The document discusses strategies for optimizing the product development process, particularly within teams facing technical complexity and capacity challenges. It emphasizes the importance of setting time-bound cycles for project shaping, encouraging collaboration between design and engineering, and promoting autonomy among teams to effectively streamline workflows. Key concepts include the need for rigorous shaping to clarify project scope and making intentional trade-offs to enhance productivity and deliver on time.

1. DEBUGGING THE PRODUCT
DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Felt Presence

2. DEBUGGING?

3. “This should be simple…”
“We’ll just add a condition to that step.”
“We’re only adding a toggle. Shouldn’t be hard.”

4. Product

5. Product Engineering

6. Design

7. Design Engineering

8. Product

9. Product Engineering

10. Integrated plan

11. Integrated plan Shredded into tickets

12. “What does all of this add up to?”
“What can we ship at the end of this?”

13. IN THE BEGINNING…
Shaping, hand-off, delivery are
humming along

14. GROWING AND GETTING BUSIER…
More work, more pressure, more
technical complexity

15. THE PILE-UP
Product team starts getting pushback
from busy engineers

16. BREAKING DOWN
No capacity for new things,
hard to build new projects

17. Hidden complexity Projects dragging Pile-ups
“I can’t be involved in everything like I used to…”
“We need to get more focused and ship stuff that moves the needle”
PLUS
NEEDS DEBUGGING

18. 17 years on the core team at 37signals / Basecamp
Author of Shape Up
Founder of Felt Presence
2003 2009 2017 2021
2019
UI Designer + Programmer + Product Manager Head of Strategy Founder
Shape Up

19. • Asked ourselves: What’s some version of this
we could do in 6 weeks? What about in 1 week?
TO AVOID
Long running projects

20. • Asked ourselves: What’s some version of this
we could do in 6 weeks? What about in 1 week?
• Put technical and design heads together from
the start of each project
TO AVOID
Hidden complexity

21. • Asked ourselves: What’s some version of this
we could do in 6 weeks? What about in 1 week?
• Put technical and design heads together from
the start of each project
• Made rough drawings instead of perfect
specifications to reduce re-work
TO AVOID
Thrown-away work

22. • Asked ourselves: What’s some version of this
we could do in 6 weeks? What about in 1 week?
• Put technical and design heads together from
the start of each project
• Made rough drawings instead of perfect
specifications to reduce re-work
• Gave teams autonomy to work out the exact
form and final scope
TO AVOID
Being involved in
every piece of work

23. • Asked ourselves: What’s some version of this
we could do in 6 weeks? What about in 1 week?
• Put technical and design heads together from
the start of each project
• Made rough drawings instead of perfect
specifications to reduce re-work
• Gave teams autonomy to work out the exact
form and final scope
• Made hard trade-offs to call a feature “done”
and agree not to touch it any more
TO AVOID
Pile-ups

24. FORMALIZED IN 2019

25. FORMALIZED IN 2019
• Six-week cycles, two weeks of cooldown

26. FORMALIZED IN 2019
• Six-week cycles, two weeks of cooldown
• Asking “what’s the 6 week version?” became what
we call setting the appetite

27. FORMALIZED IN 2019
• Six-week cycles, two weeks of cooldown
• Asking “what’s the 6 week version?” became what
we call setting the appetite
• Making trade-offs to execute in that period of time
got the name shaping

28. FORMALIZED IN 2019
• Six-week cycles, two weeks of cooldown
• Asking “what’s the 6 week version?” became what
we call setting the appetite
• Making trade-offs to execute in that period of time
got the name shaping
• Rough drawings were called fat marker
sketches and breadboards

29. Boostrapped
Mostly senior
Designers on every
team
FIT

30. MISFIT
FIT
Boostrapped
Mostly senior
Designers on every
team

31. External pressures
MISFIT
FIT
Boostrapped
Mostly senior
Designers on every
team

32. External pressures 8 weeks is too long!
MISFIT
FIT
Boostrapped
Mostly senior
Designers on every
team

33. External pressures 8 weeks is too long!
Junior / senior gaps
MISFIT
FIT
Boostrapped
Mostly senior
Designers on every
team

34. External pressures 8 weeks is too long!
Junior / senior gaps
How can we trust
them to work out
the details?
MISFIT
FIT
Boostrapped
Mostly senior
Designers on every
team

35. External pressures 8 weeks is too long!
Junior / senior gaps
How can we trust
them to work out
the details?
1 designer for every
10 engineers
MISFIT
FIT
Boostrapped
Mostly senior
Designers on every
team

36. External pressures 8 weeks is too long!
Junior / senior gaps
How can we trust
them to work out
the details?
1 designer for every
10 engineers
How will we get to
polished UX?
MISFIT
FIT
Boostrapped
Mostly senior
Designers on every
team

37. ALTERNATIVES
SCRUM / TICKET-BASED

38. ALTERNATIVES
SCRUM / TICKET-BASED
Good for “reactive” work

39. ALTERNATIVES
SCRUM / TICKET-BASED
Good for “reactive” work
(urgent, not on our schedule)

40. ALTERNATIVES
SCRUM / TICKET-BASED
Good for “reactive” work
(urgent, not on our schedule)
For project work, gives no time or space to
step back and think about what’s next

41. ALTERNATIVES
SCRUM / TICKET-BASED
Good for “reactive” work
(urgent, not on our schedule)
For project work, gives no time or space to
step back and think about what’s next
When teams do create a clear concept, it
gets “paper shredded” into tickets

42. ALTERNATIVES
DEDICATED UX / DISCOVERY PHASE

43. ALTERNATIVES
DEDICATED UX / DISCOVERY PHASE
There are special times when deep
research can be helpful

44. ALTERNATIVES
DEDICATED UX / DISCOVERY PHASE
There are special times when deep
research can be helpful
UX designers & researchers usually
work disconnected from engineers

45. ALTERNATIVES
DEDICATED UX / DISCOVERY PHASE
There are special times when deep
research can be helpful
UX designers & researchers usually
work disconnected from engineers
Long periods of time, lots of
documentation, and engineers say
“this isn’t adding value”

46. WHAT’S NEEDED

47. WHAT’S NEEDED
Time and space for figuring out what we’re doing next

48. WHAT’S NEEDED
Time and space for figuring out what we’re doing next
In a way that connects design and engineering

49. WHAT’S NEEDED
Time and space for figuring out what we’re doing next
In a way that connects design and engineering
So we build on top of each others’ efforts

50. “The one true way”
EVOLUTION

51. “The one true way”
Separate practices
EVOLUTION

52. “The one true way”
Separate practices
Each practice is adjustable & tunable
EVOLUTION

53. “The one true way”
Separate practices
Each practice is adjustable & tunable
They combine into a custom-fit process
EVOLUTION

54. 1. SHAPING MORE
RIGOROUSLY

55. UNDER-SHAPING
1. SHAPING MORE RIGOROUSLY

56. UNDER-SHAPING
Maybe describes an outcome
or a rough idea
Not enough to understand
what to go build when the
clock starts ticking
1. SHAPING MORE RIGOROUSLY

57. OVER-SHAPING
1. SHAPING MORE RIGOROUSLY

58. OVER-SHAPING
Too much of the wrong
details up front
1. SHAPING MORE RIGOROUSLY

59. OVER-SHAPING
=
UNDER-SHAPING
ÉÉ
ÉÉÉI
1. SHAPING MORE RIGOROUSLY

60. OVER-SHAPING
=
UNDER-SHAPING
“Is there electricity in that
wall or not?”
Lots of detail on the surface,
but the important technical
details are missing
1. SHAPING MORE RIGOROUSLY

61. 1. SHAPING MORE RIGOROUSLY
SHAPE WITH A
TECHNICAL PERSON

62. 1. SHAPING MORE RIGOROUSLY
SHAPE WITH A
TECHNICAL PERSON
Synchronous shaping sessions
2-3 intense hours where product,
design, and engineering work together

63. Technical
person
1. SHAPING MORE RIGOROUSLY

64. We just
want to skip
this step …
1. SHAPING MORE RIGOROUSLY

65. Hmm …
Let’s have
a look …
1. SHAPING MORE RIGOROUSLY

66. !
Oh! There are a bunch of
conditions here …
It’s not just one step,
there are different
flows!
1. SHAPING MORE RIGOROUSLY

67. 1. SHAPING MORE RIGOROUSLY

68. 2. WE THINK WE’RE
SHAPING BUT WE’RE NOT

69. i
f
Ft
Pitch: Pay Faster
2. WE THINK WE’RE SHAPING BUT WE’RE NOT
A PITCH THAT MAKES THE
BUSINESS CASE

70. i
f
Ft
Pitch: Pay Faster
2. WE THINK WE’RE SHAPING BUT WE’RE NOT
A PITCH THAT MAKES THE
BUSINESS CASE
• Lots of background, reasons why we
should spend time on this

71. i
f
Ft
Pitch: Pay Faster
2. WE THINK WE’RE SHAPING BUT WE’RE NOT
A PITCH THAT MAKES THE
BUSINESS CASE
• Lots of background, reasons why we
should spend time on this
• Doesn’t describe the solution in
actionable detail

72. i
f
Ft
Pitch: Pay Faster
2. WE THINK WE’RE SHAPING BUT WE’RE NOT
A PITCH THAT MAKES THE
BUSINESS CASE
• Lots of background, reasons why we
should spend time on this
• Doesn’t describe the solution in
actionable detail
• Valuable and sometimes necessary

73. i
f
Ft
Pitch: Pay Faster
2. WE THINK WE’RE SHAPING BUT WE’RE NOT
A PITCH THAT MAKES THE
BUSINESS CASE
• Lots of background, reasons why we
should spend time on this
• Doesn’t describe the solution in
actionable detail
• Valuable and sometimes necessary
• But this is not shaping

74. i
f
Ft
Pitch: Pay Faster
Making the case
to spend time on
something
Defining what
we’re going to
go build
FRAMING SHAPING
DIFFERENT WORK

75. i
f
Ft
Pitch: Pay Faster
Making the case
to spend time on
something
“PITCH” ?
Defining what
we’re going to
go build
Which is it?

76. i
f
Ft
Pitch: Pay Faster
FRAMING
Defining the problem and
opportunity
Making the business case to
spend time on it
A “FRAME”
The output of framing

77. A “PACKAGE”
The work we shaped is
ready for delivery
SHAPING
Figuring out the key points
of the interaction design and
architecture
Making trade-offs about
what’s in and out of scope

78. MORE BUGS WE CAN FIX

79. MORE BUGS WE CAN FIX
When people hear about a
problem and jump straight to
proposing solutions

80. MORE BUGS WE CAN FIX
When people hear about a
problem and jump straight to
proposing solutions
“Is this worth our time and
focus right now?”

81. MORE BUGS WE CAN FIX
When people hear about a
problem and jump straight to
proposing solutions
“Is this worth our time and
focus right now?”
When we’re shaping and
nobody can agree on a solution

82. MORE BUGS WE CAN FIX
When people hear about a
problem and jump straight to
proposing solutions
“Is this worth our time and
focus right now?”
When we’re shaping and
nobody can agree on a solution
“Have we aligned on what
problem we’re solving?”

83. 3. WHEN TO MAKE OUR BETS

84. 3. WHEN TO MAKE OUR BETS
The book described Basecamp’s “betting table”

85. 3. WHEN TO MAKE OUR BETS
The book described Basecamp’s “betting table”
We’d shape multiple pitches and then choose which
ones to build right before the next 6-week cycle

86. 3. WHEN TO MAKE OUR BETS
The book described Basecamp’s “betting table”
We’d shape multiple pitches and then choose which
ones to build right before the next 6-week cycle
This assumes the luxury of lots of time to shape!

87. 3. WHEN TO MAKE OUR BETS
The book described Basecamp’s “betting table”
We’d shape multiple pitches and then choose which
ones to build right before the next 6-week cycle
This assumes the luxury of lots of time to shape!
Teams without so much time end up under-shaping
a bunch of stuff in a rush for the betting table

88. 3. WHEN TO MAKE OUR BETS

89. 3. WHEN TO MAKE OUR BETS
Shaping more rigorously means we need to pick and
choose which projects deserve the time investment

90. 3. WHEN TO MAKE OUR BETS
Shaping more rigorously means we need to pick and
choose which projects deserve the time investment
For most teams, it works better to make a tentative bet
after framing, to carve the time for shaping

91. 3. WHEN TO MAKE OUR BETS
Shaping more rigorously means we need to pick and
choose which projects deserve the time investment
For most teams, it works better to make a tentative bet
after framing, to carve the time for shaping
Then shape one thing at a time, knowing we agreed
it’s worth doing, as long as we find a viable path

92. PLUS…

93. PLUS…
Cycles don’t have to be 6 weeks, or even regular!
The key point is choosing a time box and shaping into it

94. PLUS…
Cycles don’t have to be 6 weeks, or even regular!
The key point is choosing a time box and shaping into it
Latitude isn’t fixed (eg. fat marker sketch) — it’s a dial
to turn depending on the project & team

95. PLUS…
Cycles don’t have to be 6 weeks, or even regular!
The key point is choosing a time box and shaping into it
Latitude isn’t fixed (eg. fat marker sketch) — it’s a dial
to turn depending on the project & team
When designers are scarce, it’s possible to bring
them in during shaping for architectural input and
after delivery for “interior design”

96. NEXT STEPS
SHAPING IN A NUTSHELL SHAPING IN REAL LIFE
20-minute overview Custom-fit a process to your team
THE BOOK
STAY IN TOUCH
feltpresence.com @rjs on Twitter Connect on LinkedIn