An operator’s guide to product strategy | Chandra Janakiraman (CPO at VRChat, ex-Meta, Headspace)

Chandra Janakiraman: I started noticing that there was a certain mystique and aura about product strategy.

Chandra Janakiraman：我开始注意到产品策略有一定的神秘感和光环。

There was this perception that some people were intrinsically really good at strategy and others were not.

人们普遍认为，有些人本质上非常擅长战略，而另一些人则不然。

It was almost as if there was a strategy gene you needed to be born with to be good at it.

就好像你需要天生就有一种策略基因才能擅长。

Lenny Rachitsky: Say someone's sitting down, okay, I'm going to start developing a strategy for our product.

Lenny Rachitsky：假设有人坐下来，好吧，我将开始为我们的产品制定策略。

Where do you begin?

你从哪里开始？

What does this process look like?

这个过程是什么样的？

Chandra Janakiraman: In terms of what product strategy is?

Chandra Janakiraman：产品策略是什么？

There is a smallest flavor of it which focuses on solving problems, they're called present forward, and it typically operates in a two-year horizon.

其中有一个最小的风格，专注于解决问题，称为“现在向前”，通常在两年的时间内运作。

We use a five-stage process to get there and it takes about eight to 12 weeks.

我们采用五个阶段的流程来实现这一目标，大约需要 8 到 12 周的时间。

The reason I think this process works is there is a ton of alignment built in.

我认为这个过程有效的原因是内置了大量的对齐。

It goes back to human psychology of just something that comes from you, feels a lot more familiar and easy to accept.

它可以追溯到人类心理学，即来自你的东西，感觉更熟悉且更容易接受。

Lenny Rachitsky: Let's talk about big S strategy.

Lenny Rachitsky：我们来谈谈大S 策略。

When should you approach strategy this way?

什么时候应该以这种方式制定策略？

Chandra Janakiraman: There's this interesting quote by Elon Musk, which is-

钱德拉·贾纳基拉曼（Chandra Janakiraman）：埃隆·马斯克（Elon Musk）有一句有趣的话，是——

Elon Musk: "Life's got to be about more than just solving problems."

埃隆·马斯克：“生活不仅仅是解决问题。”

Chandra Janakiraman: I think this is true of every sort of company.

Chandra Janakiraman：我认为任何类型的公司都是如此。

There needs to be an aspirational and cool component to strategy.

战略中需要有一个雄心勃勃且很酷的组成部分。

What does the product look like in five to 10 years?

五到十年后产品会是什么样子？

Why is the world better in 10 years?

为什么10年后世界会变得更好？

And what is the most exciting version of that view?

这种观点最令人兴奋的版本是什么？

Lenny Rachitsky: Today my guest is Chandra Janakiraman.

Lenny Rachitsky：今天我的客人是 Chandra Janakiraman。

Chandra is chief product officer and executive vice president at VRChat.

Chandra 是 VRChat 的首席产品官兼执行副总裁。

He was a product leader at Meta, chief product officer at Headspace, a GM at Zynga, and a senior PM at Amazon.

他曾担任 Meta 的产品负责人、Headspace 的首席产品官、Zynga 的总经理以及 Amazon 的高级产品经理。

And the way this podcast episode happened was an avid podcast listener, Karthik Suresh, told me about Chandra at a community meetup.

这个播客节目的发生方式是一位热心的播客听众卡蒂克·苏雷什 (Karthik Suresh) 在一次社区聚会上向我讲述了钱德拉 (Chandra)。

And when I connected with Chandra, it was clear that I needed to get him on the podcast.

当我与钱德拉联系时，很明显我需要让他加入播客。

Lenny Rachitsky: Chandra is a student of strategy and has spent his career developing what he calls an operator's guide to strategy, which essentially pulls together the best ideas from Good Strategy, Bad Strategy, Playing to Win, Michael Porter and others to create a very clear, reliable and easy-to-follow five-step process to develop a great strategy and a set of next steps for your product and company.

Lenny Rachitsky：Chandra 是一位战略专业的学生，​​他的职业生涯一直致力于开发他所谓的运营商战略指南，该指南本质上汇集了《好战略》、《坏战略》、《为赢而战》、Michael Porter 等人的最佳想法，创建了一个非常清晰、可靠且易于遵循的五步流程，为您的产品和公司制定出色的战略和一系列后续步骤。

After hearing Chandra walk through this in our conversation, I'm basically going to now point everyone who wants to get better at strategy to this episode and Chandra's method.

在听完钱德拉在我们的谈话中讲述了这一点之后，我现在基本上将向所有想要更好地掌握策略的人指出这一集和钱德拉的方法。

Strategy is at the heart of every great product and team and business, and it's also the source of so much pain if you do it badly.

战略是每一个伟大产品、团队和业务的核心，如果你做得不好，它也是巨大痛苦的根源。

This episode is meant to help you avoid that.

本集旨在帮助您避免这种情况。

A big thank you to Karthik for making this connection.

非常感谢 Karthik 建立了这种联系。

If you enjoy this podcast, don't forget to subscribe and follow it in your favorite podcasting app or YouTube.

如果您喜欢这个播客，请不要忘记订阅并在您最喜欢的播客应用程序或 YouTube 中关注它。

It's the best way to avoid missing feature episodes and it helps the podcast tremendously.

这是避免错过专题节目的最佳方式，并且对播客有很大帮助。

With that, I bring you Chandra Janakiraman.

接下来，我为您带来钱德拉·贾纳基拉曼 (Chandra Janakiraman)。

Lenny Rachitsky: This episode is brought to you by Eppo.

Lenny Rachitsky：本集由 Eppo 为您带来。

Eppo is a next-generation A-B testing and feature management platform built by alums of Airbnb and Snowflake for modern growth teams, companies like Twitch, Miro, ClickUp and DraftKings rely on Eppo to power their experiments.

Eppo 是由 Airbnb 和 Snowflake 的校友为现代增长团队构建的下一代 A-B 测试和功能管理平台，Twitch、Miro、ClickUp 和 DraftKings 等公司依靠 Eppo 来支持他们的实验。

Experimentation is increasingly essential for driving growth and for understanding the performance of new features and Eppo helps you increase experimentation velocity while unlocking rigorous deep analysis in a way that no other commercial tool does.

实验对于推动增长和了解新功能的性能越来越重要，Eppo 可以帮助您提高实验速度，同时以其他商业工具无法做到的方式解锁严格的深度分析。

Lenny Rachitsky: When I was at Airbnb, one of the things that I loved most was our experimentation platform where I could set up experiments, easily, troubleshoot issues, and analyze performance all on my own.

Lenny Rachitsky：当我在 Airbnb 时，我最喜欢的事情之一就是我们的实验平台，我可以在其中轻松设置实验、解决问题并分析性能，一切都由我自己完成。

Eppo does all that and more With advanced statistical methods that can help you shave weeks off experiment time and accessible UI for diving deeper into performance and out of the box reporting that helps you avoid annoying prolonged analytic cycles.

Eppo 可以做到这一切以及更多，先进的统计方法可以帮助您缩短数周的实验时间，可访问的 UI 可以更深入地了解性能，而开箱即用的报告可以帮助您避免烦人的长时间分析周期。

Eppo also makes it easy for you to share experiment insights with your team, sparking new ideas for the A-B testing flywheel.

Eppo 还使您可以轻松地与您的团队分享实验见解，激发 A-B 测试飞轮的新想法。

Eppo powers experimentation across every use case, including product growth, machine learning, monetization, and email marketing.

Eppo 为每个用例提供实验支持，包括产品增长、机器学习、货币化和电子邮件营销。

Check out Eppo at geteppo.com/lenny and 10 x your experiment velocity.

请访问 geteppo.com/lenny 并查看 Eppo 和 10 倍的实验速度。

That's geteppo.com/lenny.

那是 geteppo.com/lenny。

Lenny Rachitsky: This episode is brought to you by Airtable ProductCentral, the unified system that brings your entire product org together in one place.

Lenny Rachitsky：本集由 Airtable ProductCentral 为您带来，这是一个将您的整个产品组织聚集到一个地方的统一系统。

No more scattered tools, no more misaligned teams.

不再有分散的工具，不再有不一致的团队。

If you're like most product leaders, you're tired of constant context switching between tools.

如果您像大多数产品负责人一样，您就会厌倦工具之间不断的上下文切换。

That's why Airtable built Product Central after decades of working with world-class product companies.

这就是 Airtable 在与世界一流产品公司合作数十年后建立 Product Central 的原因。

Think of it as mission control for your entire product organization.

将其视为整个产品组织的任务控制。

Unlike rigid point solutions, product central powers everything from resourcing to voice of customer to roadmapping to launch execution.

与僵化的单点解决方案不同，产品中心为从资源到客户声音、路线图到启动执行的一切提供动力。

And because it's built on Airtable's no-code platform, you can customize every workflow to match exactly how your team works.

由于它建立在 Airtable 的无代码平台上，因此您可以自定义每个工作流程以完全匹配您团队的工作方式。

No limitations, no compromises.

没有限制，没有妥协。

Ready to see it in action, head to airtable.com/lenny to book a demo.

准备好观看它的实际操作了吗，请前往airtable.com/lenny 预订演示。

That's airtable.com/lenny.

这是airtable.com/lenny。

Lenny Rachitsky: Chandra, thank you so much for being here and welcome to the podcast.

Lenny Rachitsky：Chandra，非常感谢您来到这里，欢迎来到播客。

Lenny Rachitsky: I want to share actually the context and how this conversation happened.

Lenny Rachitsky：我想分享一下实际的背景以及这次谈话是如何发生的。

I was at a meetup of my readership, of my community and someone came up to me and they're like, "Lenny, you need to get this guy Chandra on your podcast.

我参加了我的读者和社区的一次聚会，有人走过来对我说，“莱尼，你需要让钱德拉这个人加入你的播客。

He's the most amazing playbook for developing a strategy." He's gone through it with you at a company he worked at with you once, and he's just like, "People need to learn this because it's so good." And to me, if someone can get better at strategy, it feels like it just makes so much of the way the company operates and the way that people work better.

他是制定战略方面最令人惊奇的剧本。”他曾经在一家与你共事过的公司里和你一起经历过这一切，他就像是，“人们需要学习这个，因为它太好了。”对我来说，如果一个人能够在战略方面做得更好，那感觉就像它极大地改善了公司的运营方式以及人们更好的工作方式。

So we chatted, we met, I was like, "I completely agree.

所以我们聊天，见面，我说，“我完全同意。

We definitely need to get you on this podcast to share your approach to the strategy." So we made this happen, and so we're here.

我们绝对需要让您加入这个播客来分享您的战略方法。”所以我们做到了这一点，所以我们就在这里。

So again, thank you for doing this and sharing.

再次感谢您所做的事情和分享。

Lenny Rachitsky: First of all, I wanted to ask just you're very passionate about strategy and developing a way to consistently create great strategies.

Lenny Rachitsky：首先，我想问您是否对战略充满热情，并热衷于开发一种持续制定出色战略的方法。

What got you so interested in this stuff in the first place?

首先是什么让您对这些东西如此感兴趣？

What kind of sparked your interest in this area?

是什么激发了您对这个领域的兴趣？

Chandra Janakiraman: Yeah, yeah, it's a very interesting story.

Chandra Janakiraman：是的，是的，这是一个非常有趣的故事。

It goes back all the way 10 years ago, but I remember it vividly like it happened yesterday.

事情已经追溯到10年前，但我却记忆犹新，就像发生在昨天一样。

And I was a relatively new VP of product at Headspace, and we had this amazing company vision and mission that the founders had laid out, and I had come in and established goals for the team in terms of our key metrics, and we had a very buttoned up roadmap in my mind that fed into that company mission and vision.

我是 Headspace 相对较新的产品副总裁，我们有创始人所制定的令人惊叹的公司愿景和使命，我进来并根据我们的关键指标为团队制定了目标，我们在我的脑海中制定了一个非常明确的路线图，该路线图融入了公司的使命和愿景。

And I was feeling pretty good about how things were shaping up.

我对事情的进展感觉非常好。

Chandra Janakiraman: And on a particular Monday, the founder, CEO pulled me aside, and in his usual disarming style, he sort of made a short but profound statement.

Chandra Janakiraman：在一个特定的周一，创始人兼首席执行官把我拉到一边，以他惯常的解除武装的风格，他发表了一个简短但深刻的声明。

He said that, "Hey, CJ, I'm hearing that a lot of people don't really understand why we are working on what we are working on," and that was it.

他说，“嘿，CJ，我听说很多人并不真正理解我们为什么要做我们正在做的事情，”就是这样。

That was really the extent of what he shared.

这就是他分享的内容的范围。

And it was a little bit of a bubble bursting moment for me because we obviously had spent a lot of time building the plan and I was feeling relatively good about the plan.

对我来说，这有点像泡沫破灭的时刻，因为我们显然花了很多时间来制定这个计划，而且我对这个计划感觉相对不错。

Chandra Janakiraman: And so I spoke to a few people.

Chandra Janakiraman：所以我和一些人谈过。

I sort of wanted to understand it a little bit deeper, like, "Hey, what's happening?" And he was right.

我有点想更深入地了解它，比如，“嘿，发生了什么事？”他是对的。

He was right.

他是对的。

A lot of people didn't really understand why we were working on the things we were working on, and it led to some soul-searching.

很多人并不真正理解我们为什么要做我们正在做的事情，这导致了一些反思。

And basically I was lucky because there was actually a board member of Headspace who had a product background, kind of knew what good looked like, and I came to the conclusion, "Hey, we needed a strategy for Headspace."

基本上我很幸运，因为实际上 Headspace 的董事会成员有产品背景，知道什么是好的，我得出的结论是：“嘿，我们需要一个 Headspace 的策略。”

Chandra Janakiraman: So with extensive work with her, with the board person, we built the first written product strategy for Headspace.

Chandra Janakiraman：通过与她和董事会成员的广泛合作，我们为 Headspace 制定了第一个书面产品战略。

And that, and the subsequent actions on the product led to a complete re-imagination of the product.

这以及随后对产品采取的行动导致了对产品的彻底重新构想。

And basically we were able to create a new product, we call it the Next Generation Headspace, which on one hand it could support a comprehensive library of content, not just meditation, but non-meditation content as well.

基本上我们能够创建一个新产品，我们称之为下一代顶空，一方面它可以支持一个全面的内容库，不仅是冥想，还包括非冥想内容。

It had the sort of home experience where everything was incredibly personalized for the individuals, and there were several motivational elements built into the whole product experience.

它有一种家庭体验，一切都为个人提供了难以置信的个性化，并且整个产品体验中内置了一些激励元素。

And it was very transformational for the company and the product because it changed the product from being a meditation app to a broader health and wellness service and really put the company on a different trajectory.

这对公司和产品来说都是非常具有变革性的，因为它将产品从冥想应用程序转变为更广泛的健康和保健服务，并真正使公司走上了不同的轨道。

It led to my promotion to the first CPO at Headspace.

这使我晋升为 Headspace 的第一位 CPO。

Chandra Janakiraman: And most interestingly, I had a chance to, while going through it almost in a sort of out of body way, observed the process of like, okay, how did we put this thing together?

Chandra Janakiraman：最有趣的是，我有机会在几乎以一种灵魂出窍的方式经历它的同时，观察了这个过程，好吧，我们是如何把这个东西放在一起的？

And what actually went into it?

到底发生了什么？

What really started as almost a personal crisis moment of finding this need to create a strategy for a product and a company led to a bigger sort of quest for me, which is I started noticing that there was a certain mystique and aura about product strategy, and there was this perception that some people were intrinsically really good at strategy and others were not.

真正开始的几乎是个人危机时刻，我发现需要为产品和公司制定战略，这给我带来了更大的追求，那就是我开始注意到产品战略有一定的神秘感和光环，并且有一种看法，即有些人本质上非常擅长战略，而另一些人则不然。

And it was almost as if there was a strategy gene that you needed to be born with to be good at it.

就好像你需要天生就有一种策略基因才能擅长。

And that bothered me a lot, and I sort of wanted to ask myself, is it possible to break that divide between the haves and the have-nots and make this capability widely accessible through a procedural approach.

这让我很困扰，我想问自己，是否有可能打破富人和穷人之间的鸿沟，并通过程序方法使这种能力广泛获得。

And I have news for you.

我有消息要告诉你。

The answer is yes, anybody can build product strategy through a clear understanding of what it is and through a friendly and repeatable playbook.

答案是肯定的，任何人都可以通过清楚地了解产品策略并通过友好且可重复的剧本来制定产品策略。

Lenny Rachitsky: Amazing.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：太棒了。

That's exactly what I want to do here.

这正是我想要在这里做的。

The point you made about the why, I think everyone listening to this that's been in product for long enough has heard that of just, "Your team doesn't understand why we're doing this." I've heard that a number of times, as much as you think you're killing it, there's always that, you forget sometimes to do that or you aren't doing it great.

你所提出的关于原因的观点，我认为每个在产品中听了足够长的时间的人都听说过，“你的团队不明白我们为什么要这样做。”我曾多次听说过，尽管你认为自己正在扼杀它，但有时你总是会忘记这样做，或者做得不好。

And I love that basically the solution to that is the strategy solves that problem of helping people connect the dots and understand why this is the roadmap, why this is the strategy.

我喜欢基本上解决这个问题的策略是解决帮助人们连接点并理解为什么这是路线图、为什么这是策略的问题。

Okay, so before we get into it, just one more context question, what's just the best way to think about what you're about to share and also who's it for?

好的，在我们开始讨论之前，再问一个背景问题，思考您要分享的内容以及分享的对象的最佳方式是什么？

Who needs to hear this briefly?

谁需要简短地听听这个？

Chandra Janakiraman: So the way to think about this, the substance is that this is not a new framework or theory that I'm going to be talking about.

Chandra Janakiraman：所以思考这个问题的方式，实质是，这不是我要谈论的新框架或理论。

There are plenty of excellent materials on strategy from ancient texts like The Art of War from Sun Tzu, all of Michael Porter's work, Good Strategy Bad Strategy by Richard Rumelt, who's been on your podcast, Playing to Win Lafley and Roger Martin.

古代文献中有很多关于战略的优秀材料，比如《孙子兵法》、迈克尔·波特的所有著作、理查德·鲁梅尔特的《好战略、坏战略》，他一直在你的播客《为赢而战》中，雷富礼和罗杰·马丁。

So there's a ton of extensively researched and well-founded materials out there.

因此，有大量经过广泛研究且有充分依据的材料。

So the way I would think about this is, it's more of an operator's interpretation of all the stuff that's out there and are able to package it into something that's friendly and repeatable, particularly for product people who think they are weak at strategy or perhaps have received such feedback.

所以我的想法是，这更多的是运营商对现有所有东西的解释，并且能够将其打包成友好且可重复的东西，特别是对于那些认为自己在策略方面薄弱或可能收到此类反馈的产品人员来说。

Chandra Janakiraman: And just in terms of the battle-tested nature of it, I personally use this playbook about five to six times tweaking and optimizing it each time based on what I thought worked, what people thought worked and didn't work, including several times at Meta and usually leading to strong results, both for me achieving senior leadership alignment as well as driving business results for the company.

Chandra Janakiraman：就其经过实战考验的性质而言，我个人使用这本手册大约五到六次，每次根据我认为有效的内容、人们认为有效和无效的内容进行调整和优化，包括在 Meta 上使用过几次，通常会带来强劲的结果，既让我实现了高层领导的协调，又为公司推动了业务成果。

Lenny Rachitsky: Okay, I'm getting more and more excited.

Lenny Rachitsky：好吧，我越来越兴奋了。

Let's get into it, let's get into this playbook.

让我们开始吧，让我们进入这本剧本。

People hear this word strategy a lot.

人们经常听到“战略”这个词。

They're told be more strategic, build a better strategy.

他们被告知要更具战略性，制定更好的战略。

What's the simplest way to understand what is a strategy?

理解什么是策略的最简单方法是什么？

Chandra Janakiraman: Yeah, let's start with some basic definitions, which is as you asked, what is product strategy?

Chandra Janakiraman：是的，让我们从一些基本定义开始，正如您所问的，什么是产品策略？

And if you think back to the Headspace example, this sort of comes to life as well.

如果你回想一下顶空的例子，你会发现这种情况也很现实。

So product strategy, strategy sits between the mission and vision and the plan.

因此，产品战略、战略位于使命、愿景和计划之间。

It could be at the company level or at the team level, but it's usually sitting between the mission and vision and the plan.

它可以在公司层面或团队层面，但通常位于使命、愿景和计划之间。

And the plan, you can call the plan the roadmap, which is basically an ordered list of things that you want to get done and the mission and vision is basically sort of the purpose of existence, what does it look like when you achieve your purpose of existence?

计划，你可以将计划称为路线图，它基本上是你想要完成的事情的有序列表，而使命和愿景基本上是存在的目的，当你实现存在的目的时，它会是什么样子？

So it sits between the two and it forces choice to deploy scarce resources to generate maximum impact.

因此它介于两者之间，迫使人们选择部署稀缺资源以产生最大影响。

Chandra Janakiraman: And I want to borrow an analogy from the world of physics.

Chandra Janakiraman：我想借用物理学界的一个类比。

There is this concept called resonance, and the concept of resonance is really interesting, and it's actually very close to the concept of strategy.

有一个概念叫做共振，共振的概念非常有趣，它实际上与策略的概念非常接近。

So the concept of resonance works as follows, when you apply a certain frequency to an object and you get pretty close to its natural frequency, you see a disproportionate increase in the amplitude of how that object vibrates.

因此，共振的概念是这样工作的，当你对一个物体施加一定的频率并且非常接近它的固有频率时，你会看到该物体振动的幅度不成比例地增加。

And so it's very interesting, if you apply any other frequency, there's very little effect on the object, but if you get close to its natural frequency, there's this exponential increase in the vibration of the product.

因此，这非常有趣，如果您应用任何其他频率，对物体的影响很小，但如果您接近其固有频率，产品的振动会呈指数级增加。

So this concept of resonance is interesting.

所以共振这个概念很有趣。

Chandra Janakiraman: So the way to think about it in the context of strategy is, it is selecting that frequency to achieve resonance between the product and the market.

Chandra Janakiraman：所以在战略的背景下思考它的方法是，选择频率来实现产品和市场之间的共鸣。

And so when you get close to that frequency, you should see tremendous impact in terms of the product landing well in the market.

因此，当您接近该频率时，您应该会看到产品在市场上的良好登陆方面产生的巨大影响。

And so that's how I would think about it.

这就是我的想法。

It sits between mission, vision and the plan.

它位于使命、愿景和计划之间。

It forces choice to deploy scarce resources to generate maximum impact, so using resonance as a sort of an example, and it ideally includes three components.

它迫使人们选择部署稀缺资源以产生最大影响，因此以共振为例，理想情况下它包括三个组成部分。

The first is a handful of areas to focus on and I call these strategic pillars and then a whole bunch of areas that are explicitly not the focus.

第一个是一些需要重点关注的领域，我称之为战略支柱，然后是一大堆明显不是重点的领域。

And the third component is why.

第三个部分是原因。

So why are the focus areas, A, B and C?

那么为什么重点领域是 A、B 和 C？

Why are these whole bunch of areas not the focus?

为什么这些领域不是重点？

And that's the three components.

这就是三个组成部分。

That's really it in terms of product strategy.

就产品策略而言确实如此。

Lenny Rachitsky: I love it.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：我喜欢它。

And I love the things we aren't doing as a core part of this, that comes up a lot on this podcast of being clear is what we're not going to do.

我喜欢我们没有做的事情作为核心部分，在这个播客中经常出现，明确我们不会做的事情。

We know these could be things we could do, but we're deciding we're not doing these things.

我们知道这些是我们可以做的事情，但我们决定不做这些事情。

Lenny Rachitsky: Okay, so let's just talk through how you go about developing a strategy using this method.

Lenny Rachitsky：好的，我们来谈谈如何使用这种方法制定策略。

Say someone's sitting down, "Okay, I'm going to start developing a strategy for our product." Where do you begin?

假设有人坐下来，“好吧，我要开始为我们的产品制定策略。”你从哪里开始？

What does this process look like?

这个过程是什么样的？

Let's start talking through it.

让我们开始讨论它。

Chandra Janakiraman: So I sort of want to first explain this concept called smallest strategy, and I'll sort of talk about what that is and how it's different from another kind.

Chandra Janakiraman：所以我想首先解释一下这个称为最小策略的概念，然后我会谈谈它是什么以及它与其他策略有何不同。

But the basic sort of strategic process I would say takes about eight to 12 weeks long.

但我想说，基本的战略流程大约需要 8 到 12 周的时间。

It's something that I think people often underestimate how long it takes and eventually end up taking a lot more time.

我认为人们经常低估这需要多长时间，最终花费了更多的时间。

But when they start off, they think, "Oh, I could probably stand this up in a couple of weeks," but usually through iteration it actually ends up taking 8 to 12 weeks anyway.

但当他们开始时，他们会想，“哦，我可能可以在几周内完成这个任务”，但通常通过迭代，实际上最终会花费 8 到 12 周的时间。

So it's good to start with setting clear expectations that it takes about eight to 12 weeks.

因此，最好一开始就设定明确的预期，大约需要 8 到 12 周的时间。

And the way to justify the ROI on that is typically a strategy like this can be leveraged for about a couple of years.

证明投资回报率合理的方法通常是这样的策略，可以使用大约几年。

So relative to that sort of payback period, I think the investment is relatively small.

所以相对于这样的投资回收期，我认为投资相对较小。

So it's pretty healthy from that sense to manage expectations and say that that's how long it's going to take.

因此，从这个意义上说，管理期望并说明这将需要多长时间是非常健康的。

Chandra Janakiraman: So within that period, there are five phases.

Chandra Janakiraman：所以在那个时期内，有五个阶段。

There's the preparation phase, there's a strategy sprint, the design sprint, the document writing and the rollout.

有准备阶段、战略冲刺、设计冲刺、文档编写和推出。

And those are the five phases, which I'll explain how one would go through.

这就是五个阶段，我将解释如何经历这五个阶段。

And basically each of them has a certain sort of time recommendation.

基本上每个人都有某种时间建议。

For example, the preparation phase I would say is probably about four weeks.

例如，我想说的准备阶段大概是四个星期左右。

The strategy sprint is up to about one week.

战略冲刺长达一周左右。

The design sprint is another one week, document writing maybe one to two weeks, and the rollout is maybe two to three weeks.

设计冲刺可能还要一周，文档编写可能需要一到两周，推出可能需要两到三周。

So that's how you get to that range of eight to 12 weeks.

这就是如何达到 8 到 12 周的范围。

Lenny Rachitsky: Essentially it's like a quarter of work to get to a final great strategy.

Lenny Rachitsky：本质上来说，需要四分之一的工作才能制定出最终的伟大策略。

And of these five phases, the biggest bucket is preparation, which to me sounds like it's not like a full-time team thing.

在这五个阶段中，最大的部分是准备，在我看来，这听起来不像是全职团队的事情。

It's starting to gather data and user research-

它开始收集数据和用户研究 -

Lenny Rachitsky: As you talk through this, I'm curious just how much of the team is involved in each of these steps.

Lenny Rachitsky：当你谈到这一点时，我很好奇团队中有多少人参与了每个步骤。

But I think it's an important point, if you want a really good winning strategy, you need to give a time.

但我认为这一点很重要，如果你想要一个真正好的获胜策略，你需要付出时间。

You can't just say, "In a month or a week, we need to develop a strategy, go figure it out, write this document." Great.

你不能只是说，“在一个月或一周内，我们需要制定一个策略，弄清楚，写这个文件。”伟大的。

Cool.

凉爽的。

So let's talk about step one preparation.

那么我们来谈谈第一步的准备工作。

Chandra Janakiraman: That's correct, Lenny.

Chandra Janakiraman： 是的，莱尼。

And I think you, if I forget, remind me that sometimes there is pressure.

我想，如果我忘记了，你会提醒我，有时会有压力。

There's just business pressure, like the CEO might still want a strategy in two weeks, how do you respond to that?

只是业务压力，比如首席执行官可能仍希望在两周内制定战略，您对此有何反应？

And I think we can find some clever shortcuts there, but I think to the extent possible, the leader should push for to make something really great.

我认为我们可以在那里找到一些聪明的捷径，但我认为领导者应该尽可能地推动做出真正伟大的事情。

Lenny Rachitsky: And I think part of it is that as a leader, you can start on this before...

Lenny Rachitsky：我认为部分原因是，作为领导者，你可以在此之前开始……

you know this is coming, so you should get started before it's even asked for.

你知道这即将到来，所以你应该在它被要求之前就开始。

Lenny Rachitsky: Yeah, awesome.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：是的，太棒了。

Okay, let's get into it.

好吧，让我们开始吧。

Chandra Janakiraman: So I think you sort of touched on this in terms of the preparation phase being the longest phase, but also not being sort of like a full-time thing.

Chandra Janakiraman：所以我认为你在某种程度上谈到了这一点，准备阶段是最长的阶段，但也不像全职阶段。

So that's absolutely right.

所以这是绝对正确的。

So the preparation phase is really...

所以准备阶段真的...

The way to start this, which is a little different from other approaches I've seen from people is to actually form a strategy working group.

开始的方法与我从人们那里看到的其他方法略有不同，实际上是组建一个战略工作组。

This is an important concept.

这是一个重要的概念。

So the strategy working group is sort of a small team.

所以战略工作组是一个小团队。

It typically consists of engineering, product design and data at a minimum.

它通常至少由工程、产品设计和数据组成。

And in certain cases, there's a luxury to have other functions like product marketing, user research, that's also part of the strategy working group.

在某些情况下，拥有其他职能（例如产品营销、用户研究）是一种奢侈，这也是战略工作组的一部分。

But the minimum quorum, I would recommend is engineering, product design and data because design in some ways represents both sort of product design and user research.

但我建议的最低法定人数是工程、产品设计和数据，因为设计在某些方面代表了产品设计和用户研究。

So you do get the voice of the user from that perspective.

所以你确实从这个角度得到了用户的声音。

And typically the PM is driving the strategy working group and the process, but that working group is actually the team that's going to collaboratively create the strategy doc.

通常，PM 负责推动战略工作组和流程，但该工作组实际上是协作创建战略文档的团队。

Chandra Janakiraman: And so in the preparation phase, there's usually a kickoff meeting where the PM pulls the team together, talks about the purpose of the process, lays out the different phases, and gives everybody a feel for what's going to happen in the next 8 to 12 weeks.

Chandra Janakiraman：因此，在准备阶段，通常会召开启动会议，PM 将团队召集在一起，讨论流程的目的，列出不同的阶段，并让每个人了解未来 8 到 12 周内将要发生的事情。

And basically then creates a list of very discrete action items and deliverables for each of the stakeholders in the working group.

然后基本上为工作组中的每个利益相关者创建一个非常离散的行动项目和可交付成果的列表。

So specifically, there's an action item around aggregating all the behavioral insights that the team might have around the product.

因此，具体而言，有一个行动项目围绕聚合团队可能拥有的有关产品的所有行为见解。

And usually this is a combination of previous analysis that the team has run on the data side and potentially also feature launches and how they have done.

通常，这是团队之前在数据方面运行的分析的组合，也可能是功能发布及其完成方式的组合。

So all kind of analytical analysis.

所以各种分析分析。

Chandra Janakiraman: The ask is really to create a meta analysis of all of the analysis.

Chandra Janakiraman：我们的要求实际上是对所有分析进行元分析。

So the data person on the strategy working group has to scan the historical archives at the company and sort of synthesize and condense that into a very sort of digestible macro themes and learnings about users.

因此，战略工作组的数据人员必须扫描公司的历史档案，并将其综合和浓缩成一种易于理解的宏观主题和有关用户的知识。

So that's sort of one preparation phase item.

这是一种准备阶段项目。

Chandra Janakiraman: The second is UXR insight.

Chandra Janakiraman：第二个是 UXR 洞察力。

So again, there's probably a lot of soft hard signals about users, not just based on research that's run by user researchers, but also potentially from the customer service team, social channels, and basically a meta analysis of all of that into one very actionable and synthesized deck on all the insights on users.

再说一次，可能有很多关于用户的软硬信号，不仅基于用户研究人员进行的研究，还可能来自客户服务团队、社交渠道，以及基本上对所有这些的元分析，形成一个非常可操作且综合的关于用户所有见解的平台。

That's usually led by the design person and with support from their research team.

这通常由设计人员领导并得到研究团队的支持。

And that's sort of the second action item.

这是第二个行动项目。

Chandra Janakiraman: The third action item is leadership interviews.

Chandra Janakiraman：第三个行动项目是领导层访谈。

So I sort of have this fun story of the fruit with leadership strategy reviews, which I want to share.

所以我有一个关于领导力策略评论的有趣故事，我想与大家分享。

So imagine, this is sort of how sometimes strategy reviews go, which is you bring a fruit to the reviewer and say, "Hey, here's a mango, what do you think?" And the reviewer says, "I actually don't like mangoes." And you're like, "Oh," you're sort of sad.

所以想象一下，这就是有时策略评审的方式，你给评审者带来一个水果并说，“嘿，这是一个芒果，你觉得怎么样？”评论家说：“我实际上不喜欢芒果。”你会说，“哦，”你有点悲伤。

You take it back, you bring an apple and you show, "Hey, what do you think of an apple?" And then the leader says, "I actually stopped eating apples last year." And so you're disappointed again.

你把它拿回来，带上一个苹果，然后展示，“嘿，你觉得苹果怎么样？”然后领导说：“我实际上去年就不吃苹果了。”于是你又失望了。

You go back, you bring a banana.

你回去吧，你带一根香蕉。

"I hated bananas since I was a kid." And so it's a bit of a silly caricature of reviews, but there's a bit of grain of truth there, which is, imagine how frustrating that is for both the reviewer and the person who's reviewing.

“我从小就讨厌香蕉。”因此，这有点像对评论的愚蠢讽刺，但其中有一点道理，那就是，想象一下这对于评论者和评论者来说是多么令人沮丧。

Chandra Janakiraman: And so it could be made so much better if you just engage with your leaders before you actually build a strategy.

Chandra Janakiraman：因此，如果您在实际制定战略之前与领导者接触，情况可能会好得多。

It's amazing how few people actually do that.

令人惊讶的是，实际上很少有人这样做。

And so the fruit story tells you, hey, imagine if you just asked the reviewer, "Do you even like fruits?" How much better the experience would've been for both parties.

所以水果的故事告诉你，嘿，想象一下，如果你只是问评论者，“你喜欢水果吗？”对于双方来说，体验会好得多。

And so leadership interviews are a very important part of a strategy formulation process.

因此，领导层访谈是战略制定过程中非常重要的一部分。

So you can divide and conquer, there's several leaders, like you assign different leaders to different people on the strategy working group and each of them sort talks to that leader.

所以你可以分而治之，有几个领导者，就像你将不同的领导者分配给战略工作组中的不同人员，然后每个人都与该领导者进行排序对话。

And there are a few questions that I would recommend asking, and it's basically, what does success feel like for the leader?

我建议问几个问题，基本上是，领导者的成功感觉如何？

What does failure look like?

失败是什么样子的？

What is the measure of success?

衡量成功的标准是什么？

What are principles to keep in mind while going through this process?

在这个过程中需要牢记哪些原则？

Lenny Rachitsky: And these are centered around the product that you're working on?

Lenny Rachitsky：这些都是以您正在开发的产品为中心的吗？

Lenny Rachitsky: For Headspace, it'd be like, what do you think success looks like for Headspace or the specific feature of Headspace?

Lenny Rachitsky：对于 Headspace 来说，您认为 Headspace 的成功是什么样的，或者 Headspace 的具体功能是什么？

.

。

Chandra Janakiraman: That's right, yeah.

Chandra Janakiraman：没错，是的。

And also I think ask them for their favorite or better ideas.

我还认为询问他们最喜欢或更好的想法。

It's actually what I've found through this process is a lot of leaders have these better ideas, they just feel shy to share it because they don't want their teams to think of them as micromanage-y.

事实上，我通过这个过程发现，很多领导者都有这些更好的想法，他们只是不好意思分享，因为他们不希望团队认为他们是微观管理的。

They want their teams to figure out the answer themselves, but then when you ask them, they actually have a pet idea always.

他们希望他们的团队自己找出答案，但当你问他们时，他们实际上总是有一个自己喜欢的想法。

Chandra Janakiraman: And so asking them just takes the mystery out of it.

Chandra Janakiraman：所以问他们就可以解开谜团。

And it also gives them a creative avenue.

这也为他们提供了一条创造性的途径。

So some people feel nervous about engaging senior leaders in these conversations in the sense that, hey, is it a waste of their time?

因此，有些人对让高层领导参与这些对话感到紧张，因为这是在浪费他们的时间吗？

What I've found is the exact opposite, senior leaders are, they welcome this because one, it's actually a more fun conversation for them than the other meetings that they have in their day because they're getting a little bit of their creative juices going, and they actually feel happy that somebody actually asked them what they're feeling and thinking about.

我发现恰恰相反，高级领导者对此表示欢迎，因为对他们来说，这实际上比他们当天参加的其他会议更有趣，因为他们的创造力得到了一点发挥，而且他们实际上很高兴有人真正问他们的感受和想法。

And so it's actually very, very positive energy when you ask leaders just what they want.

因此，当你询问领导者想要什么时，这实际上是非常非常积极的能量。

And it's also not a sign of weakness.

这也不是软弱的表现。

It's actually a sign of strength and humility to ask your leaders what you want.

询问领导者你想要什么实际上是力量和谦逊的表现。

And so keeping that fruit story in mind, I want to just say that this is a very, very positive thing, a very powerful thing.

因此，牢记水果的故事，我只想说，这是一件非常非常积极的事情，一件非常强大的事情。

Chandra Janakiraman: The next area is competitive analysis.

Chandra Janakiraman：下一个领域是竞争分析。

So if there is a product marketing person, they can do it for you.

因此，如果有产品营销人员，他们可以为您做这件事。

If there isn't, the PM should do it themselves.

如果没有，总理应该自己做。

And basically the idea is you try to understand who are the comparables or the competitors in the space, and you sort of build a little bit of a head-to-head and sort a stack chart of where's everybody going and what are of the angles of investment for different people based on the explicit signals, which is what are they releasing?

基本上，这个想法是，你试图了解谁是该领域的可比较者或竞争对手，然后你建立了一些正面交锋，并根据明确的信号（他们释放了什么）对每个人的去向以及不同人的投资角度进行了排序。

Chandra Janakiraman: You don't really know what their strategies are, but you can kind of tell when you look at the features they're putting out that, oh, they seem to be focusing on this particular area.

Chandra Janakiraman：你真的不知道他们的策略是什么，但是当你查看他们推出的功能时，你可以看出，哦，他们似乎专注于这个特定领域。

And so that's sort of competitive analysis.

这就是竞争分析。

And bigger companies, there's also another important input, which is adjacent roadmaps.

对于更大的公司来说，还有另一个重要的投入，那就是相邻的路线图。

Are the teams adjacent to you and what are they investing in?

这些团队与您相邻吗？他们投资了什么？

Because oftentimes that can have a rub-off effect on your team, and if you're not aligning with other key teams, it's going to be important.

因为这通常会对您的团队产生负面影响，如果您不与其他关键团队保持一致，那么这将很重要。

So adjacent roadmaps and a summary of that.

相邻的路线图及其摘要。

Chandra Janakiraman: And last but not least, is what I call user observation.

Chandra Janakiraman：最后但并非最不重要的一点是我所说的用户观察。

So I like the strategy working group to actually either interview a user or watch a video and report key learnings.

因此，我希望战略工作组实际上采访用户或观看视频并报告关键经验教训。

And the idea is not to action those insights, it's really to build empathy.

我们的想法不是将这些见解付诸行动，而是真正建立同理心。

When you get somebody in the room with a user, it just changes their mind, it softens them a little bit.

当你让某人和用户一起在房间里时，这只会改变他们的想法，让他们的情绪变得柔和一些。

It gets them out of their own preconceived notions of what to build, what the strategy should be and...

它让他们摆脱了自己对要构建什么、策略应该是什么以及……的先入为主的观念。

Chandra Janakiraman: ...

钱德拉·贾纳基拉曼：...

their own preconceived notions of what to build, what the strategy should be, and it humanizes the whole process.

他们自己对构建什么、策略应该是什么的先入为主的观念，并且它使整个过程变得人性化。

That I think is the purpose, but you still give them the homework of writing down what they learned because it's a little bit of a forcing function.

我认为这就是目的，但你仍然给他们做作业，写下他们学到的东西，因为这有点强迫功能。

Chandra Janakiraman: The output of all of this is what I call the comprehensive preparation readout.

Chandra Janakiraman：所有这些的输出就是我所说的综合准备读数。

It is a single master deck where you sort of have the behavioral insights meta analysis, you have the UXR insights meta analysis, you have a download of the leadership interviews, you have the competitive stack charts, you have the adjacent roadmaps, and you have a section on user observations.

这是一个单一的主平台，您可以在其中进行行为洞察元分析、UXR 洞察元分析、领导力访谈的下载、竞争堆栈图表、相邻的路线图以及有关用户观察的部分。

It's a lot of work, but to your point, it can be done in parallel with your day jobs.

这是一项繁重的工作，但就您而言，它可以与您的日常工作并行完成。

You can multitask, and that's why you take about four weeks to do that.

你可以同时处理多项任务，这就是为什么你需要大约四个星期的时间来完成这件事。

That sort of concludes the preparation phase.

准备阶段就这样结束了。

You get the deck, and that rolls into the strategy sprint, which is the next phase.

你拿到牌组后，就会进入策略冲刺，这是下一阶段。

I want to pause and see if you have any questions.

我想暂停一下，看看你们是否有任何问题。

Lenny Rachitsky: Yeah, I have a million questions, but I'm going to keep myself contained.

Lenny Rachitsky：是的，我有一百万个问题，但我会克制自己。

Just to quickly summarize.

只是为了快速总结一下。

Basically you kick off, we're going to start developing strategy for this product, and you were going to touch on this, but it may help just to talk about this right now.

基本上你开始，我们将开始制定该产品的策略，你将触及这一点，但现在谈论这一点可能会有所帮助。

I know you have big S Strategy, small S strategy.

我知道你有大S策略，小S策略。

This process, what's an example of the level of product scale that this process is for?

这个过程，这个过程的产品规模水平的例子是什么？

Because I know you have another approach for a larger scale of a product, basically for a company.

因为我知道你有另一种方法来生产更大规模的产品，基本上是针对一家公司。

What's the best way to think about small S strategy, which is what we're going through?

我们正在经历的小S战略的最佳思考方式是什么？

Chandra Janakiraman: Yeah, I think it's a good question, Lenny.

Chandra Janakiraman：是的，我认为这是一个很好的问题，Lenny。

I would say that the process works well at sort of a growth stage company or in a vertical within sort of a larger company.

我想说，这个流程在成长阶段的公司或大型公司的垂直领域运作良好。

I think it scales pretty well.

我认为它的扩展性非常好。

The main difference between this small S and big S is the time horizon aspect and the aspirational component, which we'll get to.

小 S 和大 S 之间的主要区别在于时间跨度方面和愿望部分，我们将对此进行讨论。

Lenny Rachitsky: Okay, so this is a process you can use for entire company strategy of not a large company, not a massively, and then also just a product within a company?

Lenny Rachitsky：好的，所以这是一个可以用于整个公司战略的流程，不是大公司，不是大规模公司，也只是公司内的产品？

Lenny Rachitsky: Okay, perfect.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：好的，完美。

Okay.

好的。

Hey, we're kicking off strategy for this thing.

嘿，我们正在启动这件事的策略。

Let's say VR Chat 2.0.

比如说 VR 聊天 2.0。

You have this kickoff meeting with your working group.

您与工作组召开了这次启动会议。

You assign action items and there's six things you ask everyone to do.

您分配行动项目，并要求每个人做六件事。

Gather all the behavioral insights, all the user research insights that you've had, leadership interviews, interview people, ask what they want and see what they're hoping for, what success looks like, competitive analysis, adjacent roadmaps across other teams and user observations, just like watch users, see what's happening.

收集所有的行为见解、所有你拥有的用户研究见解、领导力访谈、采访人员、询问他们想要什么并了解他们希望得到什么、成功是什么样子、竞争分析、其他团队的相邻路线图和用户观察，就像观察用户一样，看看发生了什么。

You assign each of these tasks to different people in this working group.

您将这些任务中的每一项分配给该工作组中的不同人员。

You set a deadline.

你设定了一个最后期限。

We have to present this in say, four weeks.

我们必须在四个星期内呈现这一点。

People go work on it.

人们开始努力。

You meet ongoing as it's coming together, and then the output is a deck that you share.

当它聚集在一起时，您会遇到持续的情况，然后输出是您共享的套牌。

Do you share this deck with just that working group, or who do you share this deck with and read it out to?

您是否只与该工作组共享此套牌，或者您与谁共享此套牌并向谁朗读？

Chandra Janakiraman: Yeah.

钱德拉·贾纳基拉曼：是的。

The deck is an output of the first phase, and then it flows into the second phase, which is a strategy sprint.

牌组是第一阶段的输出，然后流入第二阶段，也就是策略冲刺。

You don't share the deck with anybody yet.

您还没有与任何人共享牌组。

Chandra Janakiraman: In the strategy sprint, it's like a key thing.

Chandra Janakiraman：在战略冲刺中，这就像一个关键的事情。

Yeah.

是的。

Lenny Rachitsky: Awesome.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：太棒了。

Okay.

好的。

I love how very concrete and actionable this is with time boxes and action items and the exact output you're looking for.

我喜欢这种非常具体和可操作的时间框和行动项目以及您正在寻找的确切输出。

I love this.

我喜欢这个。

Okay, cool.

好吧，酷。

Basically what you're trying to do here is gather all of the input that will inform the strategy.

基本上，您在这里要做的就是收集所有为策略提供信息的输入。

Lenny Rachitsky: It's giving yourself time to do this, because if you think about it, the output is determined by the quality of your input.

Lenny Rachitsky：这是给自己时间去做这件事，因为如果你仔细想想，输出是由你输入的质量决定的。

I love, it feels like a core component of this method is spend time creating, gathering all the input, all the best input, actually spend time there.

我喜欢，感觉这个方法的核心组成部分是花时间创建，收集所有的输入，所有最好的输入，实际上花时间在那里。

Don't just make it a half-assed last minute thing.

不要只是在最后一刻才做出半途而废的事情。

Okay.

好的。

Amazing.

惊人的。

Okay, let's talk about step two, which is the strategy sprint.

好吧，我们来谈谈第二步，也就是战略冲刺。

Chandra Janakiraman: Yeah, so the strategy sprint is the heart of the process.

Chandra Janakiraman：是的，战略冲刺是该流程的核心。

This is sort of where you make the decision.

这就是你做出决定的地方。

If you recall, the definition of strategy is it forces choice to deploy resources into a few areas for maximum impact.

如果您还记得的话，战略的定义是它强制选择将资源部署到几个领域以获得最大影响。

The core of strategy is really picking those areas and the areas you're not going invest in.

战略的核心实际上是选择那些领域和你不打算投资的领域。

That happens in the strategy sprint, so really it's the heart of the process.

这发生在战略冲刺中，所以它实际上是该过程的核心。

Chandra Janakiraman: Typically, it's like a three to five day process.

Chandra Janakiraman：通常来说，这需要三到五天的过程。

The first day is the share out date.

第一天是分享日期。

Everybody has done some great work.

每个人都做了一些伟大的工作。

They go in, they share what they've collected, what they've sort of learned.

他们进去，分享他们收集的东西，他们学到的东西。

It brings everybody in the working group to the same state of understanding, the same state of consciousness on the state of the union.

它使工作组中的每个人对国情都有相同的理解和意识状态。

That's a great process where what I encourage people to do is write down things that you are, as you're listening, write down things that you find are problems for our users, things that are coming in the way of our growth and things that are sort of suboptimal for the business.

这是一个很棒的过程，我鼓励人们写下你正在倾听的事情，写下你发现对我们用户来说有问题的事情、阻碍我们成长的事情以及对业务来说不太理想的事情。

Chandra Janakiraman: People take a lot of notes during that time and the people who are presenting are sharing everything they've learned.

Chandra Janakiraman：人们在那段时间做了很多笔记，演讲者正在分享他们所学到的一切。

That's really day one.

这确实是第一天。

It's just absorbing a ton of information and writing down a ton of notes so people can kind of understand where all the problems are.

它只是吸收大量信息并写下大量笔记，以便人们能够了解所有问题出在哪里。

It's a very problems focused process, and that's an important point.

这是一个非常关注问题的过程，这是很重要的一点。

I'll get back to it when we talk about big S, which is different.

等我们说到大S的时候我再回过头来，它是不同的。

Once people have that common awareness, shared knowledge of all the problems, day two is literally the most important day in the entire 8 to 12 weeks because that's where you actually make the choice.

一旦人们对所有问题有了共同认识和共享知识，第二天实际上就是整个 8 到 12 周中最重要的一天，因为那是你真正做出选择的时候。

The way to flow through it, it's actually really important to flow through it correctly.

流过的方式，正确流过其实真的很重要。

The first step is really generating a whole bunch of problems, because people have been taking notes the previous day.

第一步实际上会产生一大堆问题，因为人们前一天一直在做笔记。

Chandra Janakiraman: You start the day with, "Hey, let's collect everybody's thoughts on what the problems are that are holding us back." It's a free flowing session.

Chandra Janakiraman：新的一天开始时，“嘿，让我们收集一下每个人对阻碍我们前进的问题的想法。”这是一个自由流动的会议。

Everybody throws out their observations on what's holding us back, and you just capture all of that in a Google Sheets, for example.

每个人都会对阻碍我们的因素发表自己的看法，例如，您只需在 Google 表格中捕获所有这些即可。

Over even an hour, you start to see these patterns emerging of like, there's these clusters of problems that are really holding us back.

甚至过了一个小时，你就会开始看到这些模式的出现，比如，这些问题群确实阻碍了我们。

The next step is you do a joint clustering of related problems and you create these potentially, typically in my experience, I've seen about 10 to 15 clusters form of very related problems.

下一步是对相关问题进行联合聚类，并潜在地创建这些问题，通常根据我的经验，我见过大约 10 到 15 个非常相关的问题的聚类形式。

The beauty of it is each of those bigger cluster, you actually know what the sub problems are within that cluster because you sort of generated it very organically.

它的美妙之处在于每个更大的集群，您实际上知道该集群中的子问题是什么，因为您非常有机地生成了它。

Chandra Janakiraman: Then you have, let's say 10 to 15 clusters.

Chandra Janakiraman：那么假设有 10 到 15 个集群。

What you then do is you, because remember, because it started as a problem generation exercise, each of the clusters also has a name that is a problem, and so the next step is to flip it into an opportunity framing.

然后你要做的就是你自己，因为记住，因为它是作为问题生成练习开始的，所以每个集群也有一个属于问题的名称，所以下一步是将其转变为机会框架。

Let me give you a couple of examples.

让我举几个例子。

Chandra Janakiraman: Let's say there's a bunch of problems around people don't really know where to find different things in our product, and they don't really know where to go, where to find a certain feature or a certain experience.

Chandra Janakiraman：假设存在很多问题，人们并不真正知道在我们的产品中哪里可以找到不同的东西，他们也不知道去哪里，在哪里可以找到特定的功能或特定的体验。

There's let's say a lot of problems in that area, so difficulty finding things becomes the cluster, the problem cluster and discovery becomes the opportunity sort of framing of it.

可以说，该领域存在很多问题，因此找到问题的困难就变成了问题的集群，问题的集群和发现就成为了框架的机会。

It's sort of the more positive framing of it.

这是一种更积极的框架。

Chandra Janakiraman: Another example could be that people get a lot of content that they don't like.

Chandra Janakiraman：另一个例子可能是人们获得了很多他们不喜欢的内容。

They see a lot of stuff that they don't like, and so they disengage with the product.

他们看到很多他们不喜欢的东西，因此他们不再使用该产品。

The opportunity framing of that would be relevance.

其机会框架具有相关性。

It's basically stuff that really matters to me.

这基本上是对我来说真正重要的事情。

Maybe if it's a social product, then maybe people are finding it difficult to find friends and they are lonely because of that.

也许如果它是一个社交产品，那么也许人们会发现很难找到朋友并且因此感到孤独。

The opportunity framing would be social connection.

机会框架将是社会联系。

Chandra Janakiraman: Flipping all of those problem clusters into positive framing and opportunity framing is the next step.

Chandra Janakiraman：下一步是将所有这些问题群转变为积极的框架和机会框架。

Then you're in a great spot because now all you have to do is you have to down select from those 10 to 15 opportunity areas into ideally three, maybe five, but I would recommend three because it creates more clarity and focus.

那么你就处于一个很好的位置，因为现在你所要做的就是从这 10 到 15 个机会领域中选择，理想情况下是三个，也许五个，但我会推荐三个，因为它可以创造更多的清晰度和焦点。

The way to do that is really sort of ranking them on, I would say four or five key dimensions or criteria, and the first is expected impact.

做到这一点的方法实际上是对它们进行排名，我想说四个或五个关键维度或标准，第一个是预期影响。

Chandra Janakiraman: Let's say you actually tackle that area.

Chandra Janakiraman：假设您确实解决了该领域的问题。

What is the expected impact to whatever matters to you as a company, as a business, as a product?

作为一家公司、一家企业、一项产品，对您来说重要的事情的预期影响是什么？

The second dimension is certainty of impact.

第二个维度是影响的确定性。

Certainty of impact is basically how concrete is the evidence that this is a problem?

影响的确定性基本上是证明这是一个问题的证据有多具体？

Sometimes you have really hard data, sometimes you have more anecdotal evidence, and so the confidence really depends on how big the problem's sizing and frequency is.

有时你有非常硬的数据，有时你有更多的轶事证据，因此置信度实际上取决于问题的规模和频率有多大。

Expected impact, certainty of impact.

预期影响、影响的确定性。

The third one is also very important, which is clarity of levers.

第三点也很重要，就是杠杆的清晰性。

Chandra Janakiraman: Do you actually have an idea of how you would solve it?

Chandra Janakiraman：你真的知道如何解决这个问题吗？

If you don't, it's going to be really difficult to move the needle on it because you should kind of know that, okay, I can imagine these solutions could actually move the needle.

如果你不这样做，那么就很难改变现状，因为你应该知道，好吧，我可以想象这些解决方案实际上可以改变现状。

I can actually launch this sort of nudge system that can help people find things.

我实际上可以启动这种可以帮助人们找到东西的推动系统。

I can recommend people.

我可以推荐人。

I can recommend friends so that people can form friends quicker on the platform.

我可以推荐朋友，以便人们可以在平台上更快地结识朋友。

You should have a sense of how you would solve that particular space.

您应该了解如何解决该特定空间。

Is there clarity on levers?

杠杆是否清晰？

That's the third dimension.

这就是第三维。

Chandra Janakiraman: The fourth dimension is super important, which is are the levers unique and differentiated to that particular team or company?

Chandra Janakiraman：第四个维度非常重要，即对于特定团队或公司而言，哪些杠杆是独特且有区别的？

Which is that if another team or company could build it better than this particular team or company, then it's probably not that differentiated.

也就是说，如果另一个团队或公司可以比这个特定的团队或公司更好地构建它，那么它可能就没有那么差异化。

It's probably going to be pretty generic once you launch it.

一旦你启动它，它可能会非常通用。

It's a combination of sort of like, is there a lot of impact here?

这是一个类似的组合，这里有很大的影响吗？

How confident are we of the problem?

我们对这个问题有多大信心？

Do we have a sense of the solutions?

我们是否了解解决方案？

And basically, are we the team or company that has the capabilities and the skills to uniquely build it where other teams cannot?

基本上，我们是否有能力和技能来独特地构建其他团队无法做到的团队或公司？

Chandra Janakiraman: Once you have that, and sometimes what happens is you don't have too much data, and so it's okay to have qualitative scores on this like high, medium, low, T-shirt scores, whatever that is.

Chandra Janakiraman：一旦你有了这个，有时会发生的情况是你没有太多数据，所以可以有定性分数，比如高、中、低、T 恤分数，无论是什么。

The key is you're doing it together as a strategy working group, and you're debating the scores and you're reasoning why it should be higher versus lower.

关键是你们作为一个战略工作组一起做这件事，你们在争论分数，并推理为什么分数应该更高而不是更低。

There's a ton of alignment and collision that's happening when you're doing that, which is very healthy for the eventual outcome.

当你这样做时，会发生大量的协调和冲突，这对于最终的结果来说是非常健康的。

Chandra Janakiraman: Once you do that, basically you can do a simple sort of addition of the scores and a sort, and what you have is basically the top three and you have the remaining 7 or 12 that are basically not the focus.

Chandra Janakiraman：一旦你这样做了，基本上你可以对分数进行简单的加法和排序，你所拥有的基本上是前三名，剩下的 7 或 12 基本上不是重点。

That's the core of the process, is getting those opportunity areas and getting to a shared sense of how do we prioritize them and why?

这是该流程的核心，即获取这些机会领域并就如何优先考虑它们以及为什么优先达成共识？

Lenny Rachitsky: Okay, and this is all done in a week.

Lenny Rachitsky：好的，这一切都在一周内完成。

I know there's more to it.

我知道还有更多。

There's a couple more items that help you move from what you just said to the next step, but I love that this is the core of the biggest element of the process, and you do it in a week and you're only able to do it in a week because of the work you did ahead of time.

还有一些项目可以帮助您从刚才所说的内容转向下一步，但我喜欢这是该过程中最大元素的核心，您可以在一周内完成它，并且由于您提前完成了工作，因此您只能在一周内完成。

Again, highlighting the importance of that prep step.

再次强调准备步骤的重要性。

Lenny Rachitsky: Just to share what you've shared so far, and then we'll finish the strategy sprint step.

Lenny Rachitsky：只是分享一下您到目前为止所分享的内容，然后我们将完成战略冲刺步骤。

It's basically do the share out so everyone's on the same page about all the information that, all the inputs essentially.

它基本上是进行共享，这样每个人都在同一页面上了解所有信息，本质上是所有输入。

Enumerate all the problems, like individual small problems and then cluster them into 10 to 15 problem clusters.

枚举所有问题，例如单个小问题，然后将它们聚类为 10 到 15 个问题簇。

Flip it from here's the problem to here's an opportunity we have.

从这里的问题转向这里的机会。

Rank them based on, basically there's these four attributes you shared, which I'll actually, I wrote these down.

对它们进行排名，基本上有你分享的这四个属性，我实际上将它们写下来。

Impact potential, confidence that it will have the impact, clarity of levers and are they differentiated unique levers?

影响潜力、对其产生影响的信心、杠杆的清晰度以及它们是否是有差异化的独特杠杆？

Is there something different from what other folks are doing?

与其他人做的事情有什么不同吗？

Those are ways to rank these ideas and problem clusters.

这些是对这些想法和问题群进行排序的方法。

You essentially come up with, here's three bets basically we potentially should take.

你基本上会想出，这是我们基本上应该采取的三个赌注。

Okay, and then I think that's where you stopped.

好吧，然后我想你就到此为止了。

Is that right?

是这样吗？

Chandra Janakiraman: Those three that are at the top of that pile are basically our strategic pillars.

钱德拉·贾纳基拉曼：这三个人基本上是我们的战略支柱。

We've sort of gotten our strategic pillars and they basically hold up the strategy.

我们已经找到了战略支柱，它们基本上支撑着我们的战略。

That's why they're called strategic pillars.

这就是为什么它们被称为战略支柱。

The idea is once you have the strategic pillars, we basically translate that into a few how might we's?

我们的想法是，一旦有了战略支柱，我们基本上会将其转化为我们可以怎样做？

Let's say it's a relevance thing.

假设这是一个相关性的事情。

How might we find the best content for a particular user?

我们如何为特定用户找到最佳内容？

How might we surface it in the right place?

我们如何才能将其显示在正确的位置？

There's a few how might we's, and the how might we's are basically intended to help the next phase of the process, which is the design sprint.

我们有一些方法，而我们的方法基本上是为了帮助流程的下一阶段，即设计冲刺。

Chandra Janakiraman: You generate these areas, these strategic pillars, you generate the how might we's.

钱德拉·贾纳基拉曼：你创造了这些领域、这些战略支柱，你创造了我们的力量。

How might we's are typically pretty straightforward.

我们如何可能通常非常简单。

Once you have the strategic pillars, it takes probably an hour to generate some how might we's for each of them, maybe two or three for each strategic pillar, and then you're done with that stage.

一旦你有了战略支柱，可能需要一个小时来制定我们对每个战略支柱的建议，也许每个战略支柱有两到三个，然后你就完成了这个阶段。

Lenny Rachitsky: I just want to highlight real quick, this phrasing is really important.

Lenny Rachitsky：我只想快速强调一下，这个措辞非常重要。

I used exactly the same phrasing.

我使用了完全相同的措辞。

I had a PM that I worked with and his name was Andrew Chen, but not the Andrew Chen people know about, that's an investor, who had this concept of fertile questions that create ideas and spark ideas and solutions.

我有一位与我共事的产品经理，他的名字叫安德鲁·陈（Andrew Chen），但不是人们所知道的安德鲁·陈（Andrew Chen），他是一位投资者，他有这样的概念：提出丰富的问题​​，从而创造想法并激发想法和解决方案。

This phrase, "How might we", is actually really powerful as a way to come up with ideas to solve problems.

“我们如何”这句话实际上对于提出解决问题的想法非常有效。

It's just like, how might we increase discoverability in our app?

就像，我们如何提高应用程序的可发现性？

How might we improve relevance?

我们如何提高相关性？

There's something magical about that phrasing that it opens up your mind to, how might we?

这句话有一种神奇的魔力，它能打开你的思维，我们可以怎样呢？

Let's think about it.

我们想一想。

Versus like, how do we improve discovery?

相比之下，我们如何改进发现？

That's a different, your brain works differently hearing this.

那是不同的，你的大脑听到这个的工作方式会有所不同。

That is a really powerful phrasing.

这是一个非常有力的措辞。

Just wanted to highlight that.

只是想强调这一点。

Chandra Janakiraman: Yeah, that's awesome.

Chandra Janakiraman：是的，那太棒了。

It's also something that designers are familiar with, Lenny, so it flows really well into sort of a design sprint.

这也是设计师所熟悉的，Lenny，所以它非常适合设计冲刺。

Lenny Rachitsky: Okay, so you have these how might we'd.

Lenny Rachitsky：好的，既然你有了这些，我们该怎么办。

You have three pillars, maybe three or four or five how might we's to solve these opportunities/problems, and then what happens after that?

你有三个支柱，也许三个、四个或五个，我们如何解决这些机会/问题，然后会发生什么？

Chandra Janakiraman: Exactly.

钱德拉·贾纳基拉曼：没错。

Then the third day is it's good to start fresh.

然后第三天就可以重新开始了。

The team's accomplished a lot.

该团队取得了很多成就。

Lenny Rachitsky: This was all the first two days.

Lenny Rachitsky：这就是前两天的情况。

Chandra Janakiraman: This is the first two days, yeah.

Chandra Janakiraman：是的，这是前两天。

Lenny Rachitsky: Wow.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：哇。

Okay.

好的。

So much done in two days.

两天就做了这么多。

Chandra Janakiraman: Yeah, exactly.

Chandra Janakiraman：是的，完全正确。

The second day is particularly intense on the team, so it's good to give them a break, because it's a lot of really mental sort of wrestling, and so give the team a bit of a break.

第二天对团队来说特别紧张，所以让他们休息一下是件好事，因为这是一场真正的精神角力，所以让团队休息一下。

Then the third day is when people are a little bit refreshed, we get to winning aspiration.

然后第三天，当人们稍微精神一点的时候，我们就开始发愿了。

Winning aspiration is super interesting because it's a very creative exercise.

赢得愿望非常有趣，因为这是一项非常有创意的练习。

You basically imagine in two years, because that's the typical time horizon of a smaller strategy, is like 18 months to 24 months.

你基本上可以想象两年内的情况，因为这是较小战略的典型时间范围，比如 18 个月到 24 个月。

This is what I tell the team.

这就是我告诉团队的。

Imagine two years there's a newspaper, there's a journalist that covers this work, and there's a newspaper article that comes out.

想象一下，两年后，有一份报纸，有一位记者报道了这项工作，并发表了一篇报纸文章。

I want you to imagine the progress on all these strategic pillars and what the headline of that newspaper article looks like.

我希望你想象一下所有这些战略支柱的进展以及报纸文章的标题是什么样的。

It's called a newspaper headline approach.

这称为报纸标题方法。

Chandra Janakiraman: Basically, everybody generates a newspaper headline in parallel.

Chandra Janakiraman：基本上，每个人都会同时生成报纸标题。

It's interesting because you often see there's these common themes that sort of form when people generate these headlines.

这很有趣，因为您经常会看到当人们生成这些标题时，就会形成这些共同的主题。

The forcing function with the headline is also that it has to be somewhat simple and plain speak.

标题的强迫功能还在于它必须简单明了。

It's not too technical.

这不是太技术性的。

You have to get to a more simple layperson's language and you have to get to the key benefit that ultimately, the impact it has on the world.

您必须使用更简单的外行语言，并且必须了解其最终对世界产生的影响的关键好处。

Those kinds of themes come up often.

这类主题经常出现。

Chandra Janakiraman: Then you do a little bit, you put them all into a blender, you put all of those headlines from the team into a blender, and you mash them together and create the winning aspiration, which is ultimately what does progress on the strategy look like in a couple of years time?

Chandra Janakiraman：然后你做一点，将它们全部放入搅拌机中，将团队中的所有头条新闻放入搅拌机中，然后将它们混合在一起并创造获胜的愿望，这就是几年后战略进展的最终样子？

That comes from the working group, it's not like one person writing.

这是工作组出来的，不是一个人写的。

Lenny Rachitsky: What's an example of an aspiration that you've come up with on a project you worked on, a winning aspiration?

Lenny Rachitsky：您在自己从事的项目中提出的一个愿望是什么，一个获胜的愿望是什么？

Chandra Janakiraman: We did this process for the privacy team when I was at Meta.

Chandra Janakiraman：当我在 Meta 时，我们为隐私团队完成了这个过程。

Really the strategic pillars were around a lot of features that we would build, but the winning aspiration was really like, could we move consumer trust?

实际上，战略支柱是围绕我们将构建的许多功能展开的，但获胜的愿望实际上是，我们能否赢得消费者的信任？

The newspaper headline is something like, "Facebook has moved the needle on consumer trust by investing in these areas." That's how you create the bigger impact.

报纸的标题是这样的：“Facebook 通过在这些领域进行投资，提高了消费者的信任度。”这就是你创造更大影响的方式。

Lenny Rachitsky: That's a great example.

Lenny Rachitsky：这是一个很好的例子。

Obviously this is similar to the PR Amazon method and what I love about your approach, as you said early on, is you're just pulling together all of these awesome ideas from all these different methods of strategy work to a very methodical step-by-step process.

显然，这与亚马逊的公关方法类似，正如您早些时候所说，我喜欢您的方法的一点是，您只是将所有这些不同的策略工作方法中的所有这些很棒的想法汇集在一起​​，形成一个非常有条理的逐步过程。

Taking all the best ideas into, and as you described, an operator's playbook for doing this.

正如您所描述的，将所有最好的想法纳入运营商的行动手册中。

I love that.

我喜欢那个。

Okay.

好的。

When you say blender, by the way, I was thinking as you were talking, put them into a blender, what I'm inferring is you just take everyone's headlines and you come up with one that kind of covers the gamut of all three pillars being successful.

顺便说一句，当你说搅拌机时，我在想，当你说话时，将它们放入搅拌机中，我的推断是，你只需获取每个人的头条新闻，然后你想出一个涵盖所有三个成功支柱的范围。

Chandra Janakiraman: That's exactly right.

Chandra Janakiraman：完全正确。

More tactically what I typically do is I put them all on a slide and start, it's almost like a word cloud, and then you start to see these common words.

更具策略性的是，我通常做的是将它们全部放在幻灯片上并开始，它几乎就像一个词云，然后你开始看到这些常见词。

Then you converge those words as the key elements of the final winning aspiration.

然后你将这些词汇聚成最终获胜愿望的关键要素。

Then you try to create a nice statement out of that.

然后你尝试从中创建一个漂亮的声明。

It also symbolically, everybody sees their own statement on the deck, and that's how you get to the final model.

这也具有象征意义，每个人都会在甲板上看到自己的声明，这就是您获得最终模型的方式。

Lenny Rachitsky: Awesome.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：太棒了。

I feel like AI could help with that now.

我觉得人工智能现在可以帮助解决这个问题。

Lenny Rachitsky: Just put in all your headline ideas and it comes up with some suggestions.

Lenny Rachitsky：只要输入您所有的标题想法，它就会提出一些建议。

Okay, cool.

好吧，酷。

Is that the end of the sprint or is there more to the sprint?

这是冲刺的结束还是冲刺还有更多内容？

Lenny Rachitsky: Okay.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：好的。

At the end of the sprint, what do you have?

在冲刺结束时，你有什么？

What are the outputs?

输出是什么？

Chandra Janakiraman: Yeah, this is a great progress on strategy because now we have the three strategic pillars.

钱德拉·贾纳基拉曼：是的，这是战略上的巨大进步，因为现在我们有了三大战略支柱。

We have the how might we associate it with the strategic pillars.

我们知道如何将其与战略支柱联系起来。

You also have the why.

你也有理由。

Why did you get to those three strategic pillars and what are you not focused on and what are the reasons for it?

为什么要实现这三个战略支柱？您没有关注什么？原因是什么？

You also have the winning aspiration.

你也有获胜的愿望。

It's great progress.

这是很大的进步。

The team's done a great job.

团队做得很好。

I think now we sort of move on to the design sprint.

我想现在我们可以继续进行设计冲刺了。

Lenny Rachitsky: In your experience, how often are these three the correct three that you end up going with versus you learn something over the course of the rest of the sprint and adjust?

Lenny Rachitsky：根据您的经验，这三个是您最终选择的正确三个，而不是您在冲刺的其余部分中学到一些东西并进行调整的频率？

Chandra Janakiraman: It's a very good question.

Chandra Janakiraman：这是一个非常好的问题。

We'll speak about an example that I had in Meta where typically during the strategy sprint, you don't change it once you go through the strategy sprint, but eventually there are a lot of signals you get through execution where you sort of have to course correct.

我们将讨论我在 Meta 中遇到的一个例子，通常在策略冲刺期间，一旦完成策略冲刺，你就不会更改它，但最终你会在执行过程中收到很多信号，你必须采取正确的方向。

We'll talk about one very interesting example of how that sort of changed things here.

我们将讨论一个非常有趣的例子，说明这种情况是如何改变这里的。

Lenny Rachitsky: Awesome.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：太棒了。

Okay.

好的。

Basically, you've developed your strategy at this point, and in your experience it ends up being...

基本上，此时您已经制定了策略，根据您的经验，它最终会......

Until you hit the market and test, you don't really know what's going on.

在您进入市场并进行测试之前，您并不真正知道发生了什么。

Lenny Rachitsky: But there's kind of an implication that in your experience doing this, I think you said five or six times, it has been correct and as good as doing it any other approach.

Lenny Rachitsky：但有一种暗示，根据你这样做的经验，我想你说过五六次，它是正确的，并且与任何其他方法一样好。

Chandra Janakiraman: I would say it's not sort of an empirical study, obviously because of the small sample size, but I would say that it's really opened people's eyes and it's led to really good alignment and eventually good results.

Chandra Janakiraman：我想说这不是一项实证研究，显然是因为样本量很小，但我想说它确实开阔了人们的视野，并且带来了非常好的一致性并最终取得了良好的结果。

Even when it has not, it has led to good organizational buy-in on why and how we are approaching things.

即使没有，它也导致了组织对我们处理事情的原因和方式的良好支持。

Lenny Rachitsky: This reminds me of, Tomer Cohen was on the podcast, he's CPO of LinkedIn and he has this phrase that always says he says, which is, "We may be wrong, but we're not confused." I love that a core part of this is everyone is completely on the same page, not from the beginning, but once you start this process of here's all the inputs, here's step by step we are working together on narrowing down, so at least everyone understands the why.

Lenny Rachitsky：这让我想起，Tomer Cohen 在播客上，他是 LinkedIn 的 CPO，他总是说这句话，那就是，“我们可能错了，但我们并不困惑。”我喜欢这个的核心部分是每个人都完全在同一页面上，而不是从一开始，但是一旦你开始这个过程，这里是所有的输入，这里是我们正在一步一步地缩小范围，所以至少每个人都明白为什么。

Which is what sparked your interest in this in the first place, everyone understanding.

这首先激发了您对此的兴趣，每个人都理解。

I know there's a whole rollout at the end too to solve that.

我知道最后也会有一个整体的推出来解决这个问题。

Lenny Rachitsky: Okay, cool, so we have the sprint.

Lenny Rachitsky：好的，太酷了，我们开始冲刺了。

We have basically the three pillars that you're going to invest in, this headline of what it might look like if you're to launch and some solution ideas with how might we's.

我们基本上有您要投资的三个支柱，如果您要启动的话，它可能会是什么样子的标题，以及一些我们可以如何做的解决方案想法。

What comes next?

接下来会发生什么？

Chandra Janakiraman: Yeah.

钱德拉·贾纳基拉曼：是的。

The next phase is the design sprint, and the design sprint can be led by the design person who's in the strategy working group.

下一阶段是设计冲刺，设计冲刺可以由战略工作组中的设计人员领导。

If you remember, there's engineering, product design and data, so the design person can lead it and the PM can sort of take a bit of a backseat during this process.

如果你还记得的话，有工程、产品设计和数据，所以设计人员可以领导它，而项目经理可以在这个过程中退居二线。

The input to the design sprint is sort of the three strategic pillars and the how might we's associated with it.

设计冲刺的输入是三个战略支柱以及我们如何与之相关联。

Chandra Janakiraman: The goal of the design sprint is not to sort of come up with these are the features we should build.

Chandra Janakiraman：设计冲刺的目标不是想出这些我们应该构建的功能。

That's not the purpose of the design sprint.

这不是设计冲刺的目的。

The design sprint is to generate a lot of illustrative concepts that bring the strategy to life because a picture is worth a thousand words.

设计冲刺是为了产生大量说明性概念，将策略变为现实，因为一张图片胜过一千个文字。

Oftentimes, even though you might have the right words in your strategy doc, people might still scratch their head like, "What do you exactly mean?

很多时候，即使你的策略文档中可能有正确的措辞，人们仍然可能会挠头，“你到底是什么意思？

What are you going to build?" The illustrative concepts really sort of give people something to latch onto, "Oh, okay, I get it.

你要建造什么？”这些说明性的概念确实让人们能够抓住一些东西，“哦，好吧，我明白了。

This is what you're going to build at the end of the day with this strategy."

这就是你最终要通过这个策略构建的东西。”

Chandra Janakiraman: The more generative, the better.

Chandra Janakiraman：创造力越强越好。

Then there's the ability to, sometimes if you do the Google Ventures design sprint, you can even test some of it with users and get a little bit of sharpening of things.

然后，有时如果你进行谷歌风投设计冲刺，你甚至可以与用户一起测试其中的一些内容，并得到一些改进。

The goal here is not to build feature-ready designs, it's more to generate concepts.

这里的目标不是构建功能就绪的设计，而是生成概念。

Once you have that, basically the design sprint, and there's different flavors of design sprints, which I won't go into.

一旦你有了这个，基本上就是设计冲刺，并且有不同风格的设计冲刺，我不会详细讨论。

You can lean on your design lead to decide what's the appropriate way, but the input and the output is what needs to be very emphasized.

您可以依靠您的设计领导来决定什么是合适的方式，但输入和输出是需要非常强调的。

The input needs to be the strategic pillars.

输入需要成为战略支柱。

The output needs to be a ton of illustrative concepts to explain each strategic pillar.

输出需要大量说明性概念来解释每个战略支柱。

You could almost have a section where you talk about each strategic pillar and insert those concepts in that section.

您几乎可以有一个部分来讨论每个战略支柱并将这些概念插入该部分。

That's the idea.

就是这个想法。

Lenny Rachitsky: We're going to go through a couple examples to make this very real.

Lenny Rachitsky：我们将通过几个例子来证明这一点。

You mentioned the design sprint method, which we had the authors on the podcast.

您提到了设计冲刺方法，我们在播客上邀请了作者。

They actually didn't go through the design sprint method.

他们实际上并没有经历设计冲刺的方法。

They have another book called Make Time that's about productivity.

他们还有另一本书叫《Make Time》，是关于生产力的。

We also had their colleague from Google Ventures that designed a bullseye sprint, which is also an interesting sprint.

我们还有他们谷歌风投的同事设计了一个牛眼冲刺，这也是一个有趣的冲刺。

It's a new thing that helps you figure out your ICP and who to focus your product on and how that informs your product.

这是一个新事物，可以帮助您确定您的 ICP、您的产品的重点对象以及如何通知您的产品。

Chandra Janakiraman: Oh, that's right.

Chandra Janakiraman：哦，没错。

Interesting.

有趣的。

Lenny Rachitsky: It's another type of sprint you could use here.

Lenny Rachitsky：这是您可以在这里使用的另一种冲刺类型。

The input is here's the three things we're going to invest in, say discovery, relevance, privacy.

输入的是我们要投资的三件事，即发现、相关性、隐私。

The output is here's concepts of what this could look like to get people's minds going.

输出是这样的概念，即这可能会是什么样子，以激发人们的思维。

Is it just a bunch of mocks basically in a deck at this point?

现在这只是套牌中的一堆模拟吗？

Lenny Rachitsky: Okay, cool.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：好的，酷。

Okay, amazing.

好吧，太棒了。

That's a week.

那是一个星期。

That's another sprint.

那是另一次冲刺。

PM could maybe take a little bit of a break.

首相也许可以稍微休息一下。

Lenny Rachitsky: The engineers are kind of inputs and thought partners in this, I imagine.

Lenny Rachitsky：我想工程师们是这方面的投入者和思想伙伴。

Lenny Rachitsky: Optional, but yeah, ideally they're involved because you want all the best ideas in there.

Lenny Rachitsky：可选，但是，是的，理想情况下他们会参与，因为你想要所有最好的想法都在那里。

Chandra Janakiraman: Then the next step is the document writing.

Chandra Janakiraman：那么下一步就是文档写作。

This is sort of a solo activity that the PM should take on, but the great news is the PM is not starting from scratch.

这是总理应该承担的一项单独活动，但好消息是总理并不是从头开始。

There's so much great stuff to write.

有很多很棒的东西要写。

If you remember, there's a ton of user insights, a ton of behavioral insights, a ton of competitive analysis.

如果你还记得的话，有大量的用户洞察、大量的行为洞察、大量的竞争分析。

There's the three strategic pillars, how might we's, winning aspiration.

有三个战略支柱，我们如何才能赢得愿望。

There's a whole bunch of illustrative concepts.

有一大堆说明性概念。

Chandra Janakiraman: Oftentimes, product leads have this sort of creator's block.

Chandra Janakiraman：产品负责人常常会遇到这种创作者的障碍。

That is solved here completely because you have a ton of great material.

这个问题在这里得到了彻底解决，因为你有大量很棒的材料。

I have to tell you, it doesn't make the job easier.

我必须告诉你，这并不会让工作变得更容易。

You still have to weave together a good story.

你仍然需要编织一个好故事。

That's why I think it takes a week or two.

这就是为什么我认为需要一两周的时间。

I think it's really about combining, connecting and editing at this point and telling a cohesive story from all those components, but I think the building blocks are really solid and defensible.

我认为这实际上是关于在这一点上进行组合、连接和编辑，并从所有这些组件中讲述一个有凝聚力的故事，但我认为构建块确实是坚固且可靠的。

Lenny Rachitsky: Is there a template or kind of sections you like to include in your strategy doc?

Lenny Rachitsky：您是否希望在战略文档中包含模板或某些部分？

As someone sits down and is trying to write this out, what do you want to see there as headings?

当有人坐下来试图写下这个内容时，您希望看到什么作为标题？

Chandra Janakiraman: I think you could almost take the building blocks as a little bit of a steer for the template.

Chandra Janakiraman：我认为您几乎可以将构建块视为模板的一点指导。

You start with the broader context where you talk about what the leaders kind of want from this overall effort.

你从更广泛的背景开始，谈论领导者希望从整体努力中得到什么。

Then you get into key insights and analysis where you have user insights, behavioral insights, competitive analysis.

然后你会进入关键的洞察和分析，其中有用户洞察、行为洞察、竞争分析。

Then you get into the strategic pillars and you explain them.

然后你进入战略支柱并解释它们。

You also explain why.

你也解释一下原因。

In the appendix, you include the full table that you generated on day two of your strategy sprint.

在附录中，您将包含在策略冲刺第二天生成的完整表格。

You include the full table in the appendix, including the criteria.

您可以在附录中包含完整的表格，包括标准。

That's going to be really important because most people are going to ask, "Why did you pick these?" That's basically sort of the defensibility.

这非常重要，因为大多数人都会问：“你为什么选择这些？”这基本上就是防御性。

Chandra Janakiraman: Then you have the winning aspiration that's very bold.

Chandra Janakiraman：那么你就有非常大胆的获胜愿望。

It's a big part of the heart of the deck, and you sort of embed the illustrative concepts into the actual each of the strategic pillars so that it flows well.

它是这套牌核心的重要组成部分，你可以将说明性概念嵌入到实际的每个战略支柱中，以便它能够很好地流动。

Then finally, you end with some kind of alignment questions like, "Hey, do these feel right?

最后，你会以某种对齐问题结束，例如，“嘿，这些感觉合适吗？

Are there things we are missing?" So that it creates that framework for alignment in the subsequent meetings.

我们有什么遗漏的东西吗？”这样它就可以为后续会议中的协调创建框架。

Lenny Rachitsky: I'm excited to chat with Christina Gilbert, the founder of OneSchema, one of our longtime podcast sponsors.

Lenny Rachitsky：我很高兴能与 OneSchema 的创始人 Christina Gilbert 聊天，OneSchema 是我们的长期播客赞助商之一。

Hi, Christina.

嗨，克里斯蒂娜。

Christina Gilbert: Yes.

克里斯蒂娜·吉尔伯特：是的。

Thank you for having me on, Lenny.

谢谢你邀请我参加，莱尼。

Lenny Rachitsky: What is the latest with OneSchema?

Lenny Rachitsky：OneSchema 的最新动态是什么？

I know you now work with some of my favorite companies, like Ramp, Vanta, Scale and Watershed.

我知道您现在与一些我最喜欢的公司合作，例如 Ramp、Vanta、Scale 和 Watershed。

I heard that you just launched a new product.

我听说你们刚刚推出了一款新产品。

Lenny Rachitsky: ...

莱尼·拉奇茨基：……

and to scale and watershed, I heard that you just launched a new product to help product teams import CSVs from especially tricky systems like ERPs.

就规模和分水岭而言，我听说你们刚刚推出了一款新产品，帮助产品团队从 ERP 等特别棘手的系统导入 CSV。

Christina: Yes, so we just launched one scheme of file feeds, which allows you to build an integration with any system in 15 minutes, as long as you can export a CSV to an SFTP folder.

Christina：是的，所以我们刚刚推出了一种文件源方案，只要您可以将 CSV 导出到 SFTP 文件夹，您就可以在 15 分钟内与任何系统建立集成。

Christina: We see our customers all the time getting stuck with hacks and workarounds, and the product teams that we work with don't have to turn down prospects because their systems are too hard to integrate with.

克里斯蒂娜：我们总是看到我们的客户陷入黑客攻击和解决方法的困境，而与我们合作的产品团队不必因为他们的系统太难集成而拒绝潜在客户。

We allow our customers to offer thousands of without involving their engineering team at all.

我们允许客户提供数千种产品，而无需他们的工程团队参与。

Lenny Rachitsky: I can tell you that if my team had to build integrations like this, how nice would it be to be able to take this off my roadmap, and instead use something like OneSchema, and not just to build it, but also to maintain it forever?

Lenny Rachitsky：我可以告诉你，如果我的团队必须构建这样的集成，那么如果能够将其从我的路线图上删除，而使用 OneSchema 之类的东西，并且不仅是构建它，而且还永远维护它，那该有多好？

Christina: Absolutely, Lenny.

克里斯蒂娜：当然，莱尼。

We've heard so many horror stories of multi-day outages from even just a handful of bad records.

我们已经听过许多因少数不良记录而导致多天停电的恐怖故事。

We are laser focused on integration reliability to help teams end all of those distractions that come up with integrations.

我们高度关注集成可靠性，以帮助团队消除集成带来的所有干扰。

Christina: We have a built-in validation layer that stops any bad data from entering your system, and OneSchema will notify your team immediately of any data that looks incorrect.

Christina：我们有一个内置的验证层，可以阻止任何不良数据进入您的系统，OneSchema 会立即通知您的团队任何看起来不正确的数据。

Lenny Rachitsky: I know that importing incorrect data can cause all kinds of pain for your customers and quickly lose their trust.

Lenny Rachitsky：我知道导入不正确的数据会给您的客户带来各种痛苦，并很快失去他们的信任。

Christina, thank you for joining us, and if you want to learn more, head on over to oneschema.co. That's oneschema.co.

克里斯蒂娜，感谢您加入我们，如果您想了解更多信息，请访问 oneschema.co。那是 oneschema.co。

Lenny Rachitsky: I pulled up Playing to Win, which I know you also pull ideas from, and actually Roger Martin was on the podcast talking about this stuff.

Lenny Rachitsky：我打开了《Playing to Win》，我知道你也从中汲取了想法，实际上罗杰·马丁（Roger Martin）在播客上谈论了这些东西。

And one way I think about it as you're describing a way to break up your strategy doc, is he has these five questions that you ask.

当你描述一种分解你的策略文档的方法时，我想到的一个方法是，他有你问的这五个问题。

Lenny Rachitsky: The first is actually what's your winning aspiration?

Lenny Rachitsky：首先是你的获胜愿望是什么？

So I love that you're pulling that in.

所以我喜欢你把它拉进来。

This is one approach your doc would be.

这是你的医生会采用的一种方法。

What's your winning aspiration?

你的获胜愿望是什么？

Where will you play?

你会去哪里玩？

What market are you going after?

你要追求什么市场？

How will you win?

你将如何获胜？

What capabilities must be in place for you to win?

您必须具备哪些能力才能获胜？

And then what management systems are required?

那么需要什么样的管理系统呢？

Lenny Rachitsky: We'll link to this framework just in case people want that as a crutch in their thinking strategy, but is there anything that we could link folks to that describe how you like to think about this doc?

Lenny Rachitsky：我们将链接到这个框架，以防万一人们希望将其作为他们的思维策略的拐杖，但是我们是否可以将人们与描述您如何看待此文档的内容联系起来？

And if not, it'd be cool if you make a template that folks could borrow.

如果没有，如果您制作一个人们可以借用的模板，那就太酷了。

Chandra Janakiraman: I'm happy to share of the flowchart of the process and the template as well.

Chandra Janakiraman：我很高兴分享流程流程图和模板。

Lenny Rachitsky: Awesome.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：太棒了。

Okay.

好的。

So this is how long of a process, this writing of the document?

那么这个文档的编写需要多长时间的过程呢？

Chandra Janakiraman: It's about one to two weeks, and I think it's mostly solo work and hopefully by the end of it there's a very tight doc, and that's what we use to roll out.

Chandra Janakiraman：大约需要一到两周，我认为这主要是个人工作，希望到最后会有一个非常紧凑的文档，这就是我们用来推出的内容。

Lenny Rachitsky: And by solo work, I imagine you're looping in this working team to get their feedback as you're pulling it together, or is it just you sit there in a room and then...

Lenny Rachitsky：通过单独工作，我想你会在这个工作团队中循环，在你将其整合在一起时获得他们的反馈，或者只是你坐在一个房间里，然后......

Chandra Janakiraman: I would minimize pulling them in, because they've all contributed so much to the process already.

Chandra Janakiraman：我会尽量减少他们的参与，因为他们都已经为这个过程做出了很大的贡献。

So, I would say that at the end of it, obviously, once you have a draft, it's good to share with them, but I wouldn't tap their cycles too much at this point, because they've given a lot already.

所以，我想说，最后，显然，一旦你有了草稿，与他们分享是件好事，但此时我不会过多利用他们的周期，因为他们已经付出了很多。

I see.

我懂了。

Okay.: And how many pages do you see this doc being, roughly?

好的。：您认为这份文档大约有多少页？

What's a heuristic?

什么是启发式？

Chandra Janakiraman: It's not too long.

Chandra Janakiraman：并不太长。

I would say probably three or four pages and then an appendix has a lot of additional...

我想说大概三四页，然后附录有很多额外的......

Like, the table I spoke about and a lot of additional maybe illustrative concepts.

就像我谈到的表格和许多其他可能说明性的概念一样。

Maybe you can only use a few illustrative concepts in the main section so that there could be others there.

也许您只能在主要部分中使用一些说明性概念，以便可以有其他概念。

Chandra Janakiraman: I think usually there's a desire from leaders to say, "Okay, what are we building next?" And it's important not to include a roadmap as part of a strategy doc, because a strategy doc is meant to be separate from the roadmap.

Chandra Janakiraman：我认为领导者通常会说：“好吧，我们下一步要建设什么？”重要的是不要将路线图作为战略文档的一部分，因为战略文档应该与路线图分开。

It's meant to be a companion to your roadmap.

它旨在成为您的路线图的伴侣。

And even though there's interest, maybe sometimes you can include a illustrative roadmap in the appendix, but I would try to keep it clean and try to keep it focused on just the strategy.

即使有兴趣，也许有时您可以在附录中包含说明性路线图，但我会尽力保持其简洁并尝试使其仅关注策略。

Lenny Rachitsky: So at this point you basically developed your strategy, the next step, I think you call rollout, where you just start actually rolling this out, so let's talk about that.

Lenny Rachitsky：所以在这一点上，你基本上制定了你的策略，下一步，我认为你称之为推出，你刚刚开始实际推出它，所以让我们来谈谈这个。

But it's important to note how many weeks in this is.

但重要的是要注意这有多少周。

This is like six-ish weeks of work and you've got a strategy for your company/product?

这就像六周左右的工作，您已经为您的公司/产品制定了策略吗？

Chandra Janakiraman: That's exactly right.

Chandra Janakiraman：完全正确。

So I think you're probably in the last two to three weeks of the process, and pretty important final step is the rollout, and I would start with what I call gatekeepers.

因此，我认为您可能处于该过程的最后两到三周，非常重要的最后一步是推出，我将从所谓的看门人开始。

And these are people who are absolutely...

这些人绝对是...

You have to get their one-on-one alignment and blessing on this before it moves forward.

在事情进展之前，你必须得到他们的一对一的配合和祝福。

And it's probably not too many, probably two or three people.

而且人数可能不会太多，大概两三个人。

So I would pre-flight it with them and get their alignment.

所以我会和他们一起进行预飞行并让他们对齐。

Lenny Rachitsky: So these are one-on-one meetings with these gatekeepers?

Lenny Rachitsky：所以这些是与这些看门人的一对一会议？

These are one-on-one meetings.

这些是一对一的会议。

Exactly.: And then there's a larger group of what I call key stakeholders, people who are impacted by it, different functional leaders, et cetera.

确实如此。：然后还有一个更大的群体，我称之为关键利益相关者、受其影响的人、不同的职能领导者等等。

And that can be done either async or through a group review.

这可以异步完成，也可以通过小组评审完成。

And then there's probably a rolling of list of team roadshows.

然后可能会有一系列团队路演列表。

There's different ways to do this, but the one that I feel is most effective is the roadshow where you have about eight to 10 people in each session, so people feel more comfortable to ask questions and it's more conversational.

有不同的方法可以做到这一点，但我认为最有效的方法是路演，每次会议大约有 8 到 10 个人，这样人们会更舒服地提出问题，而且更具对话性。

These are one-on-one meetings.

这些是一对一的会议。

Exactly.: So the purpose of this stage is to land it.

没错。：所以这个阶段的目的就是落地。

It's not to seek too much feedback, so it's a delicate balance.

并不是寻求太多的反馈，所以这是一个微妙的平衡。

At the same time, you don't want to appear just being too inflexible.

同时，您也不希望显得过于僵化。

So it's a very delicate balance.

所以这是一个非常微妙的平衡。

When people ask questions, you can clarify it, and you can add clarifications to the doc, but I wouldn't change...

当人们提出问题时，你可以澄清它，你可以向文档添加澄清，但我不会改变......

The most important thing, three strategic pillars, I wouldn't change that.

最重要的是，三个战略支柱，我不会改变这一点。

I would defend it using the framework, but if people are like, "there's really good arguments about the criteria that led to your ranking," then it's okay to reconsider it.

我会使用这个框架来捍卫它，但如果人们会说，“对于导致你排名的标准确实有很好的论据”，那么重新考虑它是可以的。

I've not seeing it happen in my five to six attempts, but it's possible, theoretically possible.

我在五到六次尝试中没有看到这种情况发生，但这是可能的，理论上是可能的。

Lenny Rachitsky: The core of this approach it sounds like, is you've done a lot of the pre-work where you land in a generally correct place.

Lenny Rachitsky：这种方法的核心听起来是，你已经完成了大量的前期工作，最终到达了一个大致正确的位置。

Lenny Rachitsky: Okay, so this is the rollout.

Lenny Rachitsky：好的，这就是发布。

So what I'm thinking as you talk, say you're like a PM on a team, say you're working on privacy, it's like an IC, your ICPM, working on strategy.

所以当你说话时我在想什么，假设你就像一个团队的 PM，假设你正在研究隐私，它就像一个 IC，你的 ICPM，正在研究策略。

How do you think about including, say, your manager because through this process, when do you start to like, "Hey, here's what we're planning, here's what we're thinking," making sure they're on board?

你如何考虑让你的经理参与进来，因为在这个过程中，你什么时候开始喜欢，“嘿，这就是我们正在计划的，这就是我们正在思考的，”确保他们参与其中？

Because I could see this working team off to the side working, working, working.

因为我可以看到这个工作团队在一旁工作、工作、工作。

"Okay, we're ready to roll it out." Oftentimes there's like, "No, wait.

“好的，我们已经准备好推出它了。”通常会这样说：“不，等等。

There's all this other stuff happening at the company, we don't have resources." Where do you loop them in?

公司里还发生了所有其他事情，我们没有资源。”你把它们循环到哪里？

How do you think about that kind of stakeholder?

您如何看待这种利益相关者？

Chandra Janakiraman: The the more attuned PMs who understand organizational dynamics, probably keep the manager pretty in sync through the process.

Chandra Janakiraman：PM 越了解组织动态，就越能与经理在整个过程中保持同步。

I think, definitely, the manager becomes a person who you interview as part of the leadership interviews, so you know what the manager's looking for from the effort.

我认为，经理肯定会成为你在领导力面试中面试的人，所以你知道经理从努力中寻找什么。

Chandra Janakiraman: And then once you get to the strategic pillars on day two of the strategy sprint, you probably want to just quickly pre-flight it with the manager and say, "Hey, look, this is how it's trending, and these are the things we are probably not going to do" and any issues with that.

Chandra Janakiraman：一旦你在战略冲刺的第二天到达战略支柱，你可能只想快速与经理一起进行预检，并说：“嘿，看，这就是趋势，这些是我们可能不会做的事情”以及与此相关的任何问题。

And then eventually you actually want your manager to support you in some of these bigger meetings, so you enlist their help.

最终，您实际上希望您的经理在一些大型会议中为您提供支持，因此您寻求他们的帮助。

So I would say that it's probably each individual style, but I would keep them pretty aligned through the process.

所以我想说，这可能是每个人的风格，但我会让它们在整个过程中保持一致。

But you don't have to be too heavy , just be super light.

但你不必太重，只要超轻即可。

Lenny Rachitsky: Great.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：太棒了。

Makes a lot of sense to me.

对我来说很有意义。

There's like a...

有一个像...

Lenny Rachitsky: We're not going to solve everyone's problems with this one framework, maybe just quickly touch on resourcing.

Lenny Rachitsky：我们不会用这个框架解决每个人的问题，也许只是快速解决资源问题。

As you think about this.

当你想到这一点时。

Like a part of a strategy includes like, oh, we also need these resources.

就像战略的一部分包括这样，哦，我们也需要这些资源。

Just any thoughts on how to include that?

关于如何包含它有什么想法吗？

And then I want to get into some examples of how you've actually implemented this.

然后我想通过一些例子来说明您是如何实际实现这一点的。

Chandra Janakiraman: So I actually don't recommend thinking about resources in the strategy phase, because what you're saying is, "these are the areas of focus" and the resourcing question becomes more relevant from a road mapping standpoint.

Chandra Janakiraman：所以我实际上不建议在战略阶段考虑资源，因为你所说的是，“这些是重点领域”，从路线图的角度来看，资源问题变得更加相关。

Chandra Janakiraman: Because then you say, "Okay, what percentage of our engineering do we put on strategic pillar A, versus B, versus C?

Chandra Janakiraman：因为你会说，“好吧，我们在战略支柱 A、B、C 上投入了多少比例的工程？

And what are the specific things we build?" So it becomes a road-mapping question as opposed to a strategy question.

我们建造的具体东西是什么？”因此，它变成了一个路线图问题，而不是一个战略问题。

Lenny Rachitsky: And so by the end of this, the rollout, the part of the rollout is developing the actual roadmap.

Lenny Rachitsky：因此，到了部署结束时，部署的一部分就是制定实际的路线图。

We're not going to get deep into that.

我们不会深入探讨这一点。

That could be part two, solve every PM's problems, teach them all the steps of the process, but we're going to cut it off at, here's you have a strategy that is starting to be rolled out.

这可能是第二部分，解决每个产品经理的问题，教他们流程的所有步骤，但我们将在以下时间结束，这是一个正在开始推出的策略。

Cool.: Let's go through a couple examples where you actually move into this to make this even more real.

很酷。：让我们看几个例子，在这些例子中你实际上会进入这个领域，让这变得更加真实。

I know there's a couple companies you were thinking about sharing, strategies you worked on.

我知道您正在考虑分享几家公司的工作策略。

Chandra Janakiraman: I think there's just three quick notes to close off this process and I'll share two examples, Lenny.

Chandra Janakiraman：我认为只需三个简短的说明即可结束此过程，我将分享两个例子，Lenny。

Chandra Janakiraman: So the reason I think this process works, the first is because there is a ton of alignment built in within team alignment and leadership alignment built in.

Chandra Janakiraman：所以我认为这个过程有效的原因，首先是因为团队协调和领导力协调中内置了大量的协调。

And it's not seen as, "Oh, this PM went off and wrote this strategy doc and I don't agree with most of it." And part of this is actually very...

它不会被视为“哦，这位总理写了这份战略文档，但我不同意其中的大部分内容。”其中一部分实际上非常......

Chandra Janakiraman: It goes back to human psychology of just something that comes from you, feels a lot more familiar and easy to accept.

Chandra Janakiraman：这可以追溯到人类心理学，即来自你的东西，感觉更熟悉且更容易接受。

So this doc is actually not from the PM, the PM is facilitating it, but it's actually from the strategy working group.

所以这个文档实际上不是来自 PM，PM 正在推动它，但它实际上来自战略工作组。

And the strategy working group are the leads of the team.

战略工作组是团队的领导者。

And so it's actually...

所以它实际上是...

And the leadership inputs have been baked in, so it's actually very team representative.

而且领导层的投入已经融入其中，因此实际上非常具有团队代表性。

And so hopefully there isn't too much misalignment when you roll it out.

所以希望当你推出它时不会有太多的错位。

And I have seen that, I've seen that work out.

我已经看到了这一点，我已经看到了这一点。

Chandra Janakiraman: The second is there's just better results.

Chandra Janakiraman：第二个是有更好的结果。

You get to better problem articulation, you get a better strategic pillar, because there's just more minds on it than if it was just a product lead.

你可以更好地阐明问题，你会得到更好的战略支柱，因为与产品领导相比，有更多的人在思考它。

Chandra Janakiraman: And the third thing is you have clearly defensible criteria and outputs, and if you want to change it, like I said, you have to go back to the criteria and the scoring and then say, "Okay, why do we believe this has to be changed?" And even a change is easy to justify once you do that.

Chandra Janakiraman：第三件事是你有明确的可辩护的标准和输出，如果你想改变它，就像我说的，你必须回到标准和评分，然后说，“好吧，为什么我们认为必须改变这一点？”一旦你这样做了，即使是改变也很容易被证明是合理的。

So it creates a lot of benefits, but ultimately, and we'll get to this a little bit more, it has to be tested with execution, and that's the most important thing.

所以它创造了很多好处，但最终，我们将进一步讨论这一点，它必须通过执行进行测试，这是最重要的事情。

Lenny Rachitsky: I think it's important to highlight, no framework playbook method is going to guarantee you have the correct strategy that will win and your company will thrive.

Lenny Rachitsky：我认为需要强调的是，没有任何框架剧本方法能够保证您拥有能够获胜并且您的公司能够蓬勃发展的正确战略。

It's always just the best effort at plan.

这始终只是计划中的最大努力。

Lenny Rachitsky: As the quote, "no good plan survives first contact with the customer."

Lenny Rachitsky：正如那句话所说，“没有好的计划能够在与客户的第一次接触中幸存下来。”

Lenny Rachitsky: Cool.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：酷。

Let's talk through some examples.

让我们通过一些例子来讨论。

Chandra Janakiraman: so the first example I wanted to talk about is at Zynga.

Chandra Janakiraman：所以我想谈的第一个例子是 Zynga。

I was at Zynga a very long time ago, and this was the heyday of social gaming on Facebook.

很久以前我在 Zynga 工作，当时正是 Facebook 社交游戏的鼎盛时期。

The thing that I was extremely impressed about Zynga was the strategic clarity and strategic encoding at the company.

Zynga 给我留下深刻印象的是该公司的战略清晰度和战略编码。

And this was not attributable to me, by the way, this was already there when I got there as a entry-level PM, but the kind of strategic clarity there was really, really impressive and it was very evident and observable from all the games.

顺便说一句，这并不是我的功劳，当我作为初级产品经理到达那里时，这已经存在了，但是那里的战略清晰度确实非常令人印象深刻，并且从所有游戏中都非常明显和可观察到。

Chandra Janakiraman: So if you look at all the games, there were three elements that were very common across all the games.

Chandra Janakiraman：所以如果你看一下所有的游戏，就会发现所有游戏中都存在三个非常常见的元素。

The first was viral game loops.

第一个是病毒式游戏循环。

There's these game loops that just required you to have a social and active social network to be successful and play, and it was very tightly and fictionally integrated into the core of the gameplay.

这些游戏循环只需要你拥有一个社交和活跃的社交网络才能成功并玩游戏，并且它非常紧密且虚构地融入到游戏玩法的核心中。

That was the first one.

这是第一个。

Chandra Janakiraman: The second one was there was this idea of paying to complete things.

Chandra Janakiraman：第二个是付费来完成事情的想法。

So you're not paying to skip a whole experience, what you're paying is just to complete it.

因此，您付费并不是为了跳过整个体验，而是为了完成它。

So what happens then is different people, depending on how much time they have, complete different percentages of a progression task, or a part of the gameplay, and you only had to pay the rest to get through the experience.

那么接下来发生的事情是不同的人，根据他们有多少时间，完成不同百分比的进度任务，或者游戏的一部分，而你只需要支付剩余的费用来完成体验。

And it was this interesting experience where people put a lot of investment into it, and they didn't mind paying for the last 20% or 30%, which was very interesting, because it created this market for different elasticity of spend, different times that people had in their lives.

正是这种有趣的经历，人们投入了大量的投资，而且他们不介意为最后的 20% 或 30% 付费，这非常有趣，因为它为人们生活中不同的支出弹性、不同的时间创造了这个市场。

And it was very, very clever.

这非常非常聪明。

So that was again, very common across all the games.

所以这在所有游戏中都很常见。

Chandra Janakiraman: And then the third was network.

Chandra Janakiraman：第三个是网络。

So all of Zynga games had this cross-promotional component at the top of the game and they would promote other games, and it's like the Zynga network was the most important thing, and not an individual game.

因此，所有 Zynga 游戏在游戏顶部都有这种交叉推广组件，他们会推广其他游戏，就好像 Zynga 网络才是最重要的，而不是单个游戏。

And those were the three in our parlance now strategic pillars, and there were non-focus areas.

这些就是我们现在所说的三个战略支柱，并且存在非重点领域。

It wasn't like...

这并不像...

Chandra Janakiraman: The focus wasn't on high-fidelity graphics, it wasn't on complex game mechanics, and this was extremely clear and hard-coded into the company culture and operations.

Chandra Janakiraman：重点不在于高保真图形，也不在于复杂的游戏机制，这一点非常清晰并硬编码到公司文化和运营中。

And it was perfectly tuned to the environment at the time.

而且非常符合当时的环境。

Facebook platform afforded strong support with social graph, and channels, and basically the game studios contributed through different games in a very network accretive way.

Facebook 平台通过社交图谱和渠道提供了强有力的支持，基本上游戏工作室通过不同的游戏以非常网络增值的方式做出了贡献。

Chandra Janakiraman: So for example, I was at Zynga San Diego, and we took the company into net new game genres like action strategy, match three puzzle games, but we stayed true to the strategic pillars of the company, and we had to invent new mechanics so that the strategic pillars would work in the new genres that we introduced to the company.

Chandra Janakiraman：举个例子，我在 Zynga San Diego，我们将公司带入了全新的游戏类型，如动作策略、三消益智游戏，但我们坚持公司的战略支柱，我们必须发明新的机制，以便战略支柱能够在我们向公司引入的新类型中发挥作用。

And what was fascinating is the company actually had systems to reinforce these strategic pillars.

令人着迷的是，该公司实际上拥有加强这些战略支柱的系统。

Chandra Janakiraman: And, for example, the data infrastructure was very incredible at the time, and really reinforced these strategic pillars.

Chandra Janakiraman：例如，当时的数据基础设施非常令人难以置信，并且确实强化了这些战略支柱。

There was this function called Central Product Management, which basically propagated best practices, made sure that games were network accretive and all these things worked in harmony to enhance those strategic pillars and reinforce it, and it worked really well.

有一个称为中央产品管理的功能，它基本上传播最佳实践，确保游戏具有网络增值性，所有这些东西协调一致地增强和强化这些战略支柱，而且效果非常好。

The company, if I remember right, got to a billion dollars, it was the fastest to get to a billion dollars in the history of companies at the time.

如果我没记错的话，这家公司达到了10亿美元，是当时公司历史上达到10亿美元最快的。

In revenue.: And it worked really well until the environment changed and there was a shift to mobile.

在收入方面：它的效果非常好，直到环境发生变化并转向移动设备。

And temporarily...

并且暂时...

Basically, if you go back to that resonance concept, that deep resonance between the product and the market was temporarily lost once that shift happened to mobile.

基本上，如果你回到共鸣概念，一旦这种转变发生在移动领域，产品和市场之间的深层共鸣就会暂时消失。

Lenny Rachitsky: So there's a lot here.

Lenny Rachitsky：所以这里有很多东西。

I think one interesting note here is, as you said, the strategy work you're doing, which sounds like a lot of time, eight to 12 weeks potentially, this lasted a long time for Zynga.

我认为这里一个有趣的注释是，正如您所说，您正在做的战略工作，这听起来像是很长的时间，可能需要 8 到 12 周，这对 Zynga 来说持续了很长时间。

And so I think it's important to remember the work you're doing here, even though...

所以我认为记住你在这里所做的工作很重要，尽管......

Lenny Rachitsky: On the one hand it feels like a long time, on the other hand, it feels like very little time to come up with the things that will most help your business grow.

Lenny Rachitsky：一方面感觉时间很长，另一方面又感觉时间很少，无法想出最有利于业务发展的事情。

In this case, these three elements for Zynga.

在本例中，这三个要素适用于 Zynga。

And by the way, these three pillars, they didn't emerge from this method, but it helped you see the power of being very clear...

顺便说一句，这三个支柱，它们不是从这个方法中出现的，但它帮助你看到了非常清晰的力量......

Lenny Rachitsky: And having everything centered around, we all agree, these are the three ways we win.

Lenny Rachitsky：我们都同意，一切以一切为中心，这是我们获胜的三种方式。

Okay, cool.

好吧，酷。

And then I think the number three, again, I just want to highlight the power of just very few bets in investments.

然后我想再次强调第三点，我只是想强调投资中很少下注的力量。

So it's always three.

所以总是三。

I've always suggested three as well.

我也一直建议三个。

Some people are like, "three to five," but I think it's...

有些人会说“三到五”，但我认为......

You just find, in general, three is the right number as much?

你发现，一般来说，三是合适的数字吗？

Try very, very hard to make it three?

努力非常非常努力地做到三个？

Okay, cool.: And then I think there's also this element of differentiation being really important.

好吧，酷。：然后我认为这种差异化元素也非常重要。

So these three elements you shared for Zynga are just like they're unique and differentiated for Zynga.

因此，您为 Zynga 分享的这三个元素对于 Zynga 来说是独一无二且与众不同的。

Network, powers of apps driving other apps, paying to complete, these are things Zynga has figured out, "this is how we" win versus other products in the market.

网络、应用程序驱动其他应用程序的能力、付费才能完成，这些都是 Zynga 已经弄清楚的，“这就是我们”战胜市场上其他产品的方式。

Lenny Rachitsky: Sweet.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：太好了。

Anything else along those lines with Zynga?

Zynga 还有其他类似的事情吗？

Chandra Janakiraman: That was in hindsight reflection, Lenny, I was pretty naive when I was there, and I realized how...

Chandra Janakiraman：那是事后的反思，Lenny，当我在那里的时候我很天真，我意识到如何......

And this was, in fact, what led to my blind spot when I joined Headspace from Zynga, that you even need a strategy.

事实上，当我从 Zynga 加入 Headspace 时，这就是导致我出现盲点的原因：你甚至需要一个策略。

That's the story I said at the beginning.

这就是我一开始说的故事。

Chandra Janakiraman: The reason is because Zynga had it figured out so well that I didn't actually have a need to exercise that muscle at Zynga, and we just had to come up with new games that applied that strategy.

Chandra Janakiraman：原因是 Zynga 已经把它弄清楚得非常好，以至于我实际上不需要在 Zynga 锻炼这种能力，我们只需想出应用该策略的新游戏即可。

And so it was a net new muscle I had to develop when I got to Headspace.

因此，当我到达顶空时，这是我必须发展的新肌肉。

Lenny Rachitsky: It's like that parable of the fish swimming in the water where the older fish swims by and he's like, "How's the water?" And they're like, "Hmm?" And then he leaves and he's like, "What's water?" You just don't realize what you're in.

莱尼·拉奇茨基（Lenny Rachitsky）：这就像鱼在水里游泳的寓言，老鱼游过，他问，“水怎么样？”他们就像，“嗯？”然后他离开了，他问：“水是什么？”你只是没有意识到自己处于什么境地。

You don't realize what you're surrounded by until it's gone.

你不会意识到你被什么包围着，直到它消失。

Lenny Rachitsky: Maybe one other thing I just want to highlight while we're on this topic is just the power of focus.

Lenny Rachitsky：当我们讨论这个话题时，也许我想强调的另一件事就是专注的力量。

In the case of Zynga, just this focus on everything we do needs to get these things, these three things, everything we do, we need to do in order to win.

就 Zynga 而言，我们所做的一切都需要专注于这些事情，这三件事，我们所做的一切，我们需要做的事情才能获胜。

And I think that's a recurring theme in what you're talking about, is just focus.

我认为这是你所谈论的一个反复出现的主题，就是焦点。

The steps of the process are focus on this one part for now.

该过程的步骤目前主要集中在这一部分。

So I think that's a really interesting thread is just the power of focus.

所以我认为这是一个非常有趣的线索，就是专注的力量。

Okay, cool.: And now you have another example of your time at Meta.

好的，很酷。：现在你有另一个在 Meta 的例子。

Chandra Janakiraman: At Meta there's this fascinating example, which I think illustrates a different point, which is...

Chandra Janakiraman：在 Meta 有一个有趣的例子，我认为它说明了一个不同的观点，那就是......

Chandra Janakiraman: Basically I was standing up the product strategy for a couple of product growth teams in Reality Labs, Oculus, which was coming up with the Quest II at the time.

Chandra Janakiraman：基本上，我是在为 Oculus Reality Labs 的几个产品增长团队制定产品战略，当时他们正在推出 Quest II。

This is a standalone headset, and then Portal, which was our video conferencing product.

这是一个独立的耳机，然后是 Portal，这是我们的视频会议产品。

And we stood up these teams to go after product growth, which is basically driving hardware sales through software features.

我们成立了这些团队来追求产品增长，这基本上是通过软件功能推动硬件销售。

And we went through this process that I just described.

我们经历了我刚才描述的这个过程。

We stood up strategic pillars, and the strategic pillars were fairly similar for both Portal, which is our video conferencing product, and Oculus.

我们建立了战略支柱，Portal（我们的视频会议产品）和 Oculus 的战略支柱非常相似。

Lenny Rachitsky: I love Portal by the way.

Lenny Rachitsky：顺便说一句，我喜欢《传送门》。

I was a big fan of...

我是...的忠实粉丝

Sad that it's no longer around.

遗憾的是它已经不在了。

Chandra Janakiraman: And that led to features that are known to everybody, like the Oculus Referrals Program, the Portal Memories Integration, where you see one of your Facebook memories on the Portal, sponsored ad in your Facebook feed.

Chandra Janakiraman：这导致了众所周知的功能，例如 Oculus 推荐计划、Portal Memories Integration，您可以在 Portal 上看到您的 Facebook 记忆之一，在 Facebook feed 中看到赞助广告。

And also we had this section on the Facebook app, which is also from Facebook at the time, and then eventually also from Meta, which is these other products from the Facebook ecosystem.

我们在 Facebook 应用程序上也有这个部分，当时它也来自 Facebook，然后最终也来自 Meta，这是来自 Facebook 生态系统的其他产品。

And all those came out of that effort.

所有这些都是通过这种努力实现的。

Chandra Janakiraman: And about 18 months into it, they actually had very different outcomes.

Chandra Janakiraman：大约 18 个月后，他们实际上取得了截然不同的结果。

So on one hand the Oculus effort was incredibly successful, and we graduated it into the VR division at Meta, and till today it continues to be an incredibly successful effort.

因此，一方面 Oculus 的努力非常成功，我们将其转移到 Meta 的 VR 部门，直到今天它仍然是一项非常成功的努力。

The Portal effort actually didn't move the needle as much as we wanted to, and we sunset it, and we basically redeployed that team to other initiatives.

门户网站的工作实际上并没有达到我们想要的效果，我们放弃了它，我们基本上将该团队重新部署到其他计划中。

And that's super interesting.

这非常有趣。

Basically it was like the same strategy process.

基本上，这就像相同的战略流程。

We got the nearly identical strategic pillars, but eventually completely different outcomes.

我们得到了几乎相同的战略支柱，但最终却完全不同的结果。

Chandra Janakiraman: And I think that that illustrates the most important point about strategy, which is intrinsically strategy has no business value.

Chandra Janakiraman：我认为这说明了战略最重要的一点，即战略本质上没有商业价值。

It's basically a document with a few words.

它基本上是一个只有几句话的文档。

And I think it starts accumulating value as you generate business impact and results.

我认为，当你产生业务影响和成果时，它就会开始积累价值。

And that happens when you actually test strategy with execution.

当你实际测试策略和执行时就会发生这种情况。

Chandra Janakiraman: And so ultimately any strategy is only as good as the results it produces.

Chandra Janakiraman：因此，最终任何策略的好坏取决于它所产生的结果。

And so one has to have the intellectual honesty, and the humility, and the courage to say when it's working and when it's not.

因此，一个人必须具备理智上的诚实、谦逊和勇气，敢于说出什么时候有效，什么时候无效。

And sometimes what happens is parts of your strategy might work, parts might not, and you have to pivot away from some and double down on some.

有时，你的策略的一部分可能有效，一部分可能无效，你必须放弃某些策略，并在某些策略上加倍努力。

But I do think there's that evaluation that's really critical and testing strategy with execution.

但我确实认为评估非常关键，并且可以通过执行来测试策略。

Lenny Rachitsky: Such a great point.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：这是一个很好的观点。

Just a strategy sitting there in a doc is worthless, where the worth comes from, is it actually having impact and being successful.

仅仅放在文档中的策略是毫无价值的，其价值来自于它是否真正产生影响并取得成功。

Makes me think about a product manager also, just a PM is not worth anything until they help you drive impact.

让我也想到了产品经理，只有产品经理没有任何价值，除非他们能帮助你提高影响力。

Lenny Rachitsky: I think an important, to trickle down from that point, is that you don't want to spend too long just thinking about strategy, you want to spend as little time as possible to get to a strong hypothesis, basically to start learning if this is the right path.

Lenny Rachitsky：我认为从这一点开始，一个重要的一点是，你不想花太长时间来思考策略，你想花尽可能少的时间来得出强有力的假设，基本上是开始学习这是否是正确的道路。

And so I love that your approach is like this middle ground between give it real time, but don't spend three, four or five months working on this one document that just maybe one day you'll use.

所以我喜欢你的方法就像实时提供它之间的中间立场，但不要花三、四个或五个月的时间来处理这个可能有一天你会使用的文档。

Exactly.: And there is room for a six-month process, which we'll get to in a moment.

确实如此。：并且还有为期六个月的过程的空间，我们稍后会进行讨论。

But for small S I wouldn't recommend more than two or three months.

但对于小S我不建议超过两三个月。

Lenny Rachitsky: And again, small S strategy is for a couple of years out, not like Exactly.

Lenny Rachitsky：再说一遍，小 S 战略是针对几年后的战略，而不是像 Exactly 那样。

It's like a timeframe.

这就像一个时间框架。

Okay, cool.

好吧，酷。

Lenny Rachitsky: Okay.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：好的。

Anything else along those lines of the examples of Meta or Zynga?

Meta 或 Zynga 的例子还有其他类似的内容吗？

Chandra Janakiraman: Those are pretty good lessons I would say.

Chandra Janakiraman：我想说，这些都是非常好的教训。

Okay, sweet.: So, let's talk about big-S strategy.

好的，亲爱的。：那么，我们来谈谈大S 策略。

When should you approach strategy this way and what are just the steps of it?

什么时候应该以这种方式实施策略？其步骤是什么？

Chandra Janakiraman: So everything we've spoken about so far is what I would call small S, and it's very problem focused.

Chandra Janakiraman：所以到目前为止我们所讨论的一切都是我所说的小 S，而且它非常关注问题。

It's basically what I call present forward.

这基本上就是我所说的“现在向前”。

Chandra Janakiraman: It's like you have something, you have a product out there, it has a bunch of problems.

Chandra Janakiraman：就像你有一些东西，你有一个产品，它有很多问题。

How do we make it better for...

我们如何让它变得更好...

What are the areas we tackle for maximum impact?

我们在哪些领域发挥最大影响力？

Typically led by product managers.

通常由产品经理领导。

And there's this interesting quote by Elon Musk, which is, "Life has to be about more than just solving problems." And he says it in the context of the aspiration to become a multi-planetary species, but I think this is true of every company, big or small.

埃隆·马斯克（Elon Musk）有句有趣的名言：“生活不仅仅是解决问题。”他是在渴望成为一个多行星物种的背景下说这番话的，但我认为这对每个公司来说都是如此，无论大小。

And there needs to be an aspirational and cool component to strategy.

战略中需要有一个雄心勃勃且很酷的组成部分。

And I call this big-S strategy.

我称之为大S 策略。

Chandra Janakiraman: I'll run through this at a higher level because I think this is a little bit more fluid in how you build the big-S strategy.

Chandra Janakiraman：我将在更高的层面上讨论这个问题，因为我认为这对于如何构建大 S 战略来说更加流畅。

And it typically takes longer, potentially up to about six months.

通常需要更长的时间，可能长达六个月左右。

The approach is a bit different from small S.

做法和小S有点不同。

And you start with the company mission and vision, and there is a little bit of groundwork that is done on long-term cultural trends, social trends, competitive trends, technological trends, and those are all the backdrop to trigger ideas.

你从公司的使命和愿景开始，在长期的文化趋势、社会趋势、竞争趋势、技术趋势上做了一些基础工作，这些都是触发想法的背景。

And what you do with that backdrop is you, again, do these leadership interviews, but with a different goal of generating long-term futures.

在这种背景下，你所做的就是再次进行这些领导力访谈，但目标不同，即创造长期未来。

Chandra Janakiraman: And some of the questions you can ask during these interviews are "What does a day in the life of a user look like in five years?

Chandra Janakiraman：在这些采访中你可以问的一些问题是“五年后用户生活中的一天会是什么样子？

What does the product look like in five to 10 years?

五到十年后产品会是什么样子？

Why is the world better in 10 years?

为什么10年后世界会变得更好？

And what is the most exciting version of that view?" And basically take all of that input and cluster it into I would say, three cohesive holes.

这种观点最令人兴奋的版本是什么？”基本上，将所有这些输入集中到我想说的三个有凝聚力的洞中。

Chandra Janakiraman: And what I mean by that is three, at least fairly distinct, descriptions of the future.

Chandra Janakiraman：我的意思是对未来的三种描述，至少是相当不同的描述。

So to give you almost a very simple example, imagine you doing big S for the future of travel.

给你一个几乎非常简单的例子，想象一下你为未来的旅行做大S。

You could have a future that is talking all about fully autonomous travel, where there's very little human involvement in going from A to B.

你可能会拥有一个完全自主旅行的未来，从 A 到 B 的过程中几乎不需要人类参与。

You could talk about another future where there's extreme speed, where you can get from A to B really fast across the world that is really fast.

你可以谈论另一个未来，那里有极快的速度，你可以非常快地从 A 地到达 B 地，穿越世界，非常快。

You could talk about a third where there is no travel, it's virtual travel, and you still have the feeling of travel, and you accomplish the same goals.

你可以谈论第三种，其中没有旅行，这是虚拟旅行，你仍然有旅行的感觉，并且你实现了相同的目标。

Chandra Janakiraman: But those are different futures, they have different properties, like different elements to them.

Chandra Janakiraman：但这些是不同的未来，它们具有不同的属性，就像它们的不同元素一样。

And once you generate those distinct futures, you actually generate prototypes with learning goals.

一旦你生成了这些不同的未来，你实际上就生成了具有学习目标的原型。

And think of these prototypes as concept cars.

并将这些原型视为概念车。

And the automobile industry uses this notion of concept cars.

汽车工业使用了概念车的概念。

Concept cars, the interesting thing about concept cars is they're never commercialized.

概念车，概念车的有趣之处在于它们从未商业化。

They're often produced for inspiration, and to potentially take some part of them, like maybe a technology or a feature, and that is brought into mainstream production.

它们通常是为了获得灵感而制作的，并可能采用其中的某些部分，例如一项技术或一项功能，并将其纳入主流生产。

Chandra Janakiraman: So think of these prototypes as these concept cars that really drive inspiration and potentially give you some small nuggets that you can run with.

Chandra Janakiraman：因此，可以将这些原型视为这些概念车，它们能够真正激发灵感，并可能为您提供一些可以运行的小金块。

And then you start doing research with them with potential users, you answer key questions, and you uncover certain elements that resonate with people.

然后你开始与潜在用户一起进行研究，回答关键问题，并发现某些能引起人们共鸣的元素。

So you eliminate a whole bunch of stuff, you combine a whole bunch of stuff, and you establish some winning components that are interesting.

所以你消除了一大堆东西，你组合了一大堆东西，然后你建立了一些有趣的获胜组件。

Chandra Janakiraman: And then what you do is you push stuff that is winning into the product, live product, testing.

Chandra Janakiraman：然后你要做的就是将获胜的东西推入产品、实时产品和测试中。

So this is actually something that you actually want to start testing your way into and understanding if it works from a scalable standpoint.

因此，这实际上是您真正想要开始测试的方法，并从可扩展的角度了解它是否有效。

And this whole thing is typically led not by the PM team, but by design and UXR.

整个事情通常不是由 PM 团队领导，而是由设计和 UXR 领导。

And intentionally it's a little bit more open-ended and green field.

并且故意让它变得更加开放和绿色领域。

And it actually is a very different mind space that people have when they approach big.

事实上，当人们接近大的时候，他们的思维空间是非常不同的。

So the roadmap is really built through a combination of small-S and big-S work.

因此，路线图实际上是通过小 S 和大 S 工作的结合来构建的。

And, for example, at VRChat, we are doing both small-S and big-S work, Lenny.

比如说，在 VRChat，我们同时做小 S 和大 S 的工作，Lenny。

And they are run as parallel work streams.

它们作为并行工作流运行。

The product management team is leading the charge of the small-S work, and the design team is leading the charge on the big-S work.

产品管理团队负责小S工作，设计团队负责大S工作。

And it's really exciting stuff.

这确实是令人兴奋的事情。

What's coming out of both work streams is really exciting and really different.

这两个工作流程的成果确实令人兴奋且截然不同。

And so we are building the bridge from both sides and both work streams ultimately flow into one roadmap.

因此，我们正在从双方建立桥梁，两个工作流最终都会流入一个路线图。

It's almost like two tributaries that ultimately merge into one river.

它几乎就像两条支流最终汇成一条河流。

That's how I would think about it.

我就是这么想的。

Lenny Rachitsky: There's so many things here that are so...

Lenny Rachitsky：这里有很多东西......

Chandra Janakiraman: That's how I would think about it.

Chandra Janakiraman：我就是这么想的。

Lenny Rachitsky: There's so many things here that are so interesting.

Lenny Rachitsky：这里有很多有趣的事情。

One is we've had this conversation on the podcast a couple of times, this point that people think and see the world differently.

一是我们已经在播客上进行过几次这样的对话，这一点表明人们对世界的看法和看法有所不同。

Some people are very open-minded and creative, and think big, blue sky people.

有些人思想非常开放，富有创造力，胸怀大志，蓝天白云。

Some people, me, just like, "What are we doing next?

有些人，比如我，就会说：“接下来我们要做什么？

How do we move this metric?

我们如何移动这个指标？

Let's talk about concrete things that we can do?" For this big S approach, I think what I'm hearing is make sure the people leading it are very open-minded, creative, blue sky type people.

我们来谈谈具体可以做的事情吧？”对于这种大S方法，我认为我听到的是确保领导它的人是思想非常开放、有创造力、蓝天型的人。

If you're the person that's like, "How will this move our metric?" Maybe you shouldn't be leading it and give someone else the reins.

如果你是这样的人，“这将如何改变我们的指标？”也许你不应该领导它并把控制权交给别人。

Lenny Rachitsky: Cool.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：酷。

And then with these timelines of doing both at once, it's probably hard to align them fully.

然后，由于同时进行这两项工作的时间表，可能很难将它们完全对齐。

So what I'm hearing is it's like these are kind of ongoing sometimes.

所以我听到的是，这些有时是持续进行的。

Lenny Rachitsky: And they'll both inform what you're doing.

Lenny Rachitsky：他们都会告诉你在做什么。

You don't need to have this perfect timeline of-

你不需要有这个完美的时间表-

Lenny Rachitsky: Sweet.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：太好了。

And the big thinking I love, because sometimes, you may experience this, designers often are like, "Oh, we just work on all this boring, incremental optimization stuff.

我喜欢宏大的想法，因为有时，你可能会经历这一点，设计师常常会说，“哦，我们只是致力于所有这些无聊的、增量优化的东西。

I want to think bigger." Which is great, and this is a really good lever to allow for that in a contained environment.

我想想得更大一些。”这太棒了，这是一个非常好的杠杆，可以在封闭的环境中实现这一点。

Cool.

凉爽的。

Let's just go crazy.

让我们疯狂吧。

Let's think about what this could be in the future.

让我们想想这在未来会发生什么。

Still, let's make sure we're moving some metrics short-term, but let's give us opportunity to think big.

尽管如此，我们还是要确保短期内改变一些指标，但让我们有机会大胆思考。

And oftentimes the biggest ideas come out of that.

通常，最伟大的想法就是由此产生的。

So I love it's giving space for both types of thinking, thinking bigger and thinking long term.

所以我喜欢它为两种思维方式提供空间，即更大的思考和长远的思考。

Lenny Rachitsky: Anything else about these two methods that might be interesting to share?

Lenny Rachitsky：关于这两种方法还有什么值得分享的吗？

Otherwise, I want to talk about AI a little bit, just how that impacts things and a couple other things.

除此之外，我想谈谈人工智能，它如何影响事物以及其他一些事情。

Chandra Janakiraman: Yeah, yeah.

钱德拉·贾纳基拉曼：是的，是的。

I'll end on one short sort of note on how this all feels when you do it, and then we can segue into AI-

最后我会用一个简短的注释来说明当你这样做时这一切的感受，然后我们可以继续讨论人工智能——

Chandra Janakiraman: ...

钱德拉·贾纳基拉曼：...

Lenny.

莱尼。

So I think that whether it's big S or small S, these are incredibly satisfying processes to go through in the end.

所以我觉得无论是大S还是小S，最后经历这些都是非常令人满意的过程。

So once you get to the end, they're incredibly deeply satisfying.

所以一旦你读到最后，他们就会感到非常满足。

But with anything in life that is very deeply satisfying at the end, they have a ton of challenge, frustration, and dead ends while you go through it where you kind of get a lot of self-doubt like, "Hey, will you ever reach the end?" And I just want to sort of normalize that.

但是，生活中任何最终令人非常满意的事情，都会有大量的挑战、挫折和死胡同，当你经历它时，你会产生很多自我怀疑，比如“嘿，你能到达终点吗？”我只是想让这种情况正常化。

That's actually normal and I want people to expect that as they go through it.

这实际上是正常的，我希望人们在经历它时对此有所期待。

And I think that's what makes it even more rewarding when you get to that sort of point where you start to see things connecting.

我认为这就是当你开始看到事物之间的联系时，它会变得更加有价值的原因。

Chandra Janakiraman: The second thing is I would say that the person who's leading the charge on these efforts has to be really good at connecting diverse viewpoints and keeping them all moving forward.

Chandra Janakiraman：第二件事是，我想说的是，领导这些努力的人必须非常擅长连接不同的观点并推动它们向前发展。

And it's not easy, it's very hard because sometimes you have people who take you in different directions and you have to keep it all hanging together.

这并不容易，也非常困难，因为有时有人会带你走向不同的方向，而你必须将这一切保持在一起。

Chandra Janakiraman: So in terms of picking people who have that skill, who are good integrators, who are good connect the dots, I think it's critical for these to be successful.

Chandra Janakiraman：因此，就挑选具有该技能的人、优秀的整合者、善于将各个点连接起来的人而言，我认为这些人的成功至关重要。

And in some ways low ego because it's not like...

在某些方面，自我意识很低，因为它不像......

They do get to introduce their own ideas, but truly, it's about bringing the team together.

他们确实可以介绍自己的想法，但实际上，这是为了将团队聚集在一起。

So that's the skill that you should look for for these leads.

因此，这就是您应该为这些潜在客户寻找的技能。

Chandra Janakiraman: And then the third piece is I would say that I would just approach these with a little bit of a lighter touch and more playful sort of approach, because it's an intensive process, it's a long process.

Chandra Janakiraman：然后第三部分是我会说我会用一点轻松的接触和更有趣的方法来处理这些，因为这是一个密集的过程，这是一个漫长的过程。

And people can get tired, they can find it grindy.

人们可能会感到疲倦，他们会发现它很粗糙。

So just having a little bit of playfulness along the way goes a long way in making it feel more tolerable for the people going through it.

因此，在这个过程中只要有一点乐趣，就能让正在经历这一过程的人们感觉更容易忍受。

So those are some thoughts about either of these processes.

这些是关于这两个过程的一些想法。

Lenny Rachitsky: That was really important context, especially this will be frustrating throughout.

Lenny Rachitsky：这是非常重要的背景，尤其是这将贯穿整个过程。

It sounds really beautiful and great and smooth as you describe it.

正如你所描述的那样，它听起来真的很漂亮、很棒、很流畅。

In reality, there's a lot of pain that goes into...

事实上，这里面有很多痛苦……

Because you're making hard decisions.

因为你正在做出艰难的决定。

A lot of people have opinions, they have perspectives, there's data that's...

很多人有意见、有观点、有数据……

Rarely is there clear answer from the beginning, so I think that's really important context.

从一开始就很少有明确的答案，所以我认为这是非常重要的背景。

Lenny Rachitsky: I wanted to actually come back to your point you made about how Elon made this point about life shouldn't just be about solving problems.

Lenny Rachitsky：我实际上想回到你的观点，即埃隆如何提出生活不应该只是解决问题的观点。

I think part of that quote is just like we should work on things that are awesome and exciting and inspiring, that aren't just immediately pain solvers.

我认为这句话的一部分就像我们应该致力于那些令人敬畏、令人兴奋和鼓舞人心的事情，而不仅仅是立即解决痛苦。

And he's very good at that, just inspiring people to what could be, and we should be thinking much bigger than we are.

他非常擅长这一点，只是激励人们实现可能，我们应该思考比我们现在更宏大的想法。

Lenny Rachitsky: I was actually at an interview with Zuck where he said the same thing.

Lenny Rachitsky：实际上我在接受扎克的采访时他也说了同样的话。

He's probably inspired by Elon.

他可能受到埃隆的启发。

He's like, "I've just gotten to a point in my career where I want to work on awesome stuff, stuff that is just awe inspiring, not just-

他说，“我的职业生涯刚刚到了一个阶段，我想从事一些很棒的事情，那些令人敬畏的事情，而不仅仅是——

Lenny Rachitsky: ...

莱尼·拉奇茨基：……

another social feature." so I think that's a really important point.

另一个社交功能。”所以我认为这是非常重要的一点。

And there's a lot of power in that.

这里面有很大的力量。

People get really excited about holy moly, I did not imagine this is what Headspace could become, what VRChat could become, what Meta could become.

人们对神圣的钼感到非常兴奋，我没想到这就是 Headspace 可以变成的样子，VRChat 可以变成的样子，Meta 可以变成的样子。

It's just really powerful, getting people really inspired.

它真的很强大，能够真正激发人们的灵感。

And I love this process they shared of how to do that.

我喜欢他们分享的这个过程。

Lenny Rachitsky: And I didn't actually summarize it, so I have it right here in front of me.

Lenny Rachitsky：我实际上并没有总结它，所以我把它放在我面前。

I'll just share the five steps of the biggest process.

我将只分享最大过程的五个步骤。

So it's preparation, mission, you figure mission, vision, trends, interview people about where they think things are going.

所以这是准备、使命，你计算使命、愿景、趋势，采访人们，了解他们认为事情的发展方向。

Then you come up with three distinct futures of what the future might look like if you were to do the things you're thinking.

然后你会想出三个不同的未来，如果你去做你正在思考的事情，未来会是什么样子。

Then you build prototypes of what might this look like?

然后你构建出它可能是什么样子的原型？

And then you actually test these in your product, which I love, to start de-risking these ideas.

然后你在我喜欢的产品中实际测试这些，以开始降低这些想法的风险。

That helps you converge to here's actual plan we want to execute, and then you turn that into roadmap.

这可以帮助您集中到我们想要执行的实际计划，然后将其转化为路线图。

Chandra Janakiraman: Yeah, yeah.

钱德拉·贾纳基拉曼：是的，是的。

And the first testing of the prototypes is with UXR, so it's more sort of concept testing or prototype testing with a handful of users.

原型的第一次测试是使用 UXR 进行的，因此它更像是概念测试或少数用户的原型测试。

And then you use that as synthesizing to a live product test.

然后您将其用作实时产品测试的综合。

Lenny Rachitsky: Great.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：太棒了。

Basically, it's like big ideas and then de-risking, validating them along the way-

基本上，这就像伟大的想法，然后降低风险，一路验证它们——

Lenny Rachitsky: ...

莱尼·拉奇茨基：……

in various ways to like, "Okay, maybe this could actually work.

以各种方式喜欢，“好吧，也许这真的可行。

Let's try." Sweet.

我们试试吧。”甜的。

Okay, so just two more things.

好吧，还有两件事。

One is I want to talk about AI briefly, of how that impacts this work.

一是我想简单谈谈人工智能，以及它如何影响这项工作。

And then two, just maybe a recap of the framework for people that are listening, you're like, "Oh my god, I have so much.

然后是两个，也许只是对正在倾听的人的框架的回顾，你会说，“天哪，我有这么多。

I wrote all these notes." Let's give them a summary so they could remember to use it.

所有这些笔记都是我写的。”让我们给他们一个总结，以便他们记住使用它。

Lenny Rachitsky: Okay, cool.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：好的，酷。

So let's talk about AI briefly.

那么让我们简单谈谈人工智能。

How has AI tooling helped you evolve this process?

人工智能工具如何帮助您改进这一流程？

How can people use AI to make this easier?

人们如何使用人工智能让这一切变得更容易？

Chandra Janakiraman: So the first disclaimer is I'm not sort of an AI futurist, but I read all the emerging stuff that's coming out, most of the emerging stuff that's coming out and use some of the tools.

Chandra Janakiraman：所以第一个免责声明是我不是人工智能未来主义者，但我阅读了所有正在出现的新兴内容，大多数正在出现的新兴内容并使用了一些工具。

And it's fascinating what's happening.

正在发生的事情很有趣。

And I think it will definitely have an impact on strategy formulation.

我认为这肯定会对战略制定产生影响。

So what I'll share is what resonates for me in the context of strategy formulation with AI.

因此，我将分享的是在人工智能战略制定的背景下引起我共鸣的内容。

Chandra Janakiraman: So right away, I think the basic idea is everybody should be using assistance in the strategy formulation process with the basic tools that we have.

Chandra Janakiraman：我认为基本想法是每个人都应该利用我们拥有的基本工具在战略制定过程中获得帮助。

And there are two ways to get AI to assist you in the strategy formulation process.

有两种方法可以让人工智能在策略制定过程中为您提供帮助。

The first is to support the preparation phase in terms of research.

一是支持研究准备阶段。

And this could be competitive analysis and, for example, you could do trend analysis from a vast library of competitors' release notes.

这可能是竞争分析，例如，您可以从大量竞争对手的发行说明中进行趋势分析。

And you can sort of say, "Okay, what are the themes of investment of a competitor's release notes?" Or you could do a reviews analysis of a competitor product and sort of understand what's resonating for users, what's not.

你可以说，“好吧，竞争对手的发行说明的投资主题是什么？”或者，您可以对竞争对手的产品进行评论分析，了解哪些内容能引起用户的共鸣，哪些不能。

And you could also ask a tool like ChatGPT to do a head-to-head comparison between a few players on a certain dimension and really give you a heat map of how they all stack up.

您还可以要求像 ChatGPT 这样的工具在某个维度上对几个玩家进行头对头比较，并真正为您提供他们如何叠加的热图。

And you could also ask an open-ended question like, "Hey, why is this new product so successful?

你也可以问一个开放式的问题，比如“嘿，为什么这个新产品如此成功？

Why is it getting so many users?" And there's some good hypothesis that you usually get.

为什么它能吸引这么多用户？”你通常会得到一些好的假设。

So really leverage in sort of the preparation phase from a competitive analysis standpoint.

因此，从竞争分析的角度来看，真正利用准备阶段的优势。

Chandra Janakiraman: The second one is in this idea called generating mock strategies.

Chandra Janakiraman：第二个想法是生成模拟策略。

And I know Claire Rowe at your summit spoke about this, and I think this is absolutely right and should be a critical input into the strategy process, which is asking these tools for a mock strategy.

我知道克莱尔·罗在你们的峰会上谈到了这一点，我认为这绝对正确，应该成为战略流程的关键输入，该流程要求这些工具提供模拟策略。

And I call this a mock strategy because it's kind of almost the answer but not quite the answer.

我称其为模拟策略，因为它几乎是答案，但又不完全是答案。

So what I've found is that these mock strategies, like let's say I support VRChat now and I ask it like, "Hey, what should VRChat do?

所以我发现这些模拟策略，比如说我现在支持 VRChat，我会问它，“嘿，VRChat 应该做什么？

How should we grow?" And it generates a mock strategy.

我们该如何成长？”它会生成一个模拟策略。

Chandra Janakiraman: What I've found is that it's, one, surprisingly good.

Chandra Janakiraman：我发现它出奇地好。

It's incredibly well-informed and well-articulated.

它的消息灵通且表达得非常好。

I've also found that its biggest strength is also somewhat its weakness, which is these mock strategies tend to be pretty comprehensive and extensive, and there's an investment recommendation in a vast number of areas.

我还发现它最大的优点也是它的缺点，那就是这些模拟策略往往相当全面和广泛​​，并且在很多领域都有投资建议。

So basically, if you remember, the core of strategy is really to be very targeted and to be very focused.

所以基本上，如果你还记得的话，战略的核心实际上是非常有针对性、非常集中。

So these mock strategies become an interesting input and the burden is still on the team to down-select into the most important areas for investment.

因此，这些模拟策略成为一种有趣的输入，团队仍然有责任向下选择最重要的投资领域。

So forcing that choice still, I think, is a human element and needs that layer of additional judgment, which is very context specific to the company.

因此，我认为，强制做出这种选择仍然是人为因素，需要一层额外的判断，这与公司的具体情况有关。

So this is sort of right away, I think people should be doing this.

所以这有点马上，我认为人们应该这样做。

Chandra Janakiraman: I think more medium term and probably not too distant future and likely sooner than we all think, there's probably going to be, sort of the model that resonates with me is sort of the multi-agent model, which is you probably have different components of the strategy workflow automated.

Chandra Janakiraman：我认为从中期来看，可能不会太遥远的未来，而且可能比我们想象的要早，可能会有一种与我产生共鸣的模型是多代理模型，这就是你可能拥有自动化策略工作流程的不同组件。

So you probably have a strategy agent, you probably have a roadmap or feature agent, you have maybe a engineering agent, and these can communicate amongst each other to cycle through results and iterate.

因此，您可能有一个策略代理，您可能有一个路线图或功能代理，您可能有一个工程代理，并且这些代理可以相互通信以循环结果并迭代。

And I think Armand Ruiz from IBM has some good definitional frameworks on some of the stuff.

我认为 IBM 的 Armand Ruiz 对某些内容有一些很好的定义框架。

He shares it often on LinkedIn.

他经常在 LinkedIn 上分享这些内容。

Chandra Janakiraman: But let's take a simple example.

Chandra Janakiraman：让我们举一个简单的例子。

I can easily imagine something like this for a topic like onboarding.

对于像入职这样的主题，我可以很容易地想象类似的情况。

So every company and product team obsesses about their onboarding experience.

因此，每个公司和产品团队都非常关注他们的入职体验。

And today, there are advanced experimentation frameworks.

如今，已经有了先进的实验框架。

So imagine you're expecting a large surge in traffic.

因此，想象一下您预计流量会大幅增加。

There's these sort of experimental frameworks like multi-armed bandits that can really help you get to the optimal sort of variation very quickly in real time.

像多臂老虎机这样的实验框架确实可以帮助您实时快速地获得最佳的变化类型。

And there are variations of that, like contextual multi-armed bandits, there's combinatorial bandits.

还有一些变体，比如上下文多臂强盗，还有组合强盗。

Chandra Janakiraman: But the interesting thing is they still rely on human design of the variations, the different variations that you test.

Chandra Janakiraman：但有趣的是，他们仍然依赖于人类设计的变体，以及你测试的不同变体。

Even though the experimentation framework is very sophisticated, the variations are still human generated.

尽管实验框架非常复杂，但变化仍然是人类产生的。

Now imagine if those variations could actually be generated through generative AI and could be plugged into the advanced experimentation frameworks.

现在想象一下，这些变化是否真的可以通过生成式人工智能生成，并可以插入到先进的实验框架中。

The possibilities become infinite.

可能性变得无限。

And really, you might be surprised by what you find is the winning onboarding experience that you couldn't even have humanly imagined.

事实上，您可能会惊讶地发现，这是您无法想象的成功入职体验。

And it might be different for every user, different for every sort of territory, etc.

每个用户的情况可能不同，每种地区的情况也可能不同，等等。

Lenny Rachitsky: That is such a cool idea, I just want to say.

Lenny Rachitsky：我只想说，这是一个很酷的想法。

This agent that's just running, thinking about ways to optimize your onboarding, coming up with concepts that you probably review, like, "Cool, let's try it." And then it does it, ships an experiment to run it and just is constantly optimizing your onboarding.

这个代理刚刚运行，思考如何优化您的入职，提出您可能会回顾的概念，例如“酷，让我们尝试一下”。然后它就会这样做，进行一个实验来运行它，并不断优化您的入门。

Holy shit, that's an awesome idea.

天哪，这真是个好主意。

I think everyone will have this.

我想每个人都会有这个。

Lenny Rachitsky: And then what that makes me think there's going to be some company that's built the best onboarding agent.

Lenny Rachitsky：这让我觉得将会有一些公司打造出最好的入职代理。

That's what you're going to be paying for.

这就是你要付出的代价。

Lenny Rachitsky: Oh my god, that's so good.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：天啊，那太好了。

Okay.

好的。

Great.

伟大的。

Great idea.

好主意。

Chandra Janakiraman: Yeah, yeah.

钱德拉·贾纳基拉曼：是的，是的。

So then the question becomes, hey, what is our job?

那么问题就变成了，嘿，我们的工作是什么？

Our job becomes architecting bigger and bigger pieces of the product to take advantage of these agents.

我们的工作是设计越来越大的产品，以利用这些代理。

And there will be a sequential increase in the complexity of workloads that get automated over time.

随着时间的推移，自动化工作负载的复杂性将会依次增加。

Onboarding is probably relatively on the easier side in terms of complexity of workload.

就工作负载的复杂性而言，入职可能相对容易一些。

And you get into deeper experiences, eventually AI will get there.

当你获得更深入的体验时，人工智能最终会到达那里。

Chandra Janakiraman: So funnily enough, when that happens, some of the manual processes I describe about will seem archaic.

Chandra Janakiraman：有趣的是，当这种情况发生时，我描述的一些手动流程将显得过时。

But I think the fundamentals will still have a long shelf life, and as you think about these automated frameworks as well.

但我认为基本原理仍然有很长的保质期，并且当你考虑这些自动化框架时也是如此。

Lenny Rachitsky: Man, this could be its own podcast.

Lenny Rachitsky：伙计，这可能是它自己的播客。

I have this whole post about how AI, how PMs are the best position, role in tech to thrive in a world of AI, which I'll link to that makes people, I find, feel better when they hear you talk about how much might get done through agents in AI.

我写了整篇文章，内容是关于人工智能如何、产品经理如何成为最佳职位、如何在人工智能世界中蓬勃发展的技术角色，我将链接到它，我发现，当人们听到你谈论通过人工智能代理可以完成多少工作时，他们会感觉更好。

Lenny Rachitsky: The other quick thought I had, and I want to get to the wrap up, is I have this ongoing debate with a friend about strategy in AI.

Lenny Rachitsky：我的另一个快速想法是，我正在与一位朋友就人工智能策略进行持续的辩论，我想总结一下。

My feeling is in theory, an AI tool will be incredibly good at coming up with your strategy for you because it's just, here's all the data, here's everything you need to know, how do we win?

我的感觉是，从理论上讲，人工智能工具将非常擅长为你制定策略，因为它只是，这里是所有数据，这里是你需要知道的一切，我们如何获胜？

And to me, that feels like the ultimate way AI is good, is just here's data, here's what I found as a path to a winning.

对我来说，这感觉就像人工智能的最终好处，就是这里的数据，这就是我发现的获胜之路。

But my friend's also arguing that's the one thing that AI will be least good at because that's where we need people and context and discussion, all these things.

但我的朋友也认为，这是人工智能最不擅长的一件事，因为这是我们需要人员、背景和讨论等所有这些事情的地方。

Lenny Rachitsky: I don't know, it's like one or the other.

Lenny Rachitsky：我不知道，这就像其中之一。

Either AI will be incredibly good at helping you figure out your strategy or the worst.

人工智能要么非常擅长帮助你制定策略，要么做出最坏的打算。

Lenny Rachitsky: I'm curious.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：我很好奇。

I'm curious, I guess, do you have any quick thoughts on that?

我很好奇，我想，你对此有什么快速的想法吗？

Where do you side?

你站在哪一边？

Chandra Janakiraman: I think there is a crossover point where the human judgment will be inferior to something that's able to process multiple signals simultaneously.

Chandra Janakiraman：我认为存在一个交叉点，人类的判断力将不如能够同时处理多个信号的东西。

There's an element of lateral thinking as well here, and I'll sort of share a simple example.

这里也有横向思维的元素，我将分享一个简单的例子。

Chandra Janakiraman: For those who drive Tesla cars with the fully self-driving capabilities, when you make a turn, humans have this fairly narrow field of vision.

Chandra Janakiraman：对于那些驾驶具有完全自动驾驶功能的特斯拉汽车的人来说，当你转弯时，人类的视野相当狭窄。

So you have to look both ways and you have to make a decision combining both those signals, right?

所以你必须从两个方面考虑，并且必须结合这两个信号做出决定，对吗？

Whereas the car has six cameras, which is simultaneously processing and it can make a decision not in sequence, but in parallel.

而汽车有六个摄像头，它们同时进行处理，并且可以不按顺序而是并行地做出决定。

And it moves with confidence at turnings because of that.

因此，它在转弯时充满信心。

So there is this crossover point where some of these, the ability to hold multiple signals in the head, it's going to be more...

所以存在这个交叉点，其中一些，在头部保存多个信号的能力，它将更加......

It's going to be stronger.

它会变得更强。

Lenny Rachitsky: That makes total sense.

Lenny Rachitsky：这完全有道理。

What it makes me think about, there's going to be a strategy agent just sitting around always looking for ways to improve your strategy and point you all in a different direction.

这让我想到的是，将会有一个策略代理坐在周围，总是寻找改进策略的方法，并为大家指明不同的方向。

Oh my god, future is wild, as I've said before.

天啊，正如我之前所说，未来是疯狂的。

Lenny Rachitsky: Okay, let's do a quick wrap up of the process for folks that are taking notes and they're like, "Cool, here's the overview." So let's just do that and then let's go to get to the exciting lightning round.

Lenny Rachitsky：好的，让我们为那些做笔记的人快速总结一下这个过程，他们会说，“酷，这是概述。”那么，让我们就这样做吧，然后让我们开始激动人心的闪电回合。

Chandra Janakiraman: I think the quick recap of everything we've covered is that product strategy definitionally sits between mission vision at the top and plan at the bottom.

Chandra Janakiraman：我认为快速回顾一下我们所涵盖的所有内容是，产品战略本质上位于顶部的使命愿景和底部的计划之间。

So it sits between those two either at the company level or at the team level.

因此，无论是在公司层面还是在团队层面，它都介于这两者之间。

What it does is it forces choice to deploy scarce resources towards maximum impact.

它的作用是迫使人们选择部署稀缺资源以实现最大影响。

And think about the frequency selection and resonance as an analogy, and it ideally includes three components.

并将频率选择和谐振视为类比，理想情况下它包括三个组成部分。

A handful of areas to focus on, which we call strategic pillars, and several areas that are explicitly not the focus and why.

一些需要重点关注的领域，我们称之为战略支柱，以及几个明确不是重点的领域以及原因。

That's really it in terms of what product strategy is.

就产品策略而言，这确实是这样。

Chandra Janakiraman: There is a smallest flavor of it which focuses on solving problems.

Chandra Janakiraman：它有一个最小的特点，专注于解决问题。

It's what I call present forward, and it typically operates in a two-year horizon.

这就是我所说的“现在的未来”，它通常在两年的时间内运作。

We use a five-stage process to get there, and it takes about eight to 12 weeks.

我们采用五个阶段的流程来实现这一目标，大约需要 8 到 12 周的时间。

There is a biggest process that focuses on an aspirational future, is future backward and typically has a three, five, 10-year horizon, also a five-stage process, and can be ongoing up to a six-month period to give it enough space to generate something exciting.

有一个最大的过程，着眼于理想的未来，是面向未来的，通常有三年、五年、十年的视野，也是一个五个阶段的过程，可以持续长达六个月的时间，以给它足够的空间来产生令人兴奋的东西。

Chandra Janakiraman: And the roadmap for the company or the team is built from a combination of smallest and biggest work, which is like building a bridge from both sides of a river.

Chandra Janakiraman：公司或团队的路线图是由最小和最大的工作组合而成的，这就像从河的两岸建造一座桥梁。

And ultimately, any strategy is only as good as the results it can produce.

最终，任何策略的好坏取决于它所能产生的结果。

So test and iterate through execution and double down on what's working and pivot away from what's not.

因此，通过执行进行测试和迭代，并加倍关注有效的方法，并放弃无效的方法。

Lenny Rachitsky: Incredible.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：难以置信。

I'm glad we did that.

我很高兴我们这么做了。

Anything else that you want to share or leave listeners with before we get to our very exciting lightning round?

在我们进入激动人心的闪电回合之前，您还有什么想与听众分享或留给听众的吗？

Chandra Janakiraman: Just all the best with strategy work and ultimately individual and business success.

Chandra Janakiraman：祝您战略工作一切顺利，并最终实现个人和商业成功。

Lenny Rachitsky: Amazing.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：太棒了。

And when I asked you at the beginning, before we started recording, what your goal was for this conversation, your answer was just to create a ripple of success across companies and teams, and I feel like we've done that.

当我一开始在我们开始录音之前问你，你这次谈话的目标是什么时，你的回答只是在公司和团队之间产生成功的连锁反应，我觉得我们已经做到了这一点。

Lenny Rachitsky: Okay.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：好的。

With that, we've reached our very exciting lightning ground.

至此，我们已经到达了非常令人兴奋的闪电之地。

Chandra, are you ready?

钱德拉，你准备好了吗？

Lenny Rachitsky: Let's do it.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：让我们开始吧。

First question, what are two or three books that you've recommended most to other people?

第一个问题，您向其他人推荐最多的两三本书是什么？

Chandra Janakiraman: Yeah, I love books on creativity and innovation, Lenny, and some of my classic favorites are Walt Disney's biography.

Chandra Janakiraman：是的，我喜欢关于创造力和创新的书籍，莱尼，我最喜欢的一些经典书籍是沃尔特·迪士尼的传记。

And there's several out there, but I think the one that I like the most is the Triumph of the American Imagination.

那里有好几部，但我想我最喜欢的是《美国想象力的胜利》。

And what's interesting is it talks about how Walt Disney actually loved the theme parks more than the movies.

有趣的是，它谈到了华特·迪士尼实际上是如何热爱主题公园胜过电影的。

And the reason for that was he could actually tinker with the theme parks.

原因是他实际上可以修补主题公园。

He could make changes to where the rides were, he could change rides in and out, and then he could observe real sort of changes to reactions of people flowing into the theme parks, which he couldn't do with the movies because once it was produced, it was done, it was out of his control.

他可以改变游乐设施的位置，他可以改变游乐设施的进出，然后他可以观察流入主题公园的人们的反应的真实变化，这是他在电影中无法做到的，因为一旦制作完成，就超出了他的控制范围。

And it was interesting, he was basically A-B testing long before the term was coined.

有趣的是，早在这个术语被创造之前，他基本上就在进行 A-B 测试。

And it's just a fascinating look into how his brain worked, way ahead of its time.

这只是对他的大脑如何工作的一次令人着迷的观察，远远领先于时代。

Chandra Janakiraman: The other classic is Ed Catmull's Creativity Inc, and it talks about all the negative forces that eat away at creativity in an organization.

Chandra Janakiraman：另一本经典著作是埃德·卡特穆尔 (Ed Catmull) 的《创造力公司》(Creativity Inc)，它讨论了侵蚀组织创造力的所有负面力量。

How do you, as the leader, have to keep them at bay and make sure the team can innovate?

作为领导者，您如何才能阻止他们并确保团队能够创新？

Chandra Janakiraman: And then there's this probably less popular book, but really good one from Tom Kelly of IDEO, which is The Ten Faces of Innovation.

Chandra Janakiraman：还有一本可能不太受欢迎的书，但确实是一本不错的书，出自 IDEO 的 Tom Kelly 之手，就是《创新的十个面孔》。

It talks about different archetypes that you need on the team that are essential for creating something special.

它讨论了团队中需要的不同原型，这些原型对于创造特殊的东西至关重要。

And you actually need, I think there's the devil's advocate, you need the researcher, you need the ethnographer, you need the stage setter.

我认为你实际上需要的是魔鬼代言人，你需要研究人员，你需要民族志学者，你需要舞台设置者。

There's all these interesting personalities that you need to actually make something successful.

要真正取得成功，你需要具备所有这些有趣的个性。

So I would say those are some of the ones that I usually recommend, yeah.

所以我想说这些是我通常推荐的一些，是的。

Lenny Rachitsky: That's a really cool...

莱尼·拉奇茨基：这真的很酷......

That third book is really interesting, I haven't heard of that.

第三本书很有趣，我还没听说过。

And Creativity Inc, something I want to highlight real quick is to your point, that a lot of it is how to avoid killing good ideas.

对于创意公司，我想快速强调的是你的观点，其中很多是如何避免扼杀好创意。

And my favorite metaphor from that book is the ugly baby metaphor where every new idea is an ugly baby that people just want to get rid of.

那本书中我最喜欢的比喻是丑陋的婴儿比喻，每个新想法都是一个人们只想摆脱的丑陋的婴儿。

Get rid of this ugly baby, we don't want this around here.

摆脱这个丑陋的婴儿，我们不想让它在这里。

And just every new idea is ugly when it starts, and you need to protect the ugly baby, basically.

每个新想法一开始都是丑陋的，基本上你需要保护丑陋的婴儿。

Although I don't know who's hurting ugly babies, that's not-

虽然我不知道是谁在伤害丑陋的婴儿，但这不是——

Chandra Janakiraman: Yeah, yeah, it feels a bit...

Chandra Janakiraman：是的，是的，感觉有点......

Yeah.

是的。

Lenny Rachitsky: Yeah, harsh.

Lenny Rachitsky：是的，很严厉。

Yeah.

是的。

But it's memorable because I've never forgotten that.

但这是令人难忘的，因为我从未忘记过。

Lenny Rachitsky: Okay, next question.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：好的，下一个问题。

Is there a favorite recent movie or TV show you really enjoyed?

最近有没有您真正喜欢的最喜欢的电影或电视节目？

Chandra Janakiraman: Yeah, yeah.

钱德拉·贾纳基拉曼：是的，是的。

We watch a lot of animated films with the kids.

我们和孩子们一起看了很多动画电影。

But were a couple of good movies this year.

但今年有几部好电影。

We really liked If, Imaginary Friend, it's about growing up and forgetting these memories of your younger days, is was a really nice movie.

我们真的很喜欢《如果，想象中的朋友》，它讲述的是成长和忘记年轻时的记忆，是一部非常好的电影。

And then of course, we enjoyed Dune II as well.

当然，我们也很喜欢《沙丘 II》。

It was a fun watch.

这是一块有趣的手表。

But most of our time is dominated by the kids sort of animated folks at home or the cinema.

但我们的大部分时间都被孩子们在家里或电影院里的动画人物所占据。

Lenny Rachitsky: There's a new Dune TV show, I don't know if you've been watching it.

Lenny Rachitsky：有一个新的沙丘电视节目，我不知道你是否看过。

It just started recently on HBO.

它最近才在 HBO 上播出。

It's not the best thing in the world, but it gets you a little Dune fix-

这不是世界上最好的事情，但它可以让你修复一下沙丘 -

Lenny Rachitsky: ...

莱尼·拉奇茨基：……

in between movies.

在电影之间。

I think there's a third movie coming out.

我认为第三部电影即将上映。

Lenny Rachitsky: Third question, do you have a favorite product you recently discovered that you really love?

Lenny Rachitsky：第三个问题，您最近发现有一款您真正喜欢的最喜欢的产品吗？

Chandra Janakiraman: Yeah, yeah.

钱德拉·贾纳基拉曼：是的，是的。

I've been playing this cute little game for the last few days.

这几天我一直在玩这个可爱的小游戏。

It's called Capybara Go!

它的名字叫水豚Go！

It's a tab-based strategy RPG game.

这是一款基于标签的策略角色扮演游戏。

It's got really humorous writing and this cute capybara that goes off on an adventure.

它有非常幽默的写作和这只可爱的水豚去冒险。

It's very well-paced and it's a very well-produced game.

这是一款节奏非常快、制作非常精良的游戏。

It's one game I've been playing recently.

这是我最近玩的一款游戏。

Chandra Janakiraman: I've also been poking around Bluesky.

Chandra Janakiraman：我也一直在研究 Bluesky。

Bluesky is interesting.

蓝天很有趣。

I haven't gotten into a habit yet, but it's super interesting concept of empowering the community with these community-generated feeds.

我还没有养成习惯，但通过这些社区生成的提要为社区提供支持是一个非常有趣的概念。

It's very different experience.

这是非常不同的体验。

But it's also interesting, there's a trade-off with the simplicity of the product and what you get with the additional complexity.

但也很有趣的是，产品的简单性和额外的复杂性所带来的好处之间存在权衡。

It'll be interesting to see how it plays out, how it scales.

看看它如何发挥作用、如何扩展将会很有趣。

Lenny Rachitsky: Do you have a favorite life motto that you often come back to, find useful in work or in life?

Lenny Rachitsky：您有没有最喜欢的人生格言，并且经常回顾并发现它在工作或生活中有用？

Chandra Janakiraman: So there was this 1995 interview of Steve Jobs where he talks about this idea of there's a tremendous amount of craftsmanship between a great idea and a great product, and it sort of stuck with me over the years.

Chandra Janakiraman：1995 年，史蒂夫·乔布斯 (Steve Jobs) 在接受采访时谈到了这样一个想法：伟大的想法和伟大的产品之间存在着大量的工艺，多年来，这一点一直困扰着我。

And the simple way to think about that is it takes a lot of effort to make something special.

思考这个问题的简单方法是，要做出特别的东西需要付出很多努力。

And conversely, if it's easy, it's probably not that special or not that great.

相反，如果它很容易，它可能就没那么特别或者没那么伟大。

And it's something that I sort of think about when we build product, is there sufficient pain here where it's sort of a proxy for, are we creating something great, is interesting.

当我们构建产品时，我会考虑这个问题，这里是否有足够的痛苦，它可以作为我们创造一些伟大的、有趣的东西的代理。

Lenny Rachitsky: Wow.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：哇。

It makes me think about founder mode a little bit.

这让我有点思考创始人模式。

Like people talk about founder mode.

就像人们谈论创始人模式一样。

The reason founder mode I think is important is the people that are most committed and passionate and driven to go through that pain and continue to make it...

我认为创始人模式很重要的原因是那些最忠诚、最热情、最有动力去经历痛苦并继续成功的人......

To take it from just an ugly baby idea to an awesome winning product oftentimes needs to be the founder.

要把它从一个丑陋的婴儿创意变成一个令人惊叹的成功产品，通常需要创始人。

And that's why I think it's kind of emerged as a trend is it's important to have that drive, to just-

这就是为什么我认为它已经成为一种趋势，拥有这种动力很重要，只是——

Lenny Rachitsky: ...

莱尼·拉奇茨基：……

continue to refine it and not just like, "I had the idea, go build it now."

继续完善它，而不仅仅是“我有这个想法，现在就去构建它”。

Lenny Rachitsky: Okay, final question.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：好的，最后一个问题。

You have an amazing background behind you.

你的背后有着惊人的背景。

if people are on YouTube, it's just a beautiful book background, a bunch of objects and books.

如果人们在 YouTube 上，那只是一个漂亮的书籍背景、一堆物品和书籍。

I'm curious if there's an object on there or a book on there that might be fun to highlight that you're especially into or proud of.

我很好奇那里是否有一个物体或一本书可能会很有趣地强调你特别喜欢或自豪。

And feel free to turn around if you want to look around.

如果您想四处看看，请随意转身。

Curious if there's one thing that stands out, like, "Oh, here's this thing, ."

很好奇是否有一件事情很突出，比如，“哦，这是这个东西，”。

Chandra Janakiraman: Oh, well, it's the picture of my kids right in the center, which is without doubt the most important and memorable thing there.

Chandra Janakiraman：哦，好吧，中间是我孩子的照片，这无疑是最重要、最难忘的事情。

It's also caught it a unique time when they were incredibly...

这也捕捉到了一个独特的时刻，他们令人难以置信......

They were sort of super embracing each other and it's a phase where they've grown out of it.

他们彼此非常拥抱，现在他们已经摆脱了这个阶段。

Now there's a lot more, I think rivalry and then sibling tussles.

现在还有更多的事情，我认为是竞争，然后是兄弟姐妹之间的争斗。

But that moment is my favorite.

但那一刻是我最喜欢的。

Chandra Janakiraman: I also have a bunch of fun stuff, like a big sort of Snoopy fan, and so it is...

Chandra Janakiraman：我也有很多有趣的东西，比如史努比的忠实粉丝，所以它是......

Also a big Beetles fan, so that picture is actually an interesting blend between Snoopy walking, crossing the road and then the Beetles crossing the other way.

我也是甲壳虫乐队的忠实粉丝，所以这张照片实际上是史努比走路、过马路和甲虫乐队穿过另一条路的有趣混合。

And then a bunch of books that are more memorable over the years.

然后是一堆多年来更令人难忘的书。

You'll see Creativity Inc there, you'll see The Ten Phases of Innovation, all of that.

你会在那里看到创造力公司，你会看到创新的十个阶段，所有这些。

Lenny Rachitsky: Amazing.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：太棒了。

Thank you for sharing...

谢谢您的分享...

Your kids' photo's blocked when you're in the center, so it's like a little Easter egg.

当您位于中心时，您孩子的照片会被遮挡，所以它就像一个小复活节彩蛋。

Thank you for sharing that.

感谢您分享这一点。

Chandra, this was incredible.

钱德拉，这太不可思议了。

It was everything I was hoping it'd be.

这就是我所希望的一切。

I think we're going to create that ripple that you were hoping for.

我想我们会产生你们所希望的涟漪。

Lenny Rachitsky: Two final questions.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：最后两个问题。

Where can folks find you online if they want to reach out?

如果人们想联系您，可以在哪里找到您？

And how can listeners be useful to you?

听众如何对你有用？

Chandra Janakiraman: A reasonable choice would be LinkedIn to reach me, and I really, like you and I discussed earlier, I'd be really happy if this creates that kind of ripple effect of successes, both for individuals and for products.

Chandra Janakiraman：一个合理的选择是通过 LinkedIn 来联系我，我真的像你和我之前讨论的那样，如果这能为个人和产品带来成功的连锁反应，我会非常高兴。

And I want everybody to think of this, the stuff I shared as a bit of an open source model.

我希望每个人都能想到这一点，我分享的东西有点像开源模型。

So test some of the concepts, modify it, remix it, and share what worked or did not.

因此，测试一些概念，修改它，重新混合它，并分享哪些有效或无效。

And ultimately, that's what makes it all interesting is the community owns it ultimately, and it doesn't belong to one individual.

最终，这一切变得有趣的是社区最终拥有它，并且它不属于某个人。

That's what would make me super happy.

这会让我超级高兴。

Lenny Rachitsky: Amazing.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：太棒了。

Chandra, thank you so much for being here.

钱德拉，非常感谢你来到这里。

Chandra Janakiraman: Thank you so much for having me, Lenny, and thanks for your service to the product community.

Chandra Janakiraman：非常感谢您邀请我，Lenny，也感谢您为产品社区提供的服务。

Same to you.

你也一样。

Bye everyone.: Thank you so much for listening.

大家再见：非常感谢您的聆听。

If you found this valuable, you can subscribe to the show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your favorite podcast app.

如果您发现这很有价值，您可以在 Apple Podcasts、Spotify 或您最喜欢的播客应用程序上订阅该节目。

Also, please consider giving us a rating or leaving a review, as that really helps other listeners find the podcast.

另外，请考虑给我们评分或留下评论，因为这确实有助于其他听众找到播客。

You can find all past episodes or learn more about the show at LennysPodcast.com.

您可以在 LennysPodcast.com 上找到所有过去的剧集或了解有关该节目的更多信息。

See you in the next episode.

下一集见。