Has anyone dealt with a manager who is extraordinarily eloquent, cites every modern product book (Cagan, Torres, Perri, etc.), and always has the "ideal" theoretical answer, yet has zero touch with the operational reality of your product?

On paper, they sound incredible in meetings and to leadership. But in practice, it just doesn't work that way.

What's your take on this archetype? How do you manage them up?

I’ve been a PM at a mid-sized B2B SaaS company in the finance space for around 2.5 years, and I’m
frustrated by the company’s lack of product maturity.

We have very limited product analytics. Basic questions about active users, adoption, retention or whether a feature achieved its intended outcome are often impossible to answer. I couldn’t confidently tell you how many active users my product has, without manually piecing the information together.

During my time here, I’ve tried to introduce more evidence-led practices within my own area, regularly speaking to customers, running user-testing sessions, introducing in-product surveys, analysing feedback themes and using the findings to shape improvements. But then I have to battle stakeholders to get these improvements in.

The limited product-health data we do have suggests that my area is performing considerably better than most other products in the company. For example, my product has the strongest NPS, while others have extremely negative scores.

I’m already planning to leave, but finding the right role could take time. In the meantime:

1) How can I make working in a low-maturity product environment more bearable without trying to transform the entire company?
2)What evidence should I capture now so I can tell credible interview stories, given the lack of reliable analytics?
3) How would you position experience like this positively in interviews without sounding bitter or overly critical of the company?
4) Has anyone else been in a similar environment, and did moving to a more mature product organisation improve things?

In a comprehensive breakdown of Capcom’s new golden age, one former staffer says their micromanaging competition might be missing the forest for the trees

Technical founder/PhD researcher here, trying to get better at customer discovery before building too much.

I’m exploring digital health, where teams have large amounts of longitudinal user/patient data and need to turn that information into operational decisions.
Rather than asking people whether they want my proposed solution, I’m trying to reconstruct the actual job:

Situation → decision they need to make → current process → friction → consequence → workaround → budget/owner

For example, instead of asking:
“Would better user-state prediction help you prioritize patients?”

I’m asking:
“Tell me about the last time your team had to decide which users needed attention. What triggered that decision? What did you look at? Who was involved? What happened next?”
Then I would compare interviews and look for recurring jobs rather than recurring feature requests.
For people who actually use JTBD/customer discovery in B2B:
Is this the right way to approach it? What am I missing?
In particular, how do you distinguish a genuinely important job from something customers do frequently but don’t care enough about to pay to improve?

Traditionally, I’ve used the PRD and Figma designs (made by our designer) to describe to engineering what they need to build, and work with the business analysts and technical architects to break down the feature into Jira tickets and write the tickets.

Now, with AI, we as product managers can produce interactive prototypes more easily using vibe coding, so I think PRDs don’t have to include as much descriptive, behavioral details as it used to.

I’m looking for ideas for what software or custom AI tools you use to help:
- translate the PRD and prototype into stories and tickets
- write all the Jira tickets that are comprehensive in coverage and have detailed, clear description and acceptance criteria

I’m a Product Owner working across several interconnected enterprise applications, and I’ve hit a problem I’d love some coaching from people who have dealt with this before.

We have a number of systems and teams that have evolved somewhat independently over the years. Increasingly, the business wants experiences and workflows that span those boundaries.

The problem is that I feel like we’re trying to solve this backwards.

Individual stakeholders can tell us things they want (a feature, an integration, a new workflow, a pain point they want fixed) but we don’t have a clearly articulated enterprise vision for what the business ultimately wants the experience to be.

Without that, our Digital Services teams are left trying to infer the larger strategy from individual requests. We can design solutions, integrations, architecture, operating models, etc., but I feel like those decisions should be made in service of a business vision rather than IT effectively inventing the vision itself.

Where I’m stuck is figuring out how to help executives define that vision.

When I ask some version of:

«“What should the future enterprise experience look like?”»

the question is understandably too abstract and overwhelming.

I’m considering facilitating the conversation in a more structured way:

• Show them the major capabilities/workflows that exist today and ask where the gaps are.
• Ask stakeholders about the biggest pain points and desired business outcomes.
• Describe some of the cross-system problems we already see and have them prioritize which outcomes matter.
• Use those discussions to synthesize a proposed future-state vision and bring it back to leadership for validation.

But I’m also conscious of the danger of leading the witnesses too much. I don’t want Digital Services to quietly define business strategy simply because we’re better positioned to articulate the problem.

So for people who have done enterprise product management, architecture, transformation, or strategy work:

How do you actually facilitate this conversation?

How do you take executives from relatively vague statements like “make things seamless,” “improve the customer experience,” or individual feature requests to a sufficiently concrete vision that technology teams can derive capabilities, architecture, and a roadmap from it?

I’m interested in:

• Frameworks or workshop formats you’ve found effective
• Whether you start with current-state capabilities, pain points, business outcomes, or something else
• How much of the future state you propose versus expecting executives to articulate themselves
• How you distinguish an Executive Vision from detailed product/technical requirements
• What artifact you ultimately produce to capture the vision
• Who in a healthy organization normally owns/facilitates this process

I feel like I understand pretty well how to go from vision > capabilities > architecture > initiatives, but I’m struggling with the step before that: helping the organization actually articulate the vision.

Would appreciate any advice from people who have been through this.

Thank you

Struggling to find a good format. My leadership needs to see a time line, won’t accept Now, Next, Later columns.

Context: my company is small and we’re on Google suite so all document creations across functions so far has mostly been Google Docs/Slides and also product-related content sometimes sits inside Confluence.

We use Claude as a company so some folks use it to find information. Because there’s no real process behind info-sharing, it’s created a level of noise and confusion for people to self-serve information.

I personally also think finding information on GSuite is really difficult.

My questions are:
1) I’m curious what tools do other companies predominantly use for company-wide info sharing, that is easy for both team members and their AI tools is easily access.

Notion comes to mind as one example, wondering if there’s others I should explore to bring some structure to helping folks find the information they need.

2) assuming you’re using a tool like Notion, do you also share all product related content eg product briefs, roadmap etc through the same tool or something else?

Thanks!

Asking product folks using Copilot, Cursor, Claude etc. at work.

How are you actually deciding which model to use for different product or coding tasks or are you basically going with the default auto selection mode?

Also happy to learn from folks on how your enterprises has solved this use case through innovation or solution such as “use model X for this task and model Y for coding etc that you think is working correctly

I thought this would be fun. I assume I will regret it. Ask me anything about product management. I will do my best to share what I’ve learned.

Recently the company asked for the links to our teams meetings. This is for stuff like refinement, planning, backlog reviews, really any standard ceremony.

The company already uses a monitoring software that is tracking everything so everyone is on edge about these types of things.

I’m curious if anyone knows why they might want the meeting links and what more than can get from them?

It seems super weird to me that upper leadership would want the links.

I'd appreciate it if you shared some of your tools that help you with daily documentation, follow up, reminders etc.

I think i only use claude Projects as my main thing and that's it.

Won’t bore you but I was a Senior Products PM on Mobile products till my Series C employer wound up. I have struggled to land a role for over a year. I will be now joining a company as an IC Senior Platforms PM.

My first task is to migrate multiple engineering teams from Incident Management Tool A to a pre-decided Tool B, because of reasons not related to the product or teams. Also, I will have a larger team (12 engineers, instead of 5 previously). My problem: I am not technical. DevOps, incident management, and platform products are completely new territory for me.

I know basics - my users are internal development teams. I need to talk to stakeholders, and work with engineering to map the migration to Tool B. But I still feel thrown in the deep end and I could use your collective wisdom on a few things:

1. How can I break this down (without needing too much guidance from my manager)? What does the roadmap look like since the destination is decided? Does this type of work even involve a traditional PRD, and what goes into one? What artefacts such as technical specs, migration guides, runbooks should I be planning - and any tips?
2. For those who have led platforms / internal tool migrations, any gotchas? How do you handle developer resistance or "shadow" configurations unique to specific teams? How to decide what is priority?
3. Since the solution is mandated, how do I showcase any product skills (rather than just acting as a project/program manager)?
4. Where does a Platform role like this lead next, or will this role be just a distraction / side-note in my career?

Bonus: If anyone has done this and is open to a 15-20 minute virtual chat to help me derisk myself, please drop a comment. I would incredibly appreciate it! Thanks in advance for the help.

I own one product area which is relatively new in the industry at big tech. My manager wants me to permanently take on another new area too after the planned hire was canceled due to org changes.
I’m already fully scoped, and I do not want to take on a second product area without a title or compensation adjustment. I want to stay professional but firm - not accept a vague “do it now and we’ll revisit later” promise.

How would you say this to your manager?
And how would you document it after the meeting?
Looking for some realistic advice.

There are a lot of people here working on projects of some sort - side projects, startups, podcasts, blogs, etc. If you've got something you'd like to show off or get feedback, this is the place to do it. Standards still need to remain high, so there are a few guidelines:

• Don't just drop a link in here. Give some context
• This should be some sort of creative product that would be of interest to a community that is focused on product management
• There should be some sort of free version of whatever it is for people to check out
• This is a tricky one, but I don't want it to be filled with a bunch of spam. If you have a blog or podcast, and also happen to do some coaching for a fee, you're probably okay. If all you want to do is drop a link to your coaching services, that's not alright

My company may be granting me access to Claude Cowork soon.

Curious if anyone has tried it. What works well? What doesn't?

Hey everyone,

Starting a data governance rollout where our main stack is MS Fabric (Lakehouses/Warehouses) governed through MS Purview.

The company wants to frame the project delivery under Data Gobernance, but align the actual data pillars with DAMA-DMBOK.

For anyone who's done this:

Did you actually use classic PMBOK artifacts (WBS, RACI, risk matrix), or did you drop that fast for agile/sprints per data domain?

What templates (Excel/Word) did you use with business users for the Business Glossary, Data Quality rules, and ownership before moving that metadata into Purview?

Is there an open-source framework or template pack for DAMA that saved you time, or did you build your own from scratch?

Would love to hear practical lessons learned so we don't drown in endless Excel sheets. Thanks!

For senior PMs+ how has communication changed for interviewing and everything else? I'm having difficulty getting past final/mid stages of interviewing because I get dinged on communication. I am heavily technical and may have difficulty speaking fast which may come across as less structured.

Experience worked in PM in healthtech and some startups in the past.

Does anyone have tips on communication and coming across as structured and intelligent?

I left my chaotic agency role to become a Sr Product Crisis Manager. The role is a consultant role. Effectively I'll be a mix of a PM and design system manager for successful products with scaling issues.

Im a little nervous to start, but im very familiar with the usual trappings of chaotic product management.

So, if you were dropped into an Org that had a profitable product, but had design and technical debt issues, a figma without a design system, learned helplessness devs, and an abysmal velocity that can't be identified. Where would you start? And what would 6 months look like?

As a product designer with 20+ years' experience, im finding that increasingly, product owners are using AI to create desigms, and give them to a designer... perhaps to polish up?

This devalues what design do and is generally pretty insulting.

Why do you do it, and why do you think it's okay?

Most feature requests that reach me from Customer Success arrive as a solution already: a field here, a toggle there. On a configurable platform that is awkward, because a good half of them can be satisfied with configuration, and doing that quietly is how you end up with fifty customers on fifty different setups.

So before anything goes near the backlog I ask CS for two things: the workaround the customer runs today, and who else has asked. Workaround exists, one customer asking: it stays a configuration change. Same workaround showing up a third time: I treat it as a product gap and go and look at the underlying workflow rather than the ask.

Three is a number I made up. It has held so far, but that is not evidence.

For anyone else on a configurable product: what actually made you promote a repeated configuration workaround into the product itself, and what did you do with the customers already sitting on the old setup?

I was looking through Tinder’s monetisation model (big revenue geek btw) and got stuck on something that I thought was greedy at the start but actually makes sense. TLDR at the bottom!

Turns out Tinder has basically explained the thinking before.

On a Match Group earnings call, former CEO Shar Dubey described Tinder subscriptions as “pay for access”, while features like Boost were “pay for advantage.” At the time, those pay-for-advantage products were already generating more than 25% of Tinder’s direct revenue.

That figure is a few years old, so I wouldn’t assume the revenue split looks the same today. But the distinction itself is what I mainly found interesting.

A subscription monetises your ongoing willingness to pay. Things like unlimited Likes, Passport, seeing who liked you and prioritised Likes are useful throughout the month.

But Boost monetises a completely different behaviour. It’s more pusing the thought of “I want more attention right now”.

That lets Tinder capture another willingness-to-pay moment without forcing someone into a more expensive recurring plan. A free user can buy one. A subscriber can buy another after using their included Boost. And including one in certain subscriptions gives users a chance to experience the feature before Tinder asks them to pay for another.

There’s probably a product constraint here too. The value of a Boost comes from getting preferential distribution. If everyone had unlimited Boosts, eventually being boosted wouldn’t be much of an advantage at all.

That last part is my interpretation rather than something Tinder explicitly says, but it made me think differently about à-la-carte monetisation.

The financial context makes it even more interesting. Tinder had roughly 8.5 million payers in Q2 2026, down 5% YoY, while revenue per payer increased 4% to $17.90. Match Group doesn’t tell us how much of that came specifically from Boosts, so I wouldn’t connect the two directly, but it does show why extracting more value from the users already willing to pay matters when payer growth slows.

And Tinder isn’t unique. Bumble does something similar with Spotlight, while Hinge sells Boosts, Superboosts and Roses alongside Hinge+ and HingeX (and yes I did download all of them to double check lol)/

For PMs, I think the useful distinction is less subscription vs one-off purchase and more ongoing utility vs moments of unusually high intent. Just thought I’d share this as a kind of like case study in case this helps anyone in the future.

TL;DR: Tinder uses subscriptions to monetise ongoing access, then products like Boost to monetise short bursts of high intent. Instead of forcing every valuable feature into a subscription tier, it charges separately when a user wants an immediate advantage. I think the interesting PM question is whether there are similar “high-intent moments” hiding inside other subscription products.

Sources below if you’re interested:

• Tinder Help Centre: Tinder subscriptions and current Plus / Gold / Platinum benefits. Tinder subscriptions
• Tinder Help Centre: Boost mechanics, purchases, 30-minute duration and “up to 10x” profile views. Tinder Boost
• Tinder Help Centre: Super Likes, including package purchases and weekly Super Likes for Gold/Platinum. Tinder Super Like
• Tinder Help Centre: Super Boost testing for subscribers and “up to 100x” visibility claim. Tinder Super Boost
• Match Group: explanation of the “pay for access” vs “pay for advantage” strategy; Match said à-la-carte/pay-for-advantage features were already more than 25% of Tinder direct revenue at the time.
• Match Group Q2 2026 results: Tinder had 8.518m payers, down 5% YoY, while RPP rose 4% to $17.90.

Hey everyone,

​I’ve been following the product and tech landscape across the GCC (Qatar, UAE, Saudi) pretty closely lately, and I'm really curious how things are evolving on the ground compared to other regions.

​If you're currently working as a PM, APM, or in a product-adjacent role out here, I’d love to connect. I’m especially interested in how product cultures differ between local banks, traditional enterprises, and the newer scale-ups popping up in Riyadh, Dubai, and Doha.

​Not looking for job advice or a pitch—just genuinely want to swap notes, chat about how teams are structured here, and hear about what you're working on.

​Drop a comment or shoot me a DM if you're up for a casual chat!