to home.

(As I say, I have skipped the detail a little on this. All feels too familair - and would love to know others views?)

My inkling is yes to both.

The first thing to say about the potential market for account aggregation is that the online banking market in the UK is huge. We knew as far back as 2006 there were 17 million odd of us using online banking services. We are also well aware that internet and mobile usage in the age groups you'd expected to use account aggregation (25yrs-45yrs) is huge.

On top of this, anecdotally, I've replied to probably 60% of the customer feedback to lovemoney.com online banking and am genuinely amazed ( even in context of my BBC radio player days) about the level of excitement people have for a product that helps them manage their daily finances.

Surely, there must be something in it.

On the subject of whether anyone can make account aggregation and related services profitable remains to be seen. If US sites like Mint, Wesabe and MoneyStrands have proved there is an appetite for account aggregation from consumers, they have arguably also indicated that the ways of making money from such services are probably going to be more tricky.

But, that doesn't mean that they wont.

When it comes to personal finance, isn't convenience and ease priceless? If you consider that at it's most basic account aggregation does something that your bank simply will not do in a hurry. If you consider that there are multiple great reasons why (when you take the leap and sign-up) it's simply brilliant to view your money this way (analysis, visibility, control, awareness - it goes on an on.) If you consider that, actually, your income and expenditure is precisely where all for financial planning and provision begins and ends.

Considering all that you'd have to say that profits will come.

What do you think? I'd really like your perspective, especially if you've used an account aggregation service.

Here's a bunch of things that keep you clear headed and help give that decision it's best chance:

• Listen to others views but make sure the decision, or opinion, is your own.
• Don't shy away from making what maybe an unpopular call. Better being unpopular than having regrets.
• Consider all your feedback and analytics but be aware you need more than numbers to run people focused products and services.
• Get decisions out to the people they impact, fast. Procrastination eats away at your energy and drive.
• Once you've made a decision, stick by it and move on.
• Above all, now matter how much you love what you do, it is only what you do, it's not who you are. So, do what you need to do.

Anyone else have some good advice for making those tough decisions? I'd love to know.

Below is something new for me and the blog, a diagram that tells the story of a formula I now recognise as a successful way to approach developing websites.

I believe that understanding processes in this way will help to clarify the role the pm or pd has in smaller organisations or start-ups and how the pm or pd should interface with engineering and design.

Hopefully, it is a useful synopsis? As always, please let me know what you think and if you think I've missed bits? Also, if anyone would like to share any insight to how to enhance the process I have drawn, I would love to hear it!

(P.S: Plus, if you think I should just stick to text, say so...I don't offend easily :) )

1. Spotting new business opportunities and threats.
2. Iterating and innovating on the core product. Creating new solutions to old problems.
3. 'Steadying the ship' and spreading the love. Keeping customers and stakeholders happy (in that order.)

Nothing much changes regards the essence of product management and development. At it's heart product management is a cyclical process, the key tenets being those listed above. The cycle may well widen, but essentially, what we focus on remains the same.

So, if you feel like a hamster on a wheel in 2010, it's because you are!

Happy New Year fellow hamsters!

Carl

'Seeing the whole,' or being a good strategist and leader, are the most important aspects of being a successful product manager.

It is hard to summarise what great product leadership and strategy is so I’ll start my post with my thoughts on what it is not:

• Getting stuck in tunnel vision. Time and time again product managers suffer from fixating on an undeserving aspect or feature of a product. Ask yourself, regularly, is their value in what I am currently doing? If there isn’t, focus on something else.
• Not recognising when a problem is solved (related to the above.) Some problems need a simple solution, don’t overcomplicate them.
  
• Discarding planning. Working agile is not an excuse not to have a plan. You sooo need a course or a mid- term plan. If you don't, the chances are you will slip in to tunnel vision and by extension overcomplicate things.
• Going it alone. Sometimes this is appropriate but more often than not, it isn’t. Product roadmaps must be tied and woven to overall business strategy and goals. Product management is not about coming up with your own ideas and implementing them. We all know there is nothing more horrible than a vanity project or product.

Conversely, here’s a few of my thoughts on what great product leadership and strategy is:

• The ability to create a vision and define a product to be built. In essence, this is what product managers are there for.
• The ability to plan, prioritise and deliver the vision. Sounds straight-forward, but it is the mixture of visionary and delivery ability that make product managers so important in businesses.
• The ability to assess success and failure and treat them with equal vigour. Product managers need a natural instinct to step back from a product and see it for what it is. If a product is on vision, is succeeding, great. If it’s failing, this should be clocked and dealt with swiftly and appropriately.  
• The ability to continually spot new opportunities and weave them in to your vision. (Not to be confused with scope creep or ideas for ideas sake, all of the above points need to be considered.)
• Finally, products are all about people. People build and use products. You want both the people you work with and your customers to be happy. You are dreaming if you think you can sustain products without having both!!

That’s it. Can you 'see the whole?' Be interested to hear your thoughts on this one...

• NEVER delivered anything like this product before. Transactions, currency, 'banks,' net income statements, gazillions of security features, consumer 'trust' issues. That's before you get in to features, usability blah blah blah.
• A third party was involved.
• Pressure. Pressure to 'get it right.' It's a niche and innovative service that simply has to 'work' for our customers.

The single guiding principle for tackling a 'largish' project like this has to be: 

• Control scope. 

When controlling scope you have to decide:

• What's the core idea or principle for your product?
• What's the minimum functionality required to fulfil this core principle or idea for your product? (Note: I don't mean for Beta, I mean to actually ship a formed product.)

Once you know this, moving forward to a release is made so much easier.

That's it. That's the point I felt worthy of scribing. Defining scope and keeping scope in sight is key.

Any thoughts on the brand spanking new online banking service are very very welcome, I'd love to hear your thoughts. In particular, of-course, do you agree with my point on scope and did we get the scope of the online banking service correct for this new release?

• The software/website/thing being released is in a test phase. There may well be real concerns over whether the software/website/thing - is actually stable. 
• The software/website/thing being released isn't all there yet. It isn't fully formed, or it doesn't quite have all the components or functionality it was required to have.

But, in recent 'internet times' the term Beta has become synonymous with a load of other things, most notably:

•  Glamour. I think people in the internet community have come to love the term. Having a website in Beta is seen as fashionable, no doubt about it. The term is used with the mis-guided (in my view) perception that it will, in itself, create excitement and buzz around a product. Or maybe it just makes people feel clever? Honestly, I'm not sure anymore.
• Pretty lame marketing tactics.Related to the above, the marketing ploy you see used is attempting to cash in on the promise of being privy to something really great, FIRST. Beta is very often now used as a viral method of attracting early adopters and generating referrals/word of mouth. Though there is nothing really wrong with this, and it can be really successful, I think metaphors for 'Beta' inevitably get mixed and confused.

In my view, the plain truth about most releases on the web is that they are just, well, NEW. Further to that, I think we should generally be more confident in the scope of what we release and leave the consumer to decide whether this product is indeed new, exciting, glamorous, worth telling friends about - all those things the more contemporary use of a 'Beta label' seems to want to claim.

So, when thinking about releasing the question is not: Shall we put our product out as a Beta release? It's really more answering the question: What's the minimum I can have to release my product and be happy?

Unsurprisingly, in answer to the ultimate question: to Beta, or not to Beta? I'm going to have to say; not to Beta.

What would you say? I'd really love to know what you think on this subject...

1) There's nothing negative about innovation in a corporate/business context.
2) There's nothing negative about making a big deal about innovation in a corporate/business context.
3) It's OK to say you belong or reside within and have an innovation team within a corporate/business environment. Innovation is not a dirty word.
4) Creating processes to support innovation in a corporate/business context is not done to, nor should, promote elitism. Quite the opposite.

Overall, it has to be that innovation has a far more practical place within corporations and businesses.

Some observations:

• It's OK to have an innovation team. You have a finance team. It's really no different. I am as confident I can organise my finances as well as our finance guy, but obviously I appreciate we need someone thinking about that stuff all the time on a business level. The finance guy doesn't stop me thinking about finance. Innovation is no different.
• Innovation as a discipline and job spec. There are a few sustained qualities required by innovation. If Innovation were a person, that person needs to be a great networker, have bags of perseverance, be not afraid of experimentation,  be happy (and naturally) question status quo and (crucially) understand the business, what it is trying to do and make associations between different situations and find solutions.
• Innovation and ideas generation. Sure, the innovation team would come up with ideas, duh. But, it is also about capturing and encouraging the development of creativity and ingenuity with whatever person, unit, team or outside influence it comes in to contact with. Your innovation team, if it is a real innovation team, will find a way to empower change and promote ideas from all over the place.
• Innovation and strategy. Products without business cases or strategies are not products, they are projects, ill defined projects. Obviously, innovation has to be strategic and think strategically. Innovation for innovation sake is not viable (mostly), in a corporate or business context, so innovation has to be channeled. It has to fit. There's a gap that needs to be laced up between strategy and innovation, and the innovation team are the ones who should tie the knots.
• Innovation and R&D. R&D is clearly part of innovation, and another very practical reason why you need a team or persons on it. Thinking 5 years ahead on the web is terrifically hard. but seriously, a year ahead should be an ongoing and consistent thread of exploration, theorising and most importantly, visioning.
  
• Innovation and delivery. This comes back to innovation as a discipline. Bottom line, creative ideas that aren't realised are worthless. Another reason to look at how you ring fence persons for innovation.

Lastly, it's pointless to fear innovation, its challenges and what it entails.  Treat innovation the same way as going to the office kitchen. Keep it practical, anchored in the here and now. I'm actually off to the kitchen now. Cup of innovation anyone? It's my round...

(When I get back with my coffee I'd really like to here your feedback on this topic. Particularly on where you think innovation should sit within businesses and corporations?)

Good product managers need to be able to think with clarity and stay on top of things. You simply can't do this if you are stressed-out and tired.

So, how do you stay 'fresh?' Here's what I think:

• Don't think about your product all the time ( another crap piece of advice from a 'trainer.') A broad interest in technology and 'stuff' will help you more in the long-term than obsessing about your product.
• Look after yourself because your product will not. Eat well, exercise and indulge your passions and interests.
• Get some ZEN ( easiest way: read Tabita Green's excellent blog.)
• Focus on what's important, drop everything that isn't. If you can delegate, do.
• Laugh. We are the lucky ones, we have jobs with prospects. Enjoy it.
• Take a break, small one's, through-out the day.
• Take a break, long one's, whenever you can!
• Challenge yourself. Solving new problems is cathartic (err, if that's the right word.) Stagnation simply isn't good.
• Don't take it all so seriously, lighten up! The world still revolves without you and your product.
• Change environments. Work remotely, change your journey to work. Change is often as good as a break! (so they say.)

Love to know what you think? How do you stay 'fresh?'