A better way to plan, build, and ship products | Ryan Singer (creator of “Shape Up")

规划、构建和运输产品的更好方式 |瑞恩·辛格（《Shape Up》的创作者）

2025-03-30 · Lenny's Podcast · 原文

Ryan Singer: I often use this analogy of if you're doing a home renovation, you can have the most beautiful rendering of the new bedroom and we're going to have these lamps on the side of the bed that are coming out from the wall.

瑞安·辛格（Ryan Singer）：我经常用这个比喻，如果你正在进行家庭装修，你可以得到新卧室最美丽的效果图，我们将把这些从墙上伸出的灯放在床边。

But if you haven't checked if there's electricity in that wall there or not, it's going to drastically change the cost and the time and everything.

但如果你没有检查那堵墙是否有电，那么成本、时间和一切都会发生巨大的变化。

Ryan Singer: What we need to do in a shaping session is we come out with some kind of diagram where engineers, product and design, they're saying, "We understand that." So the first thing is we are not going to start something unless we can see the end from the beginning.

Ryan Singer：在塑造会议中我们需要做的是拿出某种图表，工程师、产品和设计人员都会说，“我们理解这一点。”所以第一件事是，除非我们能从一开始就看到结局，否则我们不会开始某件事。

We're not going to take a big concept and then say, "What's the estimate for this thing?"

我们不会采取一个大的概念，然后说：“这个东西的估计是多少？”

Ryan Singer: We're going to go the other way around and we're going to say, what is the maximum amount of time we're willing to go before we actually finish something?

Ryan Singer：我们要反其道而行之，我们会说，在真正完成某件事之前，我们愿意花的最长时间是多少？

How do we come up with a idea that's going to work in the amount of time that the business is interested in spending?

我们如何提出一个在企业有兴趣花费的时间内可行的想法？

Lenny Rachitsky: Today my guest is Ryan Singer.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：今天我的客人是瑞安·辛格。

Ryan was one of the first few hires at 37signals, and through his experience of building Basecamp and 17 years of building product at 37signals, he wrote a book called Shape Up, which shares a very different approach to building software.

Ryan 是 37signals 的首批员工之一，通过他构建 Basecamp 的经验和 17 年在 37signals 构建产品的经验，他写了一本名为 Shape Up 的书，其中分享了一种非常不同的软件构建方法。

Lenny Rachitsky: Appetites instead of deadlines.

A big focus on bringing design engine product together into a room to shape the plan versus writing long PRDs or trying to finalize designs before you start building.

重点是将设计引擎产品整合到一个房间中以制定计划，而不是编写长的 PRD 或在开始构建之前尝试完成设计。

Lenny Rachitsky: I've noticed more and more teams adopting the Shape Up method, and especially with AI starting to change how we work and build product, there's this shift coming in how product teams will operate.

Lenny Rachitsky：我注意到越来越多的团队采用 Shape Up 方法，特别是随着人工智能开始改变我们的工作和构建产品的方式，产品团队的运作方式也发生了这种转变。

And so I thought this was the perfect time to do a deep dive into the Shape Up method.

所以我认为现在是深入研究塑身方法的最佳时机。

Lenny Rachitsky: This episode is basically going to give you everything you need to give Shape Up a shot on your team or at your company to see if it fixes the problems that you're having shipping great products.

Lenny Rachitsky：这一集基本上将为您提供在您的团队或公司中尝试 Shape Up 所需的一切，看看它是否可以解决您在交付优质产品时遇到的问题。

Lenny Rachitsky: A big thank you to Des Trainer, Bob Moesta and Chris Speck for suggesting questions and topics for this conversation.

Lenny Rachitsky：非常感谢 Des Trainer、Bob Moesta 和 Chris Speck 为本次对话提出的问题和主题。

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。

Lenny Rachitsky: Also, if you become a paid subscriber of my newsletter, you get an entire year free of Perplexity Pro, Notion, Superhuman, Linear and Granola.

Lenny Rachitsky：此外，如果您成为我的时事通讯的付费订阅者，您将获得一整年的免费 Perplexity Pro、Notion、Super human、Linear 和 Granola 的机会。

Check it out at lenny'snewsletter.com.

请访问 lenny'snewsletter.com 进行查看。

With that, I bring you Ryan Singer.

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

Lenny Rachitsky：本集由 WorkOS 为您带来。

If you're building a SaaS app, at some point your customers will start asking for enterprise features like SAML authentication and SCIM provisioning.

如果您正在构建 SaaS 应用程序，那么您的客户有时会开始要求提供 SAML 身份验证和 SCIM 配置等企业功能。

That's where WorkOS comes in, making it fast and painless to add enterprise features to your app.

这就是 WorkOS 的用武之地，它可以快速、轻松地将企业功能添加到您的应用程序中。

Lenny Rachitsky: Their APIs are easy to understand so that you can ship quickly and get back to building other features.

Lenny Rachitsky：他们的 API 很容易理解，因此您可以快速交付并继续构建其他功能。

Today, hundreds of companies are already powered by WorkOS, including ones you probably know like Versel, Webflow and Loom.

如今，数百家公司已经由 WorkOS 提供支持，其中包括您可能知道的 Versel、Webflow 和 Loom。

WorkOS also recently acquired Warrant.

The fine-grain authorization service.

Lenny Rachitsky: Warrant's product is based on a groundbreaking authorization system called Zanzibar, which was originally designed for Google to power Google Docs and YouTube.

Lenny Rachitsky：Warrant 的产品基于名为 Zanzibar 的突破性授权系统，该系统最初是为 Google 设计的，旨在为 Google Docs 和 YouTube 提供支持。

This enables fast authorization checks at enormous scale while maintaining a flexible model that can be adapted to even the most complex use cases.

这可以实现大规模的快速授权检查，同时保持灵活的模型，甚至可以适应最复杂的用例。

Lenny Rachitsky: If you're currently looking to build role-based access control or other enterprise features like single sign-on SCIM or user management, you should consider WorkOS.

Lenny Rachitsky：如果您当前正在寻求构建基于角色的访问控制或其他企业功能（例如单点登录 SCIM 或用户管理），您应该考虑 WorkOS。

It's a drop-in replacement for Auth0 and supports up to 1 million monthly active users for free.

它是 Auth0 的直接替代品，免费支持多达 100 万月活跃用户。

Check it out at workos.com to learn more.

请访问 workos.com 以了解更多信息。

That's workos.

这就是工作。

com.

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

Lenny Rachitsky：本集由 Merge 为您带来。

Product leaders, yes, like you, cringe when they hear the word integration.

是的，产品领导者和你一样，在听到集成这个词时会感到畏缩。

They're not fun for you to scope, build, launch or maintain, and integrations probably aren't what led you to product work in the first place?

对于您来说，确定范围、构建、启动或维护它们并不有趣，并且集成可能不是您最初从事产品工作的原因？

Lenny Rachitsky: Lucky for you the folks at Merge are obsessed with integrations.

Lenny Rachitsky：你很幸运，Merge 的员工热衷于集成。

Their single API helps SaaS companies launch over 200 product integrations in weeks, not quarters.

他们的单一 API 可帮助 SaaS 公司在几周内（而不是几个季度）推出 200 多个产品集成。

Think of Merge like Plaid, but for everything B2B SaaS.

将 Merge 想象为 Plaid，但适用于所有 B2B SaaS。

Lenny Rachitsky: Organizations like RAMP, Dorada and Electric use Merge to access their customer's accounting data to reconcile bill payments, file storage data to create searchable databases and their product or HRAS data to auto-provision and deprovision access for the customer's employees.

Lenny Rachitsky：RAMP、Dorada 和 Electric 等组织使用 Merge 来访问客户的会计数据以协调账单支付、文件存储数据以创建可搜索数据库及其产品或 HRAS 数据以自动配置和取消配置客户员工的访问权限。

Lenny Rachitsky: And yes, if you need AI-ready data for your SaaS product, then Merge is the fastest way to get it.

Lenny Rachitsky：是的，如果您的 SaaS 产品需要人工智能就绪的数据，那么合并是获取它的最快方法。

So, want to solve your organization's integration dilemma once and for all?

那么，想要一劳永逸地解决您组织的整合困境吗？

Book and attend a meeting at merge.dev/lenny and receive a $50 Amazon gift card.

在 merge.dev/lenny 上预订并参加会议即可获得价值 50 美元的亚马逊礼品卡。

That's merge.dev/lenny.

那是 merge.dev/lenny。

Lenny Rachitsky: Ryan, thank you so much for being here.

Lenny Rachitsky：Ryan，非常感谢你来到这里。

Welcome to the podcast.

欢迎来到播客。

Ryan Singer: I am really happy to be here.

Thanks a lot.

多谢。

Lenny Rachitsky: I think this is going to be a legendary episode.

Lenny Rachitsky：我认为这将是一个传奇的插曲。

There's a lot of interest these days in different ways of working, especially ways that are Agile and SAFe and Scrum and all these ways that people hear about working.

如今，人们对不同的工作方式很感兴趣，尤其是敏捷、SAFe 和 Scrum 以及人们听说过的所有这些工作方式。

Especially in this world of AI where everything's just changing.

尤其是在这个一切都在变化的人工智能世界里。

It feels like there's just an increased interest in exploring different ways of working and specifically it feels like there's been a rise in interest in Shape Up the stuff that you talk about.

感觉人们对探索不同的工作方式越来越感兴趣，特别是感觉人们对你所说的塑身的兴趣有所增加。

Lenny Rachitsky: So, I am really excited to basically help people understand what is this way of working, is it right for them?

Lenny Rachitsky：所以，我真的很高兴能够帮助人们了解这种工作方式是什么，它适合他们吗？

What are ways to start implementing it?

What are maybe some pitfalls you may run into?

And as much as possible get into a lot of real talk about how things are actually going on product teams that people often don't like to hear.

并尽可能多地进行人们通常不喜欢听到的有关产品团队实际情况的真实讨论。

Lenny Rachitsky: So, first of all, have you also seen this increased interest in Shape Up?

Lenny Rachitsky：首先，您是否也看到人们对 Shape Up 的兴趣日益浓厚？

Ryan Singer: Yeah, I think it's interesting that we're talking now.

瑞安·辛格：是的，我认为我们现在谈论的很有趣。

I mean, the book came out in 2019 and it's, I've been hearing more and more like, "Oh, we know somebody who's trying it or we're hearing it when we go talk to other companies." So, I think, it's a wave that's slowly building.

我的意思是，这本书于 2019 年出版，我越来越多地听到这样的声音：“哦，我们知道有人在尝试，或者我们在与其他公司交谈时听到了这种说法。” So, I think, it's a wave that's slowly building.

Ryan Singer: And it's funny, when it came out, I even tried to have an online forum to get everyone who's interested to talk together and what I started to learn pretty early on is that people don't like to talk about their struggles shipping.

瑞安·辛格：很有趣的是，当它问世时，我什至试图建立一个在线论坛，让每个有兴趣的人一起讨论，而我很早就开始了解到，人们不喜欢谈论他们在运输方面的挣扎。

Ryan Singer: Especially CPOs and CTOs don't like to go on a public forum and say, "Our company isn't shipping or our engineering team is stuck, or our team is always lost in the weeds." That's not an easy community topic on an online forum.

Ryan Singer：尤其是 CPO 和 CTO 不喜欢在公共论坛上说：“我们的公司没有发货，或者我们的工程团队陷入困境，或者我们的团队总是迷失在杂草中。”这不是在线论坛上的一个简单的社区主题。

Ryan Singer: So, I think, there's also some reasons why it's been word of mouth slowly gathering steam.

瑞安·辛格：所以，我认为，口碑传播慢慢升温也是有一些原因的。

Lenny Rachitsky: That's something I struggle with on this podcast.

Lenny Rachitsky：这是我在这个播客中遇到的问题。

As you said, it's a product and product teams don't want to be sharing when things aren't going great.

正如你所说，这是一个产品，当事情进展不顺利时，产品团队不想分享。

That's why I introduced Failure Corner on the podcast where it's like, "Okay, but tell me a time things didn't go well."

这就是为什么我在播客上介绍了“失败角”，它就像是，“好吧，但是告诉我一次事情进展不顺利的时候。”

Ryan Singer: Oh yeah, that's great.

Yeah, because it's so hard to get to that, right?

是的，因为很难做到这一点，对吧？

And it's not all just this golden path, rosy, where we're all shipping beautiful, meaningful things all day.

这不仅仅是这条玫瑰色的黄金之路，我们整天都在运送美丽、有意义的东西。

Ryan Singer: It's a hard business and there's no perfect school either that produces expert product managers and CPOs and CTOs and stuff like that.

Ryan Singer：这是一项艰巨的业务，也没有完美的学校可以培养专家产品经理、首席产品官和首席技术官之类的人。

So we're all trying to figure this out and we don't have a lot of sources, so there is a lot of struggle.

所以我们都在努力解决这个问题，但我们没有很多来源，所以有很多困难。

Lenny Rachitsky: And there aren't many options for how to build product.

Lenny Rachitsky：对于如何构建产品，没有太多选择。

All people really read about is Scrum/Agile/SAFe as they scale and then there's Waterfall, which, "No, I never do Waterfall." Then there's the start up way of just ship and maybe one or two week cycles and then there's Shape Up, so it feels like it's one of the rare other options that exists.

人们真正读到的都是 Scrum/Agile/SAFe，因为它们是可扩展的，然后是 Waterfall，“不，我从不做 Waterfall”。然后是刚发货的启动方式，可能是一到两周的周期，然后是 Shape Up，所以感觉它是现有的罕见的其他选择之一。

And so-

所以——

Ryan Singer: That's one of the things I've been hearing.

瑞安·辛格：这是我听到的事情之一。

It's, I hear like, "Oh, we thought there was only Scrum or Kanban, and then we heard there was this Shape Up thing.

我听到的是，“哦，我们以为只有 Scrum 或看板，然后我们听说有 Shape Up 的东西。

What's that?

那是什么？

Lenny Rachitsky: And I think it's always been connected to Basecamp.

Lenny Rachitsky：我认为它一直与 Basecamp 相关。

We're going to talk about that.

我们要讨论这个。

Just, it works for companies that are nothing like Basecamp.

只是，它适用于与 Basecamp 完全不同的公司。

Maybe just touch on that briefly.

Ryan Singer: Well, I mean, that came as a surprise to me.

瑞安·辛格：嗯，我的意思是，这让我感到惊讶。

I mean, when I wrote the book, I had been in Basecamp at that time, I think 15 years, and I actually didn't even know the outside world.

我的意思是，当我写这本书的时候，我当时已经在 Basecamp 了，我想已经有 15 年了，实际上我什至不了解外面的世界。

I mean, it was Jason's idea to even write the book.

我的意思是，写这本书也是杰森的主意。

Because he said, "Look, a lot of people are going to want to know about this.

因为他说：“看，很多人都想知道这个。

A lot of people are struggling." And I'm like, "Well, okay."

很多人都在挣扎。”我说，“好吧，好吧。”

Ryan Singer: I knew our inside story of we had some growing pains and we had to be able to formalize the way that we were working and shipping so that as we brought new people in that they could participate in that and we could stay fast.

瑞安·辛格（Ryan Singer）：我知道我们的内幕，我们经历了一些成长的烦恼，我们必须能够正式确定我们的工作和运输方式，这样当我们引入新人时，他们可以参与进来，我们就能保持快速发展。

So, I knew our internal struggles, but I honestly didn't know anything about the outside world.

所以，我知道我们内部的斗争，但老实说我对外面的世界一无所知。

Ryan Singer: And it was only after the book came out that it gave me this excuse to start talking to people from all kinds of different companies, and it's been really interesting.

There are some really amazing cases of companies of very different characteristics from Basecamp, like VC funded, significantly bigger, very different pressures, different team structure, different skills who are doing it.

Ryan Singer: At the same time, there is also a lot of questions that are coming in my way because honestly, there are so few teams that are structured just like Basecamp, that there are a lot of gaps in the book of like, "Well, what about this, and what about that, and how do we do that in our situation?"

Ryan Singer: So, a lot of my focus today is actually closing those gaps and helping people figure out how can I make this work for me or for our team?

瑞安·辛格：所以，我今天的重点实际上是缩小这些差距，并帮助人们弄清楚如何才能让这项工作为我或我们的团队工作？

Lenny Rachitsky: And you specifically told me, you just now call it instead of Shape Up it's Shape Up In Real Life or Shape Up For Real Life.

Lenny Rachitsky：你特别告诉我，你现在不叫它“Shape Up”，而是叫“Shape Up In Real Life”或“Shape Up For Real Life”。

Ryan Singer: Yeah.

瑞安·辛格：是的。

Well, my wife heard me saying the same thing over and over again on every phone call.

嗯，我妻子每次打电话时都听到我一遍又一遍地说同样的话。

And she's overhearing me and she's like, "You have to make a course, you have to do something.

她无意中听到我说，“你必须开设一门课程，你必须做点什么。

You always are saying the same thing."

Ryan Singer: So then this led to this course that we made, which is called Shaping and Real Life.

瑞安·辛格（Ryan Singer）：这导致了我们制作这门课程，称为塑造和现实生活。

And well, yeah, the idea is the real life part, right?

嗯，是的，这个想法是现实生活的一部分，对吧？

How do I make this work if my designers don't code?

如果我的设计师不编码，我该如何完成这项工作？

It's very contentious to get engineering time.

You know what I mean?

你知道我的意思吗？

When there's all these different pressures that Basecamp didn't have.

Basecamp 没有这些不同的压力。

Lenny Rachitsky: We're going to get into the nitty gritty of how this actually works and the key elements, but can you just give a very short overarching summary of how Shape Up is different from how other product approaches are?

Ryan Singer: I think the way it's different starts with how the way we were working was a little bit different.

瑞安·辛格（Ryan Singer）：我认为它的不同之处始于我们的工作方式有点不同。

So, I started working with Jason and David on the first version of Basecamp, which was the flagship product of 37signals back in 2003.

因此，我开始与 Jason 和 David 合作开发 Basecamp 的第一个版本，这是 2003 年 37signals 的旗舰产品。

We were a team of three.

我们是三人一组。

Ryan Singer: And, I mean, I think, it's for any really small team, when you're just starting out, you don't need a process.

Ryan Singer：我的意思是，我认为这对于任何非常小的团队来说，当你刚刚开始时，你不需要一个过程。

You don't need a way of working.

It just happens organically because you're together.

因为你们在一起，所以一切都会自然而然地发生。

You don't have to explain it to other people, it just happens on its own, right?

你不需要向其他人解释它，它会自然发生，对吗？

Ryan Singer: But there was always this really intense urgency from both Jason and David, "We've got to get to something we can ship.

瑞安·辛格：但是杰森和大卫总是有一种非常强烈的紧迫感，“我们必须得到一些我们可以运送的东西。

We have to finish this and move on.

We have to get to something that's done." There was just no tolerance for big things that got fuzzy and started to drag.

我们必须完成一些事情。”对于那些变得模糊并开始拖延的大事情，我们无法容忍。

There was always this sharpening to get to what is this thing really and when are we going to get to the end soon?

总是需要不断地磨砺才能明白这件事到底是什么，我们什么时候才能尽快结束？

Ryan Singer: And on top of that, even when we were building V1, David wasn't actually full-time as our only technical person.

Ryan Singer：最重要的是，即使在我们构建 V1 时，David 实际上并不是我们唯一的全职技术人员。

He was programming 10 hours a week.

So, we had this really intense pressure of how can we really use David's time well?

那么，我们面临着巨大的压力，我们如何才能真正利用好大卫的时间呢？

Ryan Singer: We don't want to ever give something that this is the thing we want to build, and then it turns out not to be what we want and we have to throw it away and then come back again or you know what I mean?

Those bad cycles of waste.

那些浪费的坏循环。

Lenny Rachitsky: Let me actually ask about this because this is really interesting.

Lenny Rachitsky：让我实际上问一下这个问题，因为这真的很有趣。

So this is DHH.

这就是 DHH。

He was working part-time when he started 37signal.

当他创办 37signal 时，他正在做兼职。

Lenny Rachitsky: Was he working on Ruby basically and that whole thing?

Lenny Rachitsky：他基本上是在研究 Ruby 以及整个事情吗？

Ryan Singer: Well, Rails came out of the first...

Ryan Singer：嗯，Rails 是从第一个...

So, he told Jason, "I want to try building this in Ruby," because before they had done some collaboration and David had done things in PHP before that and he had this new idea, he wanted to try Ruby, this language he fell in love with.

Ryan Singer: And then the framework, Ruby on Rails, he ended up releasing that after Basecamp was standing.

Ryan Singer：然后是 Ruby on Rails 框架，他最终在 Basecamp 成立后发布了该框架。

Because it was extracted from the things that were necessary to give V1 of Basecamp to stand up.

因为它是从让Basecamp的V1站起来所必需的东西中提取出来的。

Lenny Rachitsky: So that's what he was doing the rest of his time instead of-

Lenny Rachitsky：所以这就是他余下时间所做的事情，而不是-

Ryan Singer: I don't know.

瑞安·辛格：我不知道。

I don't know what he was doing the rest of his time.

我不知道他剩下的时间在做什么。

Lenny Rachitsky: Probably something great.

Lenny Rachitsky：可能是很棒的事情。

Something-

有什么东西-

Ryan Singer: But he's always been like that.

He's always doing something interesting.

他总是在做一些有趣的事情。

He's either racing or who knows what, you know what I mean?

他要么在赛车，要么谁知道什么，你明白我的意思吗？

But all I knew was that we got 10 hours of that time.

但我只知道我们有 10 个小时的时间。

Lenny Rachitsky: Yeah, I love that that was a constraint to design a way of working that uses engineering time most efficiently.

Lenny Rachitsky：是的，我喜欢这是设计一种最有效地利用工程时间的工作方式的限制。

Ryan Singer: Yeah, I mean, put that together.

瑞安·辛格：是的，我的意思是，把它们放在一起。

So, David's constraint of 10 hours a week and then Jason has this, I mean, I think, many really successful founders and especially CEOs have this thing, it's like all they want to see is movement.

You know what I mean?

你知道我的意思吗？

Forward, forward, forward.

前进，前进，前进。

Ryan Singer: So when do we get to see it?

瑞安·辛格：那我们什么时候能看到呢？

When do we get to try it?

我们什么时候可以尝试一下？

When do I get to put it into somebody's hands?

我什么时候才能把它交到别人手里？

So that combination, there was just so much urgency even though there was no outside pressure.

因此，尽管没有外部压力，但这种结合还是非常紧迫。

You know what I mean?

你知道我的意思吗？

It was completely just let's say cultural energy of how do we keep getting somewhere and getting to something that we can celebrate and get excited about.

Lenny Rachitsky: I love that.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：我喜欢这个。

That's an attribute, I think, of a lot of successful founders.

我认为这是许多成功创始人的特质。

So that makes sense to hear that.

所以听到这个是有道理的。

Ryan Singer: Totally, totally.

瑞安·辛格：完全，完全。

And that's why where I come back to you, this is the part of the story where, I think, so many companies would say, "Yeah, I know that experience," right?

Because, I think, that's probably the seedling of, as you said, of successful companies.

因为，我认为，正如你所说，这可能是成功公司的幼苗。

Ryan Singer: Is that combination of urgency and also that those guys were so talented and that they had a clear vision of what they wanted to do and all of that.

It's this amazing time actually, these early days.

实际上，这是一个美妙的时刻，早期的日子。

Lenny Rachitsky: Is there anything more to the backstory that's important to share or super interesting?

Lenny Rachitsky：背景故事还有什么值得分享或非常有趣的吗？

Ryan Singer: Yeah, I mean, the other big piece of it was, so Jason and I were this product, what do you call it?

瑞安·辛格：是的，我的意思是，另一个重要部分是，杰森和我就是这个产品，你怎么称呼它？

The two thirds.

三分之二。

So, I was doing UX at the time and I was doing hands-on coding as well.

所以，我当时正在做用户体验，同时也在做实践编码。

So we're very, very integrated.

所以我们非常非常融洽。

Everybody does a little bit of everything.

每个人每件事都只做一点点。

All of us were coding.

我们所有人都在编码。

Ryan Singer: Jason was in the actual app templates as well doing HTML and CSS to do the views.

Ryan Singer：Jason 也在实际的应用程序模板中使用 HTML 和 CSS 来制作视图。

He's doing hands-on design.

他正在亲自动手设计。

We're all very much connected with why are we building this?

我们都非常关心为什么要建造这个？

What is this?

这是什么？

David's doing the bulk of the programming, and Jason and I were having these little sessions.

大卫负责大部分编程工作，杰森和我则负责这些小会议。

Ryan Singer: These little sessions where we would really figure out what the idea was and there would be this moment where you would have a few strokes of this Sharpie pen on a big pad of paper and all of a sudden you'd be like, "Oh yeah, that's the idea.

That's the thing we want to go try to build."

这就是我们想要尝试构建的东西。”

Ryan Singer: And for me, those sessions with Jason, they were these short, very, very intense sessions where you're trying to crack the nut together.

Where's the idea?

想法在哪里？

What's the concept?

这是什么概念？

How can we go...

我们怎样才能去...

What's this thing that we're going to go and 10 hours later, right, David's going to come back and we're going to be like, "This is awesome.

我们要去的是什么，10 小时后，大卫会回来，我们会说，“这太棒了。

This thing works and it does something we're excited about," right?

这东西有效，而且它做了一些让我们兴奋的事情，”对吧？

Ryan Singer: That was really the seedling.

瑞安·辛格：那确实是幼苗。

I mean, actually that continued over years and years and years, those sessions.

我的意思是，实际上这些会议持续了很多年。

And that's the seedling of this word in the book shaping.

而这就是书中塑造的这个词的苗子。

What does it mean to do shaping?

塑形是什么意思？

It wasn't sitting alone writing a document, it wasn't making a bunch of requirements.

它不是单独写一份文档，也不是提出一堆要求。

Ryan Singer: It wasn't making a beautiful Figma file to represent a concept that could maybe be a feature.

Ryan Singer：我们并没有制作一个漂亮的 Figma 文件来代表一个可能成为功能的概念。

It was this super intense, really exciting collaborative, "What about this?

这是一种超级激烈、非常令人兴奋的合作，“这个怎么样？

What about that?

那又怎样呢？

Oh, maybe this." So that was a really big part of how we worked also.

哦，也许是这个。”所以这也是我们工作方式的一个非常重要的部分。

Ryan Singer: Very intensely collaborative sessions to figure out what the idea is and getting it sharp enough and crispy enough that we could very confidently get a yes from David.

That he would know exactly what it is and what it means and come back.

他会确切地知道这是什么以及这意味着什么，然后回来。

Ryan Singer: It would be what we pictured and it would work the way that we hoped so that we would keep going and we wouldn't have to reverse or go back to the drawing board.

Lenny Rachitsky: What it sounds like is essentially you're trying to maintain the startup way of working as the company grows.

Lenny Rachitsky：听起来本质上是随着公司的发展，你试图维持初创公司的工作方式。

Everything you're describing is how it feels to be at a startup, and this is a method to keep that.

你所描述的一切都是在初创公司的感觉，这是保持这种感觉的一种方法。

Does that sound right?

听起来对吗？

Ryan Singer: That's exactly what became Shape Up, was how do we hold onto that as much as possible?

Ryan Singer：这正是 Shape Up 的初衷，我们如何尽可能地坚持下去？

I mean, one big ingredient, we had an advantage also, which was that Jason and David hired so deliberately slowly, and this is a fortunate side effect of the fact that they didn't take investment money.

Ryan Singer: So there was never that moment of now's the moment when we grow.

瑞安·辛格（Ryan Singer）：所以现在从来没有那个时刻是我们成长的时刻。

It was always one person.

一直都是一个人。

And then the organism adapts.

然后有机体就会适应。

One more person.

又一个人。

And so, this natural way of working, it was organically spreading.

因此，这种自然的工作方式正在有机地传播。

There were, I think, maybe 10 years before we had the first, "Wait a minute, what just happened?" That project didn't go well, that's not how things normally run.

我想，也许是在 10 年前我们才第一次问：“等一下，刚刚发生了什么？”那个项目进展不顺利，事情不是正常进行的。

Ryan Singer: Of course there were always ups and downs, but it was about 10 years later when we had the first project.

Ryan Singer：当然总是有起有落，但大约 10 年后我们有了第一个项目。

I mean, I remember the project.

我的意思是，我记得这个项目。

I remember being at the end of...

我记得在最后...

It was at that time already, it had been maybe six weeks or seven weeks.

We hadn't yet completely locked the six-week thing that went into Shape Up.

Ryan Singer: And I remember we had a review session and there was a fairly new person who's doing half of the work on that team, and we had the review session and it was like instead of, "Oh, look, this is about ready to ship." It was like, "There are a lot of open questions here."

Ryan Singer: "And not only are there a lot of open questions here, we're not getting quick answers as we're asking." And what we're starting to realize is like, "Oh, not only is this not going to ship, but we can't even see the end of this."

瑞安·辛格（Ryan Singer）：“这里不仅有很多悬而未决的问题，而且我们没有像我们所问的那样快速得到答案。”我们开始意识到，“哦，这不仅不会发货，而且我们甚至看不到结局。”

Ryan Singer: That was one of those moments where you're like, "Oh, this isn't going to automatically, organically just keep it spreading as we hire forever." You know what I mean?

瑞安·辛格（Ryan Singer）：那是你会想的时刻之一，“哦，这不会自动、有机地随着我们永远雇用而继续传播。”你知道我的意思吗？

We did reach a point where it's like, "Oh, we're going to have to figure out when this goes well, why does it go well and what do we do differently and how do we formalize that so it's reproducible as we keep onboarding more people?"

我们确实达到了这样一个地步：“哦，我们必须弄清楚什么时候进展顺利，为什么会进展顺利，我们应该采取哪些不同的做法，以及如何将其形式化，以便在我们不断吸引更多人的时候它可以重现？”

Ryan Singer: That's actually when Shape Up as a framework started.

That's when I really started to lean in and I took over that responsibility of, "Okay, how do I systematize this?"

Lenny Rachitsky: That's a great segue to let's actually talk about how the Shape Up method works.

Maybe just at a high level, what are the core ingredients to the Shape Up method?

也许从高层次来说，Shape Up 方法的核心要素是什么？

Ryan Singer: There's basically three maybe big things.

So, the first thing is this notion of we are not going to start something unless we can see the end from the beginning.

所以，第一件事是，除非我们能从一开始就看到结局，否则我们不会开始某件事。

So, we're not going to take a big concept and then say, "What's the estimate for this thing?" We're not going to say, "Oh, we need to build a calendar and then do a whole bunch of Figma files or write a whole bunch of requirements and then ask for an estimate."

所以，我们不会采取一个大的概念，然后说：“这个东西的估计是多少？”我们不会说，“哦，我们需要构建一个日历，然后制作一大堆 Figma 文件或编写一大堆要求，然后要求估算。”

Ryan Singer: We're going to go the other way around and we're going to say, "What is our appetite for this?

瑞安·辛格：我们会反其道而行之，我们会说，“我们对此有什么兴趣？

What is the maximum amount of time we're willing to go before we actually finish something?" And we have that startup moment that we talked about.

在我们真正完成某件事之前，我们愿意花的最多时间是多少？”我们有我们谈到的启动时刻。

That moment of like, "Ah, you know what I mean?

那一刻就像是，“啊，你知道我的意思吗？

It works.

它有效。

We got somewhere." At least this, if not the whole project, this meaningful piece, we can literally walk away from.

我们到某个地方了。”至少这个，如果不是整个项目，这个有意义的部分，我们可以从字面上离开。

Ryan Singer: So then what we found was that there was a lot of experimentation.

瑞安·辛格：然后我们发现有很多实验。

We found that six weeks is the maximum that we can see into the future where we could actually say, "How do we work backward and figure out something we could build in that six weeks and really land it?"

我们发现，六周是我们可以预见的未来的最长期限，我们实际上可以说，“我们如何向后工作，找出我们可以在这六周内建造的东西并真正实现它？”

Ryan Singer: That's the first piece.

瑞安·辛格：这是第一首曲子。

Is working backward from the amount of time we actually want to spend on something and say, "What can we do?

是从我们实际想要花在某件事上的时间倒推并说：“我们能做什么？

What could we shape so that after that amount of time we've gotten to somewhere we want to be?"

我们可以塑造什么，以便在经过一段时间后我们能够到达我们想要到达的地方？”

Ryan Singer: It's like if you're going to buy a car or you're going to buy a house or you're going to rent a new flat or whatever, you have to have a budget in mind, right?

瑞安·辛格：这就像如果你要买一辆车、买一套房子、或者要租一套新公寓或其他什么，你就必须有一个预算，对吧？

And the budget then is how you choose between all kinds of alternatives and make a lot of hard choices and trade-offs to figure out like, "Well, I want the faster engine, but I have to give this up, or I want it to be fun to drive, but we also need space for longer road trips." You're making all these trade-offs, right?

然后预算就是你如何在各种替代方案之间进行选择，并做出很多艰难的选择和权衡，以弄清楚，“好吧，我想要更快的发动机，但我必须放弃这个，或者我希望它驾驶起来很有趣，但我们也需要更长的公路旅行空间。”你正在做出所有这些权衡，对吗？

Ryan Singer: So, this second piece is this work that we call shaping and the shaping work is, how do we actually take this fixed amount of time that we've given for ourselves and vary the scope?

瑞安·辛格：那么，第二件作品就是我们所说的塑造工作，而塑造工作就是，我们实际上如何利用我们为自己提供的固定时间并改变范围？

How do we come up with a idea, some version of this that's going to work in the amount of time that the business is interested in spending?

我们如何想出一个想法，这个想法的某个版本，可以在企业有兴趣花费的时间内发挥作用？

Ryan Singer: So, this is those creative sessions that I was talking about where we're jumping all over the room in front of the whiteboard and getting to an idea.

瑞安·辛格（Ryan Singer）：所以，这就是我所说的那些创意会议，我们在白板前跳遍整个房间并得出一个想法。

And there, the really key thing is that we're getting to an idea where we can see the idea.

在那里，真正关键的事情是我们正在形成一个我们可以看到这个想法的想法。

We understand why we're doing this.

我们明白为什么要这样做。

Ryan Singer: We're wrestling with the problem and we're wrestling with the solution until we have an idea that we can actually say, "This is what we want to go build." So it's not just calendar or dashboard or newsletter builder, but it's this idea of how we're going to tackle this problem about the calendar request, right?

Ryan Singer：我们正在努力解决问题，我们正在努力寻找解决方案，直到我们有了一个可以真正说“这就是我们想要构建的东西”的想法。因此，这不仅仅是日历、仪表板或新闻通讯生成器，而是我们如何解决有关日历请求的问题的想法，对吗？

So that's the shaping.

所以这就是塑造。

Ryan Singer: And then the third piece is when we've actually carved out a fixed amount of time, when we've shaped a solution that is from a experience standpoint, from a functionality standpoint, from a technical standpoint, doable and desirable, something that we can make happen in that amount of time, then we can give it to a team.

Ryan Singer：然后第三部分是当我们实际上划出了固定的时间，当我们从体验的角度、从功能的角度、从技术的角度形成了一个解决方案，可行且理想的，我们可以在这段时间内实现的事情，然后我们可以将其交给团队。

Ryan Singer: We don't have to do the sometimes called scrum, the paper shredder.

Ryan Singer：我们不必做有时被称为 scrum 的碎纸机。

That's where you take an idea and then you split it into 100 tickets, right, and you hope that it all glues together still after you've done that step.

这就是你提出一个想法，然后将其分成 100 张票，对吧，你希望在完成这一步后，所有这些仍然粘在一起。

We don't want to do that.

我们不想这样做。

Ryan Singer: Instead, we want to have a whole idea, give it to a team so they see the whole, they really understand it, right?

Ryan Singer：相反，我们希望有一个完整的想法，将其交给团队，以便他们看到整体，他们真正理解它，对吧？

And then they can come up with their tasks and they can figure out how to track that and break it into pieces so they can actually take more responsibility.

然后他们可以提出他们的任务，他们可以找出如何跟踪它并将其分解成碎片，这样他们实际上可以承担更多的责任。

Ryan Singer: And so what we see is way more engagement, especially from the technical team, right?

Ryan Singer：所以我们看到的是更多的参与，尤其是技术团队的参与，对吗？

Because instead of, "Here's your ticket," or "Here's your user story," it's like, "Here's the thing you understand, that makes sense, and now you're going to have freedom to figure out how to actually make this a reality."

因为不是“这是你的门票”或“这是你的用户故事”，而是“这是你理解的、有意义的东西，现在你将可以自由地弄清楚如何真正使其成为现实。”

Ryan Singer: There's going to be a million things to solve in the implementation detail, and now you have a bunch of fun problems and you don't have to keep asking questions to other people to understand what this is or how do I make a trade off or that thing.

Ryan Singer：在实现细节中将有一百万个问题需要解决，现在你有很多有趣的问题，你不必不断向其他人提问来理解这是什么或者我如何进行权衡或那件事。

Lenny Rachitsky: One of the core elements of this, and I want to confirm is that you can pick and choose these things into your team.

Lenny Rachitsky：其中的核心要素之一，我想确认的是，你可以挑选这些东西到你的团队中。

You don't need to do this wholesale, correct?

你不需要批发，对吗？

Ryan Singer: You don't need to do any of it.

瑞安·辛格：你不需要做任何事情。

So, this is where it helps to look at what's going wrong and what are we trying to fix?

那么，这有助于了解问题出在哪里以及我们要解决什么问题？

And then what do I want to bring into this, right?

然后我想把什么带入其中，对吗？

Ryan Singer: And usually, what I notice is that people, they like to start sometimes with, "Oh, I want to give the team, let's say six weeks and I want to give the team more latitude or let's say more creative freedom, that they're going to be responsible in this six weeks to figure out how to make it happen."

瑞安·辛格：通常，我注意到人们有时喜欢这样开始：“哦，我想给团队，比如说六周的时间，我想给团队更多的自由度，或者说更多的创作自由，他们将在这六周内负责弄清楚如何实现这一目标。”

Ryan Singer: And usually a lot of the drive for that is, "I'm getting tired of having so many meetings and rituals and things that are not actually working on the problem and doing the work." I mean, especially scrum teams, they often complain about that.

瑞安·辛格（Ryan Singer）：通常，这样做的大部分动力是，“我厌倦了这么多的会议和仪式以及实际上并不能解决问题和完成工作的事情。”我的意思是，尤其是 Scrum 团队，他们经常抱怨这一点。

Ryan Singer: So, what they sometimes see in this is like, "Oh, I love this idea that the team is just going to be cooking for six weeks and they're not going to, we're going to meet as needed and we're going to workshop things, but we're not going to be busy with all these rituals all the time," right?

瑞安·辛格：所以，他们有时会看到这样的情况，“哦，我喜欢这个想法，团队只会做饭六周，但他们不会这样做，我们将根据需要开会，我们将讨论一些事情，但我们不会一直忙于所有这些仪式，”对吧？

Ryan Singer: Now, the thing that's tricky is that if you want that reality of the team happily buzzing and humming like some happy bee colony for this six weeks, they need to have a lot more clarity around what's the thing that we're solving, right?

Ryan Singer：现在，棘手的是，如果你希望团队在这六周内像快乐的蜂群一样快乐地嗡嗡作响，他们需要更清楚地了解我们正在解决的问题，对吧？

Ryan Singer: And so when we start working backward from that, then what we see is that, "Oh, well, if we don't shape better, then the team isn't going to have the clarity that they need to take over that responsibility, so they can make choices and make decisions and make trade offs so that they can get to the end of this thing." And the worst is that sometimes see cases where people are like, "Okay, we're doing Shape Up.

瑞安·辛格：所以当我们开始从这个角度开始向后工作时，我们会看到，“哦，好吧，如果我们不能更好地塑造，那么团队就不会清楚地知道他们需要接管这一责任，因此他们可以做出选择、做出决定并做出权衡，以便他们能够完成这件事。”最糟糕的是，有时人们会说，“好吧，我们正在做塑身活动。

So, you guys are going to build the newsletter builder, okay?

那么，你们要构建时事通讯生成器，好吗？

But you only get six weeks to do it.

但你只有六周的时间来做这件事。

So use your fixed time, vary your scope and enjoy your responsibility." You know what I mean?

因此，利用你的固定时间，改变你的范围并享受你的责任。”你知道我的意思？

Which is just cruel, right?

这太残酷了，对吧？

Ryan Singer: Because I think I'll quote Bob Moesta, who's been on your show a couple times, "You can't put 10 pounds of crap in a five pound bag." So, it's a high academic statement and we can't just take any project, no matter how giant it is, and then throw it at a team and say, "Figure it out and ship something meaningful in six weeks by cutting away scope," right?

瑞恩·辛格：因为我想我会引用鲍勃·莫埃斯塔的话，他曾多次参加过你的节目，“你不能把 10 磅的垃圾放进一个 5 磅的袋子里。”所以，这是一个很高的学术声明，我们不能只是接受任何项目，无论它有多大，然后把它扔给一个团队并说，“通过削减范围，在六周内弄清楚并交付一些有意义的东西，”对吗？

Ryan Singer: So, it starts to raise questions about how do we actually decide together what this project is?

瑞安·辛格（Ryan Singer）：所以，这开始提出这样的问题：我们如何真正共同决定这个项目是什么？

Do we actually have clarity around what the idea is and what we're going to build?

我们真的清楚这个想法是什么以及我们要构建什么吗？

Lenny Rachitsky: Let me follow up on a couple of the elements.

Lenny Rachitsky：让我跟进几个要素。

So appetites, I think for any product manager, engineer, designer, anyone that has experienced, "Okay, we estimate this landing page is going to take a couple of weeks.

因此，我认为对于任何产品经理、工程师、设计师以及任何经历过的人来说，“好吧，我们估计这个登陆页面将需要几周的时间。

Great, let's work on it," and then it ends up being six weeks can understand why this makes sense.

太好了，让我们一起努力吧”，然后六周后就可以理解为什么这是有意义的。

Lenny Rachitsky: It's just like, "This landing page is not that important to us.

Lenny Rachitsky：就像，“这个登陆页面对我们来说并不那么重要。

Let us just say we will commit two weeks to it.

我们只是说我们将承诺两周时间。

We'll do as much as we can in two weeks and then we move on.

我们将在两周内尽我们所能，然后继续前进。

And scope is not allowed to go beyond that." Makes total sense.

并且范围不允许超出这个范围。”完全有道理。

This just makes so much sense as you listen to this, especially for people that have...

当你听这个的时候，这很有意义，特别是对于那些……

Lenny Rachitsky: So much sense as you listen to this, especially for people that have just fallen into the problems of estimates not being accurate.

Lenny Rachitsky：你听这个很有道理，特别是对于那些刚刚陷入估计不准确问题的人来说。

Then there's a six-week element and the key there is your, and this is counter to maybe two-week sprints like Scrum, is that kind of the where this comes?

然后有一个为期六周的元素，关键是你的，这与 Scrum 等两周的冲刺相反，这就是它的来源吗？

Ryan Singer: So, actually, it turns out that the six-week is only a maximum and that's really where this number does some work for us.

瑞安·辛格：实际上，事实证明六周只是最长期限，而这确实是这个数字对我们有用的地方。

If we think of six weeks as a maximum, that's going to force us to ask some really good questions to ourselves about what piece of this do we really think we can land?

如果我们认为最多六周，这将迫使我们向自己提出一些非常好的问题，即我们真正认为我们可以着陆其中的哪一部分？

Because if you try to say, in six months, we're going to ship this thing, you can't get your arms around all of the problems that have to get solved for an entire six-month chunk of work to actually happen.

因为如果你想说，在六个月内，我们将交付这个东西，你就无法解决整个六个月工作实际发生时必须解决的所有问题。

There are so many unknowns, there are so many ticking time bombs of things that we didn't understand or couldn't foresee, but if we set a ceiling at six weeks, we have a much better chance of, I think that's the size of something where we can actually shape it and surface enough unknowns and reveal that complexity before we're in the middle of it.

有太多的未知数，有太多我们不理解或无法预见的定时炸弹，但如果我们将上限设定为六周，我们就有更好的机会，我认为这就是我们可以实际塑造它并暴露足够的未知数并在我们陷入其中之前揭示其复杂性的东西的大小。

Ryan Singer: It doesn't mean that we can't use this technique to do a two-week project, especially if you're on a growth team, you don't want to wait six weeks or, you know what I mean?

Ryan Singer：这并不意味着我们不能使用这种技术来做一个为期两周的项目，特别是如果你在一个增长团队中，你不想等待六周，或者，你知道我的意思吗？

You're going to have to artificially bundle things together to do six weeks.

你必须人为地将事情捆绑在一起才能完成六周的时间。

It's like, look, I've got something I want to ship in the next week and then I've got a thing that might take two weeks after that and then a week after that.

就像，看，我有一些东西想要在下周内发货，然后我有一个东西可能需要两周后，然后一周后才能发货。

So, it's more a question of what we're trying to take on.

所以，这更多的是我们要尝试做什么的问题。

It's really that upper limit.

确实是这个上限。

Lenny Rachitsky: Okay.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：好的。

So, it could be a two-week cycle and the appetite is-

所以，这可能是一个两周的周期，而胃口是-

Lenny Rachitsky: Cool.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：酷。

So, it's like we're going to build this new landing page, we're going to give it two weeks and then do a shaping session on that.

所以，就像我们要构建这个新的登陆页面一样，我们将给它两周的时间，然后对此进行一次塑造会议。

Ryan Singer: Now, the other side of that is when it comes to feature development or building something that's going to be needy enough to sell, then there's very few things that are going to be a substantial value add to a product that you can do in two weeks.

Ryan Singer：现在，另一方面是，当涉及到功能开发或构建需要足够销售的东西时，很少有事情可以在两周内完成，从而为产品带来实质性的增值。

So, then you get into a point where, well now, we're just sprinting and we're just taking one bite after the other.

所以，然后你就进入了一个地步，现在，我们只是冲刺，我们只是一口接一口地咬下去。

And then that's where we can land in that situation where we feel like, "Ah, I can never see the end of this.

然后我们就会陷入这样的境地：“啊，我永远看不到这一切的结局。

I just keep going back and saying, one more sprint, one more sprint, one more sprint." But six weeks is this long enough chunk or sometimes, four weeks that the question is kind of, what's big enough that we can actually get somewhere with this amount of time?

我只是不断回头说，再冲刺一次，再冲刺一次，再冲刺一次。”但六周已经足够长了，有时四个星期就足够了，问题是，什么足够大，我们可以用这么长的时间真正到达某个地方？

Lenny Rachitsky: And there's an implied element to this that I think is worth highlighting.

Lenny Rachitsky：我认为其中有一个隐含的元素值得强调。

The whole idea is you commit to the appetite and if you are not on track to hit that instead of extending the date you cut in order to still hit it.

整个想法是，你要致力于满足胃口，如果你没有达到目标，而不是延长你削减的日期，以便仍然达到目标。

This is a tricky one.: So, you're right that it's implied, but the thing is, in real life, if you make a commitment and you get alignment that we are going to spend six weeks of engineering time building this thing, if you get to that end of that six weeks and something is going wrong, it wasn't shaped, we can't see the end of it.

这是一个棘手的问题。：所以，你说得对，它是隐含的，但问题是，在现实生活中，如果你做出承诺并且你一致同意我们将花费六周的工程时间来构建这个东西，如果你在那六周结束时出现了问题，那么它就没有成型，我们看不到它的结束。

It's more complicated than we thought.

这比我们想象的更复杂。

All these different things.

所有这些不同的事情。

And by the way, we can also talk about why those things happen, but when we get in that situation, if we're at the end of the six weeks and it's not looking good, we can't just cut off what we agreed to that made this thing valuable.

顺便说一句，我们也可以讨论为什么会发生这些事情，但是当我们遇到这种情况时，如果我们在六周结束时而且情况看起来不太好，我们就不能直接中断我们同意的使这件事变得有价值的事情。

We can't just cut the scope and say, "Oh, well now, we managed to ship inside of six weeks." That's going to kill everybody's morale.

我们不能只是缩小范围并说：“哦，现在，我们设法在六周内发货。”这会打击所有人的士气。

Everyone's going to feel disappointed.

每个人都会感到失望。

We're going to feel like this wasn't really worthwhile.

我们会觉得这真的不值得。

This is a tricky one.: And now, we go into the next cycle with this debt feeling that we didn't actually finish the thing we were supposed to finish, so now, we're like overtime.

这是一个棘手的问题：现在，我们带着债务进入下一个周期，感觉我们实际上没有完成我们应该完成的事情，所以现在，我们就像加班一样。

None of that is good.

这些都不好。

And if we also go the other extreme and just say, well, should we say in the book, we had this principle at base camp which was this notion of the circuit breaker.

如果我们也走另一个极端，只是说，好吧，我们应该在书中说，我们在大本营有这个原则，这就是断路器的概念。

If a project is not on track to actually finish after the six weeks, we're just going to cancel it and rethink.

如果一个项目在六周后仍未能真正完成，我们就会取消它并重新考虑。

Almost no teams have the stomach for that, but the version of that that's more stomachable is look, we can't just cancel the project and then say, "Let's see what comes next." But what we can do is say, "We're not going to keep reinvesting in something that we don't understand."

几乎没有团队愿意这样做，但更容易接受的版本是，我们不能只是取消该项目，然后说，“让我们看看接下来会发生什么。”但我们能做的就是说：“我们不会继续对我们不理解的东西进行再投资。”

This is a tricky one.: So, let's take this out of build mode and bring this back into shaping mode, which might mean different people, a different conversation asking different questions, doing a different kind of work to suss out what is it that's fuzzy here?

这是一个棘手的问题。：所以，让我们将其从构建模式中带回塑造模式，这可能意味着不同的人，不同的对话提出不同的问题，做不同类型的工作来弄清楚这里模糊的是什么？

What is it that we couldn't see?

到底是什么是我们看不到的呢？

What do we not understand?

我们不明白什么？

How do we get to the clarity that we need, so that we can actually say this thing is going to happen if we give it another whack.

Lenny Rachitsky: I love just how real this approach is not this theoretical.

Lenny Rachitsky：我喜欢这种方法的真实性，而不是理论上的。

Okay, cool.

好吧，酷。

After six weeks, use just the scope and it's all that's cool.

六周后，只需使用瞄准镜就可以了。

Ryan Singer: I've seen some Shape Up adoptions that looked like that by the way, and that's not the way.

Ryan Singer：顺便说一句，我看到过一些 Shape Up 的采用看起来像这样，但事实并非如此。

The shaping step is crucial.

塑形步骤至关重要。

And what you mentioned with your landing page example, by the way, it's so seductive because we can imagine, oh, Parkinson's law, right?

顺便说一句，您在着陆页示例中提到的内容非常诱人，因为我们可以想象，哦，帕金森定律，对吗？

If you give me six weeks to do the landing page, I'll find a way to use it, but if you give me two weeks, then I'll stop after two weeks.

如果你给我六周的时间来制作登陆页面，我会找到一种使用它的方法，但如果你给我两周的时间，那么我会在两周后停止。

But when it comes to real product work, where there's some functionality that we have to figure out how to make it exist, we can't just cut the scope if we run out of time.

但当涉及到实际的产品工作时，我们必须弄清楚如何实现某些功能，如果时间不够，我们就不能仅仅缩小范围。

So, what it means is that the shaping work is really working hard together to figure out what are the main moving pieces of this thing.

所以，这意味着塑造工作确实在共同努力，找出这个东西的主要移动部分是什么。

How do we narrow down our understanding of the problem and how do we identify what the moving parts are of the solution and what actually connects together for this feature to work?

我们如何缩小对问题的理解，如何确定解决方案的移动部分以及实际上是什么连接在一起才能使该功能发挥作用？

Ryan Singer: And when we really get to the level where we can say, "Oh, we need to do this, this, and then the engine is going to turn," that's the place where we can say, "Oh, this is well-shaped." And it's a different kind of work.

瑞安·辛格：当我们真正达到可以说“哦，我们需要这样做，这个，然后引擎就会转动”的水平时，我们就可以说，“哦，这形状很好。”这是一种不同的工作。

In shaping in real life, we call it, we actually teach it as doing live shaping sessions, and this was how I did it for years with Jason.

We'd get into the room and I had both the technical and the UX side, so both sides were represented there in one person in that case, but for a lot of teams today, we actually teach them how to bring the senior engineering person who isn't just senior in title, the one who actually knows where the bodies are buried, how the old stuff works and what's truly possible and what's hard and what's easy in our infrastructure, like the person that really knows.

我们走进房间，我负责技术和用户体验方面的工作，所以在这种情况下，双方都由一个人代表，但对于今天的很多团队来说，我们实际上教他们如何带上高级工程人员，他们不仅仅是头衔上的高级人员，而是真正知道尸体埋在哪里、旧东西如何工作、什么是真正可能的、什么是我们的基础设施中困难和容易的人，就像真正了解的人一样。

Ryan Singer: You bring that person together with the product person who deeply understands the backstory of why this is an opportunity and what we're trying to solve with this.

Ryan Singer：你将这个人与产品人员聚集在一起，他们深刻理解为什么这是一个机会以及我们试图解决的问题。

And then a designer in the room and they're whiteboarding and wrestling with each other to get to what's a version of this thing that we believe in that's real that we can actually finish in that time.

然后房间里有一位设计师，他们在白板上互相争论，以得到我们相信我们可以在那时真正完成的真实版本。

Lenny Rachitsky: This is great.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：这太棒了。

Let's go one level deeper on this shaping session.

让我们更深入地了解这个塑造课程。

So, a few tactical questions.

那么，一些战术问题。

How long are these sessions?

这些会议持续多长时间？

It sounds like the people that join are a designer and an engineer and an NPM.

听起来加入的人是设计师、工程师和 NPM。

So, add anything else there.

所以，在那里添加其他东西。

And when do they happen is at the end of a...

它们什么时候发生，是在……结束时。

Do you call it a cycle by the way or sprint, the six-ish week period?

顺便说一句，你称之为周期还是冲刺，也就是六周左右的时间？

Ryan Singer: What I actually like is time box actually, because the thing is that some teams need regular cycles because they have parallel teams and they need that cadence in order to reduce management overhead.

Ryan Singer：我真正喜欢的是时间框，因为事情是一些团队需要定期的周期，因为他们有平行的团队，他们需要这种节奏来减少管理开销。

But if you're small and you only have one or two teams, you might not need to be on a fixed cadence or a cycle plan.

但如果您规模较小并且只有一两个团队，则可能不需要采用固定的节奏或周期计划。

You might be able to just set one time box after another.

您也许可以设置一个又一个的时间框。

So, the key thing is actually that that time is pushing back at you and that you're being intentional about, what's my time budget that I need to shape into?

所以，关键的事情实际上是，时间正在对你产生影响，而你是有意识的，我需要调整的时间预算是多少？

Lenny Rachitsky: Let me take a quick tangent because if you're, that's so interesting that the time boxes can be very different lengths.

Imagine at a larger company, this gets complicated when other teams are trying, there's dependencies and timelines launch and go to market dates and all these things.

想象一下，在一家较大的公司，当其他团队正在尝试时，这会变得复杂，存在依赖性和时间表，启动和上市日期以及所有这些事情。

What's the largest company this approach has worked at?

What's the ideal company stage for Shape Up?

Shape Up 理想的公司阶段是怎样的？

Ryan Singer: It can function in very large companies.

We have, for example, I have some friends at a, what is it called?

They're doing clinical trials.

他们正在进行临床试验。

So, they're in the pharmaceutical industry and the companies, thousands of people, and it's not that every team is doing this, but they have a few teams that are working in important areas and they're doing this and it's completely possible in that context, if you have someone who's at a senior level on the engineering side who is able to make the right architectural choices and also do some negotiating and be the backstop to make sure that someone isn't going to get pulled away onto something else, if you can carve out, oh, this system can be worked on independently of that system.

因此，他们在制药行业和公司，有成千上万的人，并不是每个团队都在这样做，但他们有几个团队在重要领域工作，他们正在这样做，在这种情况下这是完全可能的，如果你有一个在工程方面处于高级水平的人，他能够做出正确的架构选择，也能够进行一些谈判，并成为后盾，以确保某人不会被拉到其他事情上，如果你能雕刻的话 out, oh, this system can be worked on independently of that system.

This was actually what David at Basecamp has always been amazing at is this dependency, how...

这实际上是 Basecamp 的 David 一直令人惊奇的地方，那就是这种依赖性，如何……

Ryan Singer: It's actually not.

瑞安·辛格：实际上不是。

It's not.

它不是。

So many people are used to it and they think that it's just how it is, but it's actually not.

It is possible for engineering leadership, good engineering leadership untangles things, so we can work on this system without having to be thinking about this other system somewhere else.

工程领导力是可能的，良好的工程领导力可以解决问题，因此我们可以在这个系统上工作，而不必在其他地方考虑另一个系统。

So, when you have some untangling with your infrastructure and with your architecture from an engineering standpoint, then you have some freedom.

因此，当您从工程的角度理清基础设施和架构时，您就有了一些自由。

And then if you can also figure out the capacity management side of I'm going to protect this team from that other work for this number of weeks, you can really get a lot done.

然后，如果您还可以弄清楚我将在这几周内保护该团队免受其他工作的影响，那么您确实可以完成很多工作。

Lenny Rachitsky: This insight that you can operate this way at a larger company and the whole company doesn't have to operate this way, I think is really freeing to a lot of people.

Lenny Rachitsky：这种洞察力表明，你可以在一家更大的公司以这种方式运营，而整个公司不必以这种方式运营，我认为这对很多人来说确实是一种自由。

What's the adapter?

适配器是什么？

And I want to come back to the actual shaping process, but I can't help but ask this.

Say the company's operating a quarterly cadence or six month cadence and then there's a team operating in a two week, sometimes six weeks, sometimes four week cadence advice on how to, what's the adapter that connects those two cadences?

假设公司以季度节奏或六个月节奏运营，然后有一个团队以两周、有时六周、有时四周的节奏运营，建议如何操作，连接这两种节奏的适配器是什么？

Ryan Singer: So, there's two different things.

瑞安·辛格：所以，有两件事不同。

So, I've seen cases where they've decided on a four-week plus two-week or so they'll do five-week and then one week of cool down in between and then they time it so that it adds up to a quarter.

所以，我见过这样的情况，他们决定四个星期加两周左右，然后他们会进行五周，然后在中间进行一周的冷却，然后他们计时，使其加起来达到四分之一。

I've seen that.

我见过那个。

The other thing I've seen is when the team is just continuously delivering meaningful things, it doesn't have to line up because from the executive level, if you are CP or CTO or in these bigger cases, it's more like a VP in some area, but you're coming to the table where you're supposed to be reporting of what your group is doing.

我看到的另一件事是，当团队只是不断地交付有意义的事情时，它不必排队，因为从执行层面来看，如果你是 CP 或 CTO 或在这些更大的情况下，它更像是某个领域的副总裁，但你来到桌子前，你应该报告你的团队正在做什么。

And when you are consistently saying, "We said we were going to do this and nothing finished and now, we're doing this and it's going to finish," and the next time you say, "We said we were going to do that and it's finished, without excuses and without, well, maybe another few more months or we're working at it," that's what everyone wants to see is that movement.

当你不断地说，“我们说过我们要这么做，但什么都没完成，而现在，我们正在做这件事，它将会完成”，而下一次你说，“我们说过我们要这么做，它已经完成了，没有任何借口，也没有，好吧，也许再过几个月，或者我们正在努力”，这就是每个人都想看到的运动。

Lenny Rachitsky: Yeah, if you're doing great, people will leave you alone.

That makes sense.

这是有道理的。

Lenny Rachitsky: I love that.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：我喜欢这个。

I love that point.

我喜欢这一点。

Okay, coming back to shaping, maybe one way that would make it real easy for people to understand, what's the output of the shaping session?

Ryan Singer: The output of the shaping session is, and by the way, about shaping session, maybe we can talk a little bit about what shaping is not because we need the contrast sometimes.

Ryan Singer：塑造会话的输出是，顺便说一下，关于塑造会话，也许我们可以谈谈塑造不是什么，因为有时我们需要对比。

So, very often, when people try Shape Up, what I see is a product team creating either a lot of Figma files or maybe a lot of documentation, like a PRD with a bunch of requirements and a bunch of backstory and good reasons why we're doing this and stuff like that.

所以，很多时候，当人们尝试 Shape Up 时，我看到的是一个产品团队创建了很多 Figma 文件，或者可能是很多文档，比如带有一堆需求和一堆背景故事的 PRD，以及我们这样做的充分理由。

And what you see is that when you give that to a team as this is what we shaped, what happens is it blows out.

So, you probably know about what happens when the Figma file makes first contact with the engineering team.

There's a reality check that happens there and very often, there's a back to the drawing board.

So, when there's a lot of solutioning all the way down to detail without engineering involved, usually, that's a painful recipe and then it's like, "No, we can't do that," or, "Actually, it doesn't work like that."

因此，当有很多解决方案一直到细节而不涉及工程时，通常这是一个痛苦的秘诀，然后就像是，“不，我们不能这样做”，或者“实际上，它不是那样工作的。”

Ryan Singer: And then on top of it, the other big challenge is that there's so much that you can't see on the surface of a UI.

Ryan Singer：除此之外，另一个巨大的挑战是，有太多东西是你在 UI 表面上看不到的。

How do we flow from here to there?

我们如何从这里流向那里？

What are the different cases of logic?

逻辑有哪些不同的情况？

In which case do we move from here to here to here in the flow?

在什么情况下我们会在流程中从这里移动到这里？

What is happening behind the scenes?

幕后发生了什么？

It's like the engineering team, they have to put on their x-ray goggles and study this thing to try and understand what's happening underneath.

就像工程团队一样，他们必须戴上 X 射线护目镜并研究这个东西，尝试了解下面发生的情况。

I often use this analogy of if you're doing a home renovation, you can have the most beautiful rendering of here's the new bedroom, and we're going to have these lamps on the side of the bed that are coming out from the wall, and you can have the perfect rendering and the perfect lamp and the perfect color, but if you haven't checked if there's electricity in that wall there or not, it's going to drastically change the cost and the time and everything if you're going to have to rip open those walls to feed some lines up to those lamps.

我经常用这样的类比，如果你正在进行家庭装修，你可以得到新卧室最漂亮的渲染图，我们将把这些灯放在床边从墙上伸出来，你可以得到完美的渲染图、完美的灯和完美的颜色，但如果你没有检查那堵墙是否有电，如果你必须撕开那些灯，那么成本、时间和一切都会发生巨大的变化。墙壁为这些灯提供一些线路。

Ryan Singer: So, what we need to do in a shaping session when it's going well is we come out with some kind of drawing or diagram where engineers, product, and design are all looking at that and they're saying, "We understand that.

Ryan Singer：所以，当一切进展顺利时，我们在塑造会议中需要做的就是拿出某种绘图或图表，让工程师、产品和设计人员都在关注它，然后他们说：“我们理解这一点。

I know exactly what to go build." I'll use the example of the calendar from the book.

我确切地知道要建造什么。”我将使用书中日历的示例。

So, what is a calendar?

那么，什么是日历？

So, first of all, there was this work that we had to do before we could even shape it, which is like, can we actually narrow down this problem?

所以，首先，在我们塑造它之前，我们必须先做这项工作，这就像，我们真的可以缩小这个问题的范围吗？

In shaping in real life, we call this framing.

在现实生活中的塑造中，我们称之为框架。

And in the book, there's a chapter called Setting the Boundaries where we get into this and it's like, look, we are not going to just build calendar, which is Google Calendar.

书中有一章名为“设置边界”，我们在其中讨论了这一点，我们不会只构建日历，即 Google 日历。

Who knows where it ends?

谁知道它在哪里结束？

We narrowed it down to we understand that for our specific customers who are requesting this again and again, it's more about I need to see empty spaces and in the existing agenda view, I can only see things that are already scheduled and I can't see free spaces where I could book something.

我们缩小了范围，我们了解到，对于一次又一次提出此要求的特定客户，更多的是我需要看到空的空间，在现有的议程视图中，我只能看到已经安排好的事情，而看不到可以预订的空闲空间。

Ryan Singer: So, we got to that point of what we're trying to solve here is the empty spaces.

Ryan Singer：所以，我们现在要解决的问题是空白区域。

So, that's a good frame.

所以，这是一个很好的框架。

Then what are we actually going to build?

那么我们实际上要构建什么？

We came to, here's a good rule of thumb.

我们发现，这是一个很好的经验法则。

If it's shaped well, you can usually describe it in less than 10 moving pieces.

如果形状好的话，通常可以用不到10个动人的片段来描述它。

If I can say, "It's going to have this, this, this, this, this, and this," and that's how we're going to let people see the empty spaces, that's a good indicator that it's clear enough that it's shaped well.

如果我可以说，“它将有这个，这个，这个，这个，这个，还有这个”，这就是我们如何让人们看到空白的空间，这是一个很好的指标，表明它足够清晰，形状很好。

So, in this case, when you go to an airline and you want to book something, you see this two-month grid.

因此，在这种情况下，当您去航空公司想要预订一些东西时，您会看到这个两个月的网格。

So, it's like there's going to be two months side by side, but they're just going to have dots in them to indicate if there's a free day or not, if there's something in that day or not, like the iPhone calendar, I think still has this where it's just dots on the month view.

所以，就像会有两个月并排一样，但它们只是用点来表示是否有空闲的一天，或者那天是否有东西，就像 iPhone 日历一样，我认为仍然有这个，它只是月视图上的点。

Ryan Singer: And then if you tap a day with a dot in it or without a dot in it, there's going to be an agenda view that slides underneath, which is going to show you what's scheduled in that day.

瑞安·辛格：然后，如果你点击其中有点或没有点的一天，就会在下面滑动一个议程视图，它会向你显示当天的安排。

And then there's going to be navigation to go forward and back in the months, there's going to be a create button to create an event, and that's more or less it.

然后将有几个月内前进和后退的导航，将有一个创建按钮来创建事件，仅此而已。

So, what you can see here is it's not like, what is a calendar?

所以，你在这里看到的并不是什么是日历？

It's not a calendar.

这不是日历。

It's a two-month dot grid with scrolling agenda view underneath and the ability to hit new when you're looking at an empty space to create something in what you're viewing.

这是一个为期两个月的点网格，下方有滚动议程视图，当您查看空白空间时，能够在您正在查看的内容中创建一些新内容。

So, that's the kind of thing where that's shaped and we can talk about what that means and what it entails, and we can have a really practical, realistic conversation about, is that a thing we can do in six weeks?

所以，这就是这样的事情，我们可以讨论这意味着什么以及它需要什么，我们可以进行一次非常实际、现实的对话，我们可以在六周内完成这件事吗？

Ryan Singer: That's going to be a real conversation and not looking at a whole bunch of mock-ups and trying to x-ray to figure out what's actually the intent here and what's really real and what's not and what's possible and what's not.

瑞安·辛格（Ryan Singer）：这将是一次真正的对话，而不是看着一大堆模型，试图通过 X 射线来弄清楚这里的实际意图是什么，什么是真正真实的，什么不是，什么是可能的，什么不是。

Lenny Rachitsky: That was a great example.

Lenny Rachitsky：这是一个很好的例子。

This is really helpful.

这真的很有帮助。

So, if I were to try to describe this, essentially what you're coming out of it with a shaping session with is like the user experience with just wire frames/sketches of the screens and the key buttons and flows.

因此，如果我要尝试描述这一点，本质上，您通过塑造会话得到的结果就像是仅使用屏幕线框/草图以及关键按钮和流程的用户体验。

So, it's like the architecture with key components, not like a dock of spec and not final design, and also not just a user story.

因此，它就像具有关键组件的架构，而不是规范码头，也不是最终设计，也不仅仅是用户故事。

As a user, I need to be able to see empty spaces.

作为用户，我需要能够看到空白区域。

Ryan Singer: Exactly.

瑞安·辛格：没错。

So, because the thing where it goes wrong.

所以，因为事情出了问题。

If we're going to commit engineering time and it's like we believe there's some way to see empty spaces, but the way is a question mark, it's a really risky way to spend that time.

如果我们要投入工程时间，并且我们相信有某种方法可以看到空白空间，但这种方法是一个问号，那么花费这些时间的方式确实很冒险。

Lenny Rachitsky: Because you're committing, right?

Lenny Rachitsky：因为你正在承诺，对吧？

It's like-

这就像——

Ryan Singer: Yeah, we're committing and that time is really valuable.

瑞安·辛格：是的，我们正在承诺，时间非常宝贵。

That's six weeks of engineer's time, and that time wasn't easy to get in the first place because, of course, there's all these other forces in the company that want to be doing something with the engineers.

这是工程师六周的时间，而这个时间一开始就不容易获得，因为当然，公司里还有其他所有力量想要与工程师一起做一些事情。

So, if we want that team to be really using that time well where they are moving, they understand what they're solving and they're creatively engaged because they know what it's supposed to be doing, they need to have that clarity both on the problem side of this is about the empty spaces and on the solution side of it's a dot grid with two months and a scrolling agenda view and a button.

因此，如果我们希望该团队真正充分利用他们正在移动的时间，他们了解自己正在解决什么问题，并且创造性地参与其中，因为他们知道应该做什么，他们需要清楚地了解问题方面的空白，以及解决方案方面的问题，包括两个月的点网格、滚动议程视图和按钮。

There's still a million interesting creative tasks there in the actual high fidelity design in the code.

在代码的实际高保真设计中仍然存在一百万个有趣的创造性任务。

There's so many things to solve there, but that is something that they can all hold in their heads and understand and work on.

那里有很多事情需要解决，但这是他们都可以牢记在心、理解和努力的事情。

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 ProductCentral 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创建 ProductCentral 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, ProductCentral powers, everything from resourcing to voice of customer to road mapping to launch execution.

与僵化的单点解决方案不同，ProductCentral 拥有从资源到客户声音、路线图到启动执行的一切能力。

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?

准备好看看它的实际效果了吗？

Head to airtable.com/lenny to book a demo.

前往airtable.com/lenny 预订演示。

That's airtable.com/lenny.

这是airtable.com/lenny。

Lenny Rachitsky: You mentioned, and I think a lot of people listening to this are going to be like, "Oh, I'm scared of doing this," is if you get too detailed, the engineers and designers on the team are just like, "What the hell?

Lenny Rachitsky：你提到过，我想很多人听到这个都会说，“哦，我害怕这样做，”如果你说得太详细，团队中的工程师和设计师就会说，“到底是什么？

You're just telling me what to build.

你只是告诉我要构建什么。

That sucks.

太糟糕了。

I don't want that kind of work." So, is the solution to that the engineering lead was super involved and detailed, and the design lead was super involved, and so you can trust that you're not just the code monkey building the thing they told you to build?

我不想要那样的工作。”那么，解决方案是否是工程主管超级参与和详细，设计主管超级参与，因此您可以相信您不仅仅是构建他们告诉您构建的东西的代码猴子？

Ryan Singer: That's really interesting.

瑞安·辛格：这真的很有趣。

I got to tell you, the dominant failure case that I see in the real world is always, again and again, not enough detail.

我必须告诉你，我在现实世界中看到的主要失败案例总是一次又一次地缺乏足够的细节。

And it's also the most common failure mode where the engineers run back to the product folks and say, "I'm not getting enough from you." It is really like that, but I can understand why the hair stands up on the back of the neck a little bit thinking about it because, of course, if you give a senior engineer like, "Here's how I want you to go implement the schema for this database change for this model," they're going to be like, "What do you think?

这也是最常见的故障模式，工程师跑回产品人员那里说：“我从你们那里得到的还不够。”确实是这样，但我可以理解为什么稍微想一想它就会感到毛骨悚然，因为当然，如果你给一个高级工程师这样的信息，“我希望你如何实现这个模型的数据库更改的模式，”他们会说，“你觉得怎么样？

Who are you?

你是谁？

Who are you?" You know what I mean?

你是谁？”你知道我的意思？

But what's really interesting is it's not a universal thing.

但真正有趣的是它不是一个普遍的东西。

The amount of detail that the team is going to feel helps them is a dial that we can turn that depends on who's on the team.

团队感受到的细节数量对他们有帮助，我们可以根据团队成员的情况来调整。

Ryan Singer: So, if you have a more junior person who's on the build team and then you have a more senior engineer who's involved in the shaping, they can make that junior engineer much more successful with additional detail.

Ryan Singer：所以，如果构建团队中有一名初级工程师，然后有一名参与塑造的高级工程师，他们可以通过额外的细节使该初级工程师更加成功。

So, we're going to do this and I would suggest approaching it like this, this, this, and this.

所以，我们要这样做，我建议像这样、这样、这样、这样来处理它。

That junior person is, when they don't know how to do it, they're not going to ask because they don't want to show that they don't know, and they're going to hide the fact that they're lost and it's going to blow up later in the project.

那个初级人员是，当他们不知道如何做时，他们不会问，因为他们不想表明他们不知道，他们会隐藏他们迷路的事实，并且它会在项目后期爆炸。

And on the other hand, if they are given more guidance, they're going to be able to be successful.

另一方面，如果给予他们更多指导，他们将能够取得成功。

They're going to learn about this is how this person who knows well, kind of approached it and then in the next round or a few projects later, you can dial it back and say, "Well, let's give less detail and see how they handle it."

他们将了解这个了解情况的人是如何处理它的，然后在下一轮或稍后的几个项目中，你可以回拨并说：“好吧，让我们提供更少的细节，看看他们如何处理它。”

Ryan Singer: So, you can really give people bigger shoes to grow into and help them to be successful.

瑞安·辛格：所以，你真的可以给人们更大的鞋子来成长并帮助他们取得成功。

And then, of course, you can also do it the other way around where if you've got some really stellar talent on the team and you have a long history and you have a lot of trust that they are going to be able to understand and solve it, then of course, you can leave things out.

当然，你也可以反过来做，如果你的团队中有一些非常出色的人才，而且你有悠久的历史，并且你非常相信他们能够理解和解决问题，那么当然，你可以把这些事情排除在外。

Ryan Singer: But the thing that I often see is if there's someone on the build team who really feels that they should be involved in the fundamental decisions about the approach, then a better solution would be to actually bring them into the shaping and have them play that technical role in the shaping session.

Ryan Singer：但我经常看到的是，如果构建团队中有人真的认为他们应该参与有关该方法的基本决策，那么更好的解决方案就是让他们真正参与塑造并让他们在塑造会议中发挥技术作用。

If they have the right skills and the right perspective and the right knowledge to play that role well, then just bring them into the shaping.

如果他们拥有正确的技能、正确的视角和正确的知识来很好地扮演这个角色，那么就把他们带入塑造中。

So, it's all about how do we bring people into a moment where we are using their strengths and then we're giving them an input, so that whatever their work step is that they're able to apply the maximum creativity, but also have the maximum clarity, so that they can really use that time well and also feel good about what they're doing.

因此，关键在于我们如何让人们发挥自己的优势，然后给他们提供意见，这样无论他们的工作步骤是什么，他们都能够发挥最大的创造力，同时也拥有最大的清晰度，这样他们就能真正充分利用这段时间，并对自己所做的事情感觉良好。

Lenny Rachitsky: It feels like the core of this is de-risk the biggest risks and address the biggest unknowns as much as possible.

Lenny Rachitsky：感觉其核心是消除最大的风险并尽可能解决最大的未知数。

There's probably this 80% of here are the risks.

大概80%都是风险。

Let's just understand them deeply before we commit to this appetite.

在我们满足这种需求之前，让我们先深入了解它们。

Ryan Singer: That is exactly right.

瑞安·辛格：完全正确。

There are these, we can call them rabbit holes, we can call them time bombs.

有这些，我们可以称之为兔子洞，我们可以称之为定时炸弹。

There are these things where we say, "Oh, it'll be fine." One example, simple example, I worked with a team and they had a step of onboarding in a FinTech product and there was this step of onboarding and they would lose a lot of people in the funnel at that step because you had to fill out a whole bunch of information, and they figured out that they could actually pipe that data in from one of the partners that they had.

在某些事情上，我们会说：“哦，一切都会好起来的。”举个简单的例子，我和一个团队合作，他们在金融科技产品中有一个入职步骤，在这个入职步骤中，他们会在这一步失去很多人，因为你必须填写一大堆信息，他们发现他们实际上可以从他们拥有的一个合作伙伴那里输入这些数据。

They were partnered with banks and they're like, "Oh, we don't even need to be asking people this.

他们与银行合作，他们说，“哦，我们甚至不需要问人们这个。

So, we're going to fix conversion.

因此，我们将修复转换问题。

We're going to eliminate a step from our user experience.

我们将消除用户体验中的一个步骤。

It's going to be great."

这将会很棒。”

Ryan Singer: The thing that they didn't look at was if you go into the code on that step of the onboarding, it's not actually one step.

Ryan Singer：他们没有考虑的一件事是，如果你进入入职那一步的代码，它实际上不是一个步骤。

There's like three different branches of that step depending on which bank the customer is integrated on.

该步骤有三个不同的分支，具体取决于客户集成到哪家银行。

And so, that's the kind of thing where it all sounds so great and simple, and then you get into the weeds and you realize like, "Oh, wait a minute." You know what I mean?

所以，这就是那种听起来如此伟大和简单的事情，然后你陷入困境，你意识到，“哦，等一下。”你知道我的意思？

So, now, we have decisions to make.

所以，现在我们需要做出决定。

Now, if you're in the middle of a project and it's already been resourced and people are already on the hook that we're supposed to be doing this, and you already got the alignment that the engineering time is happening for this, and you're finding that out in week four.

现在，如果您正处于一个项目的中间，并且该项目已经获得了资源，并且人们已经意识到我们应该这样做，并且您已经获得了工程时间为此进行的调整，并且您会在第四周内发现这一点。

You know what I mean?

你知道我的意思？

You did all these beautiful drawings, by the way, and now, you're finding this out in week four, that's a bad place to be.

顺便说一句，你画了所有这些漂亮的图画，现在，你在第四周就发现了这一点，那是一个糟糕的地方。

Ryan Singer: But if we're in the shaping room and we didn't kick this thing off yet, we didn't even green light the project yet, and we have an engineer there, not just the product people, not just the designer, but we have that engineer who really insists on sometimes, I like to think of it like the grumpy old plumber who's seen everything and he insists on opening up the walls and looking at the pipes before he'll give you a quote.

瑞安·辛格：但是如果我们在造型室里，我们还没有开始这件事，我们甚至还没有为这个项目开绿灯，我们那里有一名工程师，不仅仅是产品人员，不仅仅是设计师，但我们有那个有时真的坚持的工程师，我喜欢把它想象成脾气暴躁的老水管工，他看到了一切，他坚持在给你报价之前打开墙壁并检查管道。

So, it's like when you've got that person in the room, they're saying, "Yeah, that all sounds great.

所以，就像当你让那个人在房间里时，他们会说：“是的，这一切听起来都很棒。

Let's take a quick look at the code and figure out what screen you're actually talking about.

让我们快速浏览一下代码并找出您实际上正在谈论的屏幕。

Just let's just take a quick look." And it only takes a moment to open up the code, find this thing that we're talking about, and really look at it and say, "Oh, it's more complicated than we thought."

让我们快速看一下。”只需要一点时间就可以打开代码，找到我们正在谈论的这个东西，然后真正查看它并说：“哦，它比我们想象的更复杂。”

Ryan Singer: And now, it's not like, "Okay, now, we're screwed and the project is going to be bigger." Now, we can have a really cool conversation about trade-offs.

瑞安·辛格：现在，情况不再是“好吧，现在我们完蛋了，项目会变得更大。”现在，我们可以就权衡进行一次非常酷的对话。

So, let's say we've got three different integrations here, three different segments integrated into different banks.

因此，假设我们在这里进行了三种不同的集成，将三个不同的部分集成到不同的银行中。

How big are they relative to each other in terms of the deals we made or the percentage of customers who flow through those three different conditions?

就我们达成的交易或经历这三种不同条件的客户的百分比而言，它们之间的关系有多大？

If we just did this on one of those branches, would it be a win?

如果我们只在其中一个分支上执行此操作，这会是一场胜利吗？

And if we did it on all three, how much more time would we have to negotiate for and would it feel worth it?

如果我们在这三个方面都这样做，我们还需要谈判多少时间？这是否值得？

You see, we're getting into this horse-trading of what is important, what's worth it, what do we need to get out of it?

你看，我们正在陷入一场关于什么是重要的、什么是值得的、我们需要从中得到什么的讨价还价？

And that's really productive.

这确实很有成效。

And when you're doing that before the project starts off, that feels like, "Oh, we're talking about the important things.

当你在项目开始之前这样做时，感觉就像是，“哦，我们正在谈论重要的事情。

We're not failing right now.

我们现在还没有失败。

We are engaged in the hard questions that are going to enable us to really ship something that's successful later."

我们致力于解决棘手的问题，这些问题将使我们能够真正推出日后成功的产品。”

Lenny Rachitsky: Well, let's go one level deeper on this shaping session, because clearly, that is so core to this working, and I know you have a whole book about how to actually do this.

Lenny Rachitsky：好吧，让我们更深入地讨论这个塑造会议，因为显然，这是这项工作的核心，而且我知道你有一整本书关于如何实际做到这一点。

So, we're not going to-

所以，我们不会-

Lenny Rachitsky: ...

莱尼·拉奇茨基：……

to this working, and I know you have a whole book about how to actually do this, so we're not going to answer all the questions, and there's a lot of detail and nuance.

对于这项工作，我知道你们有一整本书关于如何实际做到这一点，所以我们不会回答所有问题，并且有很多细节和细微差别。

But a few questions, how long do these usually take?

但有几个问题，这些通常需要多长时间？

It sounds like a whole day experience, and then it sounds like you invite as few people as possible, but not too few people.

这听起来像是一整天的体验，然后听起来你邀请的人尽可能少，但也不能太少。

What's your guidance on who should join?

您对谁应该加入有何指导？

Ryan Singer: In this shaping and real life course, we've been doing workshops where we try to help people to learn what it's like in a shaping session.

瑞安·辛格（Ryan Singer）：在这个塑造和现实生活课程中，我们一直在举办研讨会，试图帮助人们了解塑造过程中的情况。

One of the things that's always interesting to me is how...

我一直感兴趣的事情之一是如何......

So Kathy and I will be running the session and we have to...

所以凯西和我将主持会议，我们必须……

People aren't used to working so fast.

人们不习惯这么快的工作速度。

What are we actually doing right now?

我们现在实际上在做什么？

What's the decision?

决定是什么？

What's an idea right now?

现在有什么想法吗？

We're not going to go away and draw something, and then I'll comment on a document and then come back and get together tomorrow.

我们不会出去画一些东西，然后我会对文档发表评论，然后明天再回来聚在一起。

What ideas do we actually have right now starting from zero?

从零开始，我们现在到底有哪些想法？

So imagine, we've narrowed down the calendar problem too.

想象一下，我们也缩小了日历问题的范围。

It's about empty spaces.

这是关于空的空间。

We are willing, from a business standpoint, to spend six weeks on a whack at this where it's solved.

从商业角度来看，我们愿意花六周的时间来解决这个问题。

We believe there's a way that's possible, so what can we come up with?

我们相信有一种方法是可能的，那么我们能想出什么办法呢？

Lenny Rachitsky: And that's the input to the framing session or sorry, the shaping session.

Lenny Rachitsky：这就是框架会议的输入，或者抱歉，是塑造会议的输入。

Ryan Singer: Exactly.

瑞安·辛格：没错。

Having a narrowed down problem from the framing work, and this is a whole other topic of very often the PMs are sometimes just taking something at face value and not negotiating down to really narrow down what is this really, and where is the value in this?

从框架工作中缩小问题范围，这是一个完全不同的话题，PM 有时只是从表面上看一些东西，而不是通过谈判来真正缩小范围，这到底是什么，它的价值在哪里？

But let's suppose that that's happened, that we've narrowed down the problem, so now we've got a narrow problem.

但假设这种情况已经发生，我们已经缩小了问题的范围，所以现在我们有了一个狭窄的问题。

So now what we need to do is try out different ideas, and this is the real thing.

所以现在我们需要做的是尝试不同的想法，这才是真正的事情。

We have to try to break them.

我们必须尝试打破它们。

So I want to draw an idea, and then I want the technical person to find, oh, this isn't going to...

所以我想画一个想法，然后我希望技术人员发现，哦，这不会......

You know what I mean?

你知道我的意思吗？

This isn't going to work because of this reason.

由于这个原因，这是行不通的。

Or the product person is going to be looking in and saying, "I get that that's really an easy way to do it technically, but I don't think that we're actually delivering the value if I play through the customer scenario here." You know what I mean?

或者产品人员会查看并说：“我知道这在技术上确实是一种简单的方法，但我认为如果我在这里研究客户场景，我们实际上并没有提供价值。”你知道我的意思？

Ryan Singer: So there's these different angles where the idea can fail, and one of the things that we also coach people to do in a session is not just to go down one path and then be stuck in one idea and now you're going in circles around little details of one idea for three hours, but to really step back and say, "Here's an approach.

瑞安·辛格：所以，这个想法可能会在不同的角度失败，我们在课程中指导人们做的一件事不仅仅是走一条路，然后陷入一个想法，现在你要在一个想法的小细节上绕了三个小时，而是要真正退一步说，“这是一种方法。

What if we had the scrolling agenda view, okay?

如果我们有滚动议程视图怎么办？

And that's idea A.

这就是想法 A。

Then what's a very different way of doing this?" Do you know what I mean?

那么有什么完全不同的方法呢？”你知道我的意思吗？

If we didn't want to have the agenda view there, is there a way to do this where it's just a month view?

如果我们不想在那里看到议程视图，有没有办法在只有月视图的情况下做到这一点？

Let's see if we can draw that.

让我们看看是否可以画出它。

So that's the thing that's happening.

这就是正在发生的事情。

You asked about the time, and I started with people aren't used to just going all the way in to actually trying ideas.

你问了时间，我一开始就说人们不习惯直接去实际尝试想法。

Ryan Singer: So there is a little bit of learning how to just face that blank page and start trying things together.

瑞安·辛格（Ryan Singer）：因此，需要学习如何面对空白页并开始一起尝试。

What we find is that a three-hour session can be very, very productive to help you figure out what do we already have that are possible approaches to this?

我们发现，三小时的会议可以非常非常有效地帮助您弄清楚我们已经拥有哪些可能的方法？

What are some major missing things?

有哪些主要缺失的东西？

Like, okay, I've got the calendar dot grid, I've got the agenda idea, but what about multi-day events?

就像，好吧，我已经有了日历点网格，我已经有了议程想法，但是多日活动呢？

Do you know what I mean?

你知道我的意思吗？

So there can be these things, these what abouts.

所以可能会有这些事情，这些是关于什么的。

So then maybe we break and we think for a little bit, and somebody sketches some ideas on that and does a spike or two on something, and we come back again for another three hours or we come back the next day.

因此，也许我们会休息一下，思考一下，有人会就此勾画出一些想法，并对某些事情进行一两次的突破，然后我们再回来三个小时，或者第二天再回来。

And what I would say is if the project that you're trying to do is doable with, let's say, your existing technology, you're not inventing a new algorithm, you're not inventing some new database or...

我想说的是，如果你想做的项目可以用你现有的技术来实现，那么你不会发明一种新的算法，你不会发明一些新的数据库或者......

You know what I mean?

你知道我的意思吗？

Ryan Singer: You're not doing a new AI model.

Ryan Singer：你并不是在做一个新的人工智能模型。

It's more about how do I use the APIs and the frameworks and the tech stack that we have?

更多的是关于如何使用我们拥有的 API、框架和技术堆栈？

How do I put that together to build something?

我如何将它们组合在一起来构建一些东西？

Then if the problem is clear and the time is now, you will be able to come to a conclusion about what's possible to build in three sessions, something like that.

然后，如果问题明确并且现在就是时候，您将能够得出关于在三个会议中可以构建什么的结论，类似这样的事情。

The key thing is leaning into those sessions and really wrestling with each other.

关键是要专注于这些会议并真正相互角力。

If you have just the product and the designer there and then it's like, well, we'll show this to the technical person later, then it can all blow up.

如果你只有产品和设计师，然后就像，好吧，我们稍后将其展示给技术人员，然后它就会爆炸。

And then you find out it's more complicated than you thought and you have to go back to the drawing board.

然后你发现它比你想象的更复杂，你必须回到绘图板。

We need to have all the necessary information in the same room for these sessions to go fast.

我们需要在同一个房间内掌握所有必要的信息，以便这些会议能够快速进行。

Lenny Rachitsky: There's so much genius built into this approach, and it sits on top of human nature.

Lenny Rachitsky：这种方法蕴藏着太多的天才，它建立在人性之上。

One is just, you need to actually spend...

一是，你需要实际花费......

go into the deep edge cases and nuances and not just-

深入研究边缘情况和细微差别，而不仅仅是-

Lenny Rachitsky: Yeah, that's fine.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：是的，那很好。

Let's go with .

我们一起去吧。

Lenny Rachitsky: Very concrete, very in depth, and then the appetites are...

Lenny Rachitsky：非常具体，非常深入，然后就是胃口......

There's just so many elements of this that just connect with the way humans work versus the theory of just like, "Yeah.

其中有很多元素与人类的工作方式相关，而不是像“是的。

Well, let's see how long this will take.

好吧，让我们看看这需要多长时间。

It'll be a great...

这将是一个很棒的...

and we'll figure it out as we're building.

我们会在建设过程中解决这个问题。

We don't need to really figure this out.

我们不需要真正弄清楚这一点。

Yeah.

是的。

We don't have time for that."

我们没有时间这么做。”

Ryan Singer: And we're solving a puzzle together, if it needs to be doable in this amount of time.

瑞安·辛格：如果需要在这段时间内完成的话，我们正在一起解决一个难题。

But it also has to hit these points in terms of the problem we're solving.

但就我们正在解决的问题而言，它也必须满足这些要点。

You know what I mean?

你知道我的意思？

It has to do these things, but in this time.

它必须做这些事情，但是在这个时候。

One other thing that I would mention is that we can't be drawing Figma files.

我要提到的另一件事是我们无法绘制 Figma 文件。

By the way, I'm being very mean to Figma so far in this conversation.

顺便说一句，到目前为止，我在这次谈话中对 Figma 非常刻薄。

There is a time when it's the right time for the Figma file.

有时正是 Figma 文件的最佳时机。

What we want to do is have that clarity around the...

我们想要做的是让……变得清晰。

Let's say, we already know where the sink is going in the kitchen and now we can make final calls about the tile and the exact fixture-

比方说，我们已经知道厨房里水槽的位置，现在我们可以对瓷砖和确切的固定装置进行最后的决定 -

Ryan Singer: ...

瑞安·辛格：...

and stuff like that.

诸如此类的事情。

Right, grout color.

对了，灌浆颜色。

We don't want to have to throw it all away every time something changes.

我们不想每次发生变化时就必须把它全部扔掉。

So there's a time and a place where Figma is amazing and feels good and it's like, oh, now it's beautiful.

所以在某个时间、某个地点，Figma 令人惊叹，感觉很好，就像，哦，现在它很漂亮。

Now, it's amazing.

现在，这真是太神奇了。

But in a shaping session, you can't collaborate on something so high fidelity.

但在塑造过程中，你们无法在如此高保真度的事情上进行合作。

So we need also some ways to collaborate, and this is where you see these techniques in the book, like breadboarding and fat marker sketching.

因此，我们还需要一些协作方式，这就是您在书中看到这些技术的地方，例如面包板和粗标记草图。

These are tools to help us express an idea very, very clearly in detail.

这些工具可以帮助我们非常非常详细地表达想法。

We're going to hit this button and from this button, go to here.

我们将点击这个按钮，然后从这个按钮转到这里。

This calculation runs, then we get this answer, and then we have this choice to go here or here.

运行这个计算，然后我们得到这个答案，然后我们可以选择去这里或这里。

That's the thing that we need to be seeing and that's the level of detail where we can move fast together but still see something real as more this breadboarding level.

这就是我们需要看到的东西，这就是我们可以一起快速移动的细节级别，但仍然可以看到更多真实的东西，就像面包板级别一样。

Lenny Rachitsky: Fat marker session is very evocative of what this whole session is about, is very high level sketches.

Lenny Rachitsky：脂肪标记会议非常令人回味整个会议的内容，是非常高水平的草图。

That's a great term.

这是一个很棒的术语。

Ryan Singer: The danger there that I often see is that what we don't want is to say, "Oh, Figma isn't the right thing at this level.

Ryan Singer：我经常看到的危险是我们不想说，“哦，Figma 在这个级别上不是正确的东西。

So instead, we're going to do fat marker sketches," and what you get is the equivalent of a blurry Figma.

因此，我们将制作粗标记草图，”你得到的相当于模糊的Figma。

Do you know what I mean?

你知道我的意思吗？

Just less detailed.

只是不太详细。

What we need from a fat marker sketch for it to be valuable to us as builders is it has to really communicate the idea.

为了让粗大的记号笔草图对我们作为建筑者有价值，我们需要的是它必须真正传达想法。

When I look at that, I'm like, "Oh, now I get it?" And if it's more this general wire frame of dashboard goes here and there's going to be four reports, and it's like I still don't know what to build, right?

当我看到这一点时，我想，“哦，现在我明白了吗？”如果更多的是仪表板的通用线框放在这里，将会有四个报告，就像我仍然不知道要构建什么，对吧？

Ryan Singer: So if it's not telling me what to build, so maybe this is a way to come back to your question about what's the output of the shaping session, it's like it's shaped if we can give this to a technical person and they say, "Yeah, I know what to go build now."

Ryan Singer：所以，如果它没有告诉我要构建什么，那么也许这是回到你关于塑造会话的输出是什么的问题的一种方式，如果我们可以将其交给技术人员，那么就像它已经成形一样，他们说，“是的，我知道现在要构建什么。”

Lenny Rachitsky: I'm very happy with our overview of the process.

Lenny Rachitsky：我对我们对流程的概述感到非常满意。

I think we've done a really good job giving people the gist.

我认为我们在向人们传达要点方面做得非常好。

And obviously, if they want to actually implement it, they can get the book and dive in or work with you, which we'll point people to.

显然，如果他们想实际实施它，他们可以拿到这本书并深入研究或与您合作，我们将向人们指出这一点。

Say someone's like, "This is awesome.

有人说：“这太棒了。

I want to do this." What would you say is a good first step for a team that's currently...

我想做这个。”您认为对于目前的团队来说这是一个良好的第一步......

let's say, they're in startup land, and they're just shipping every two weeks, maybe every week?

比方说，他们处于初创公司的土地上，他们每两周发货一次，也许每周发货一次？

So maybe for that bucket of folks and then also for a larger company, I don't know, Agile Scrum SAFe, and they're just like, "Oh, let's try something different."

所以也许对于那群人，然后对于一家更大的公司，我不知道，Agile Scrum SAFe，他们只是说，“哦，让我们尝试一些不同的东西。”

Ryan Singer: Sometimes dev teams, they like the idea of not having the Scrum ritual, so they want to take in the six weeks, but unless the engineering and product come together to figure out how to collaboratively shape, like we talked about before, that time box isn't going to go well.

Ryan Singer：有时，开发团队喜欢不进行 Scrum 仪式的想法，因此他们希望在六周内完成，但除非工程和产品齐心协力找出如何协作塑造，就像我们之前讨论的那样，否则时间框不会顺利进行。

So I-

所以我-

Lenny Rachitsky: They think they're going to not have to do standups, but now it's a day of hard thinking.

Lenny Rachitsky：他们认为他们不必进行站立会议，但现在是认真思考的一天。

Ryan Singer: Well, it turns into even more meetings, because we don't know what to do.

瑞安·辛格：嗯，这变成了更多的会议，因为我们不知道该怎么做。

Lenny Rachitsky: And the more meetings is just that shaping session specifically.

Lenny Rachitsky：更多的会议就是专门的塑造会议。

Right?

正确的？

Ryan Singer: No, what I mean is that if we didn't-

瑞安·辛格：不，我的意思是如果我们不-

Ryan Singer: If we only adopted the six-week cycle and said we're going to figure it out and we didn't adopt the shaping, then we just don't know what to do.

瑞安·辛格：如果我们只采用六周周期，并说我们会弄清楚，但我们没有采用塑造，那么我们就不知道该怎么办。

And then we reached the end, and we're basically scrambling to shape it as we go.

然后我们就到了最后，我们基本上是在边走边努力塑造它。

And then we run out of time, and then we feel like this wasn't...

然后我们就没有时间了，然后我们觉得这不是......

It was nice to get a break from the Scrum rituals, but we can't say that we are knocking the champagne bottle on the boat because we're celebrating the launch or whatever, again and again.

很高兴能从 Scrum 仪式中休息一下，但我们不能说我们在船上敲香槟酒瓶，因为我们正在一次又一次地庆祝发布或其他什么。

Right?

正确的？

Lenny Rachitsky: That's a good, actually, time to maybe talk about there's obviously the spring kickoff in Scrum.

Lenny Rachitsky：实际上，现在正是谈论 Scrum 春季启动的好时机。

What's main difference for people, because they may be thinking, "Oh, this is just like a spring kickoff." That's-

对人们来说主要的区别是什么，因为他们可能会想，“哦，这就像春季开球一样。”那是——

Ryan Singer: That's a good one.

瑞安·辛格：这是一件好事。

So what you often see in a Scrum team is that there's somebody who creates these tickets of these are the things that are going to happen inside of the sprint.

因此，您在 Scrum 团队中经常看到的是，有人创建了这些票据，这些票据是冲刺中将要发生的事情。

Really, in my opinion, too many cases, it's not the person who's doing the building who's creating those tickets.

事实上，在我看来，在很多情况下，并不是建造这些门票的人创建的。

Ryan Singer: So there's a big, big gap there.

瑞安·辛格：所以那里存在很大很大的差距。

We could talk a lot about that, but there's gaps in context.

我们可以就此谈论很多，但上下文中存在空白。

The person who's writing the ticket doesn't actually understand the work that's involved.

写票的人实际上并不了解所涉及的工作。

You know what I mean?

你知道我的意思？

So there are so many unknowns and time bombs waiting in those tickets that sound reasonable, but they weren't really created by the person who understands the work that needs to happen.

因此，这些门票中存在着如此多的未知因素和定时炸弹，听起来很合理，但它们并不是真正由了解需要进行的工作的人创造的。

So the key difference is two things.

所以关键的区别有两点。

So in Scrum, you have a person who's not the builders making tickets, and this is what in the cruel picture is the paper shredder.

所以在 Scrum 中，你有一个人，他不是制作罚单的构建者，而这就是残酷的画面中的碎纸机。

In the shape-up world, you have a single idea that was shaped.

在塑造世界中，你只有一个被塑造的想法。

This is the thing we shaped with the two months in the agenda view and da da.

这是我们用两个月的时间在议程视图和哒哒中塑造的东西。

Go make your own tasks, because you're the professionals.

去做你自己的任务，因为你是专业人士。

Do you know what I mean?

你知道我的意思吗？

So the contractors, if you're building a house, they have to know the plans, but you don't have to tell them, "Now take the hammer and go over here."

所以承包商，如果你要建造一座房子，他们必须知道计划，但你不必告诉他们，“现在拿起锤子到这里来。”

Ryan Singer: That's their, right?

瑞恩·辛格：那是他们的，对吧？

So in a shape-up world, a kickoff is, here's the well-shaped idea, and now this time box starts.

因此，在塑造世界中，启动就是，这是精心塑造的想法，现在这个时间框开始了。

At Basecamp, it was really, really loose because they are just stocked with senior people.

在 Basecamp，情况真的非常非常宽松，因为他们只有资深人才。

They have so many very senior engineers and all the designers are coding.

他们有很多非常高级的工程师，所有的设计师都在编码。

They're very technical, really, really skilled people.

他们是非常有技术、非常非常熟练的人。

What I found is helpful when the team is a little bit more mixed, if they're not all super senior, is a simple exercise of at kickoff, take whatever was shaped and just draw a grid with nine boxes, and give me nine boxes of the nine major chunks that you think have to get implemented from an implementation standpoint.

我发现，当团队更加混合一点时，如果他们不都是超级高级，那么在开始时进行一个简单的练习是有帮助的，采取任何形状，只画一个带有九个框的网格，然后给我九个框，其中九个主要块是你认为从实施的角度必须实施的。

So translate this into nine major scopes of implementation that need to somehow happen over the time box.

因此，将其转化为需要在一定时间内以某种方式发生的九个主要实施范围。

So really, really useful exercise to kick things off, and we have a lot of teams doing that now.

因此，非常非常有用的练习可以拉开帷幕，我们现在有很多团队都在这样做。

Ryan Singer: If you take six weeks, that's 30 business days.

Ryan Singer：如果需要六周，那就是 30 个工作日。

You divide that by nine, it's four days per box.

你把它除以九，每盒就是四天。

So you're going to get a lot of clarity from a quick exercise.

因此，通过快速练习，您将会变得更加清晰。

And again, this is done by the builders.

再说一次，这是由建筑商完成的。

This is a really also good exercise for them to notice like, "Oh, wait a minute, we think there's too much scope here.

这对他们来说也是一个很好的练习，让他们注意到，“哦，等一下，我们认为这里的范围太大了。

Even though it seemed reasonable, when we put it into nine boxes, it's like, I don't think we can do this all." Or it's also a good moment where somebody who's more junior might describe their implementation approach, and then someone who's senior can review that and say, "Actually, we've done that before, and we'll run into this trouble if we don't use this other thing." So those really nice coaching moments can happen.

尽管这看起来很合理，但当我们将其放入九个盒子时，我认为我们无法做到这一切。”或者，这也是一个好时机，资历较浅的人可能会描述他们的实施方法，然后资历较深的人可以回顾一下并说：“实际上，我们以前已经这样做过，如果我们不使用其他东西，我们就会遇到这个麻烦。”所以那些真正美好的教练时刻可能会发生。

Lenny Rachitsky: If you were to try this approach and have a shaping session, this is a sign you're heading in a good direction, is if the output, the team that's building it can come up with nine...

Lenny Rachitsky：如果你要尝试这种方法并进行一次塑造会议，这表明你正朝着一个好的方向前进，如果输出，构建它的团队可以拿出九个......

Does it have to be nine?

一定要九个吗？

Is six cool, 10 cool?

6 很酷，10 很酷吗？

Ryan Singer: What I found is if it's more than 10, then you just get into ticket land of, here's a million things I have to do.

Ryan Singer：我发现如果超过 10 个，那么你就进入了门票领域，这是我必须做的一百万件事。

You know what I mean?

你知道我的意思？

If you have 100 things, that doesn't tell me anything.

如果你有 100 件事，那并不能告诉我任何事情。

But if it has to be nine or less.

但如果必须是九个或更少。

Lenny Rachitsky: Nine or less.

Lenny Rachitsky：九个或更少。

Okay.

好的。

Okay, cool.

好吧，酷。

Ryan Singer: I actually think...

瑞安·辛格：我实际上认为……

I'm speculating here, but the UX designers in your audience will know about this rule of seven, plus or minus two.

我在这里推测，但观众中的用户体验设计师会知道这个七加或减二的规则。

It's this cognitive science principle that was found about how many things someone can hold in their head at once.

正是这种认知科学原理发现了一个人的头脑中可以同时容纳多少事物。

So this nine is the upper limit of seven plus or minus two, and it basically...

所以这个九就是七加减二的上限，它基本上...

It's like, do we actually have a picture of what it means to build this that we can also hold in our heads?

就像，我们是否真的对构建这个意味着什么有一个清晰的认识，并且可以牢牢记住？

Can we see the whole castle?

我们能看到整个城堡吗？

Lenny Rachitsky: So what I'm hearing is if you're on a, say, Agile Scrum team today, if you want to start trying this out, it's schedule a shaping session, assume it's six weeks to start, try to come into it with a framing of here's the problem we're trying to solve.

Lenny Rachitsky：所以我听到的是，如果你今天在敏捷 Scrum 团队中，如果你想开始尝试这个，就需要安排一次塑造会议，假设开始时间为六周，尝试以我们要解决的问题为框架进行讨论。

Is that a good way of thinking about it, like the problem we're trying to solve?

就像我们试图解决的问题一样，这是一种很好的思考方式吗？

Ryan Singer: Yeah, for sure.

瑞安·辛格：是的，当然。

The question is what problem are we trying to solve, because the shaping work is more what are our options for the solution?

问题是我们要解决什么问题，因为塑造工作更多的是我们的解决方案有哪些选择？

And if the problem is too fuzzy and big, if the problem is just calendar, then the shaping is going to be this ever-expanding, never-ending thing, and we're not going to be able to get anywhere.

如果问题太模糊、太大，如果问题只是日历，那么塑造将是一个不断扩大、永无休止的事情，我们将一事无成。

Lenny Rachitsky: Yeah.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：是的。

Okay.

好的。

So you spend three hours, maybe six hours in the first session.

所以你在第一节课上花了三个小时，也许六个小时。

Would you recommend try to keep it to this many hours when you're first trying it up?

您是否会建议您在第一次尝试时尝试将其保留这么多小时？

Ryan Singer: No, I wouldn't do that.

瑞安·辛格：不，我不会那样做。

I think the key thing is actually if you get to the point where you're trying to hold a shaping session and you manage to get product and engineering into the same room to do it, you are far along.

我认为关键的事情实际上是，如果你试图举办一次塑造会议，并且你设法让产品和工程进入同一个房间来完成它，那么你就已经走得很远了。

You're doing great if you're at that point.

如果你在那个时候，你就做得很好了。

Oh, so much of the challenge is getting to the point of aligning between product and engineering that we cannot have projects that are dragging and dragging and dragging.

哦，如此多的挑战是如何在产品和工程之间保持一致，我们不能让项目拖拖拉拉。

We can't keep ending in a place where this is the end of a sprint or the end of a cycle and we still can't see the end of it, or we have to make so many cuts and compromises at the last minute that it's not the quality of...

我们不能一直在冲刺结束或周期结束的地方结束，但我们仍然看不到它的结束，或者我们必须在最后一刻做出如此多的削减和妥协，这不是……的质量。

or it's not really matching what it was supposed to be in the first place.

或者它与最初的预期并不相符。

When those problems are happening or...

当这些问题发生或者...

Also by the way, this is surfacing at the exact level.

顺便说一句，这也是在准确的水平上出现的。

Ryan Singer: Imagine, you're the CPO, you're the CTO, and you are supposed to be answering to, "How's that work going?"

Ryan Singer：想象一下，你是 CPO、CTO，你应该回答“工作进展如何？”

Ryan Singer: And it's like, "Well, actually, we're working on it.

瑞安·辛格：就像，“嗯，实际上，我们正在努力。

I can just think of a couple of times when I needed to go to Jason, and he expected me to be making progress on something and I had gotten nowhere on it.

我能想到有几次我需要去找杰森，他希望我在某件事上取得进展，但我却一无所获。

And that feeling when you are with top leadership in the room and you don't have a good answer for where you are on something is like...

当你和房间里的最高领导在一起，而你对自己在某件事上的立场却没有一个好的答案时，这种感觉就像……

Oh, it's brutal, right?

噢，这太残酷了，对吧？

And then from the CEO's perspective, it's like, "Where's the movement?

然后从首席执行官的角度来看，就像是，“动向在哪里？

We're running a business here.

我们在这里做生意。

Really, nothing is shipping still?"

真的，还没发货吗？”

Ryan Singer: This can't just keep happening.

瑞安·辛格：这种情况不能一直发生。

So there's some recognition somewhere either at the higher levels or within the team of, we don't want to keep dragging, we don't want to keep being lost in the weeds, and then this can be the activation energy.

因此，无论是在更高级别还是在团队内部，都有一些认识，我们不想继续拖延，我们不想继续迷失在杂草中，然后这可以是激活能量。

You gather the power to be like, "Okay, we actually want to try something different."

你聚集力量说：“好吧，我们实际上想尝试一些不同的东西。”

Ryan Singer: And in that case, what I would say is what usually works best is, okay, we're going to try a pilot project, and what we want to do is, as you said, choose a problem that's important enough to all of us that we think it's meaningful, it's going to be worth trying to do well.

瑞安·辛格：在这种情况下，我想说的是，通常最有效的方法是，好吧，我们将尝试一个试点项目，我们想要做的是，正如你所说，选择一个对我们所有人来说足够重要的问题，我们认为它是有意义的，值得努力做好。

And it doesn't have to be six weeks.

而且不必是六周。

It could be something that is a little bit smaller, maybe you feel comfortable taking on three week thing for the first time.

它可能是一个稍微小一点的事情，也许你第一次接受三周的事情会感到舒服。

What's important is just matching these things together.

重要的是将这些东西匹配在一起。

Ryan Singer: Here's a problem that we actually care about.

Ryan Singer：这是我们真正关心的一个问题。

It's timely, something that we would like to be shipped soon.

来得正是时候，我们希望尽快发货。

It's not so small that we're not going to actually learn this new muscle, and it's big enough that it's going to feel like we really achieved something.

它不会小到我们无法真正学习这块新肌肉，它又足够大，让我们感觉我们真的取得了一些成就。

So maybe that's going to be four weeks, maybe it's going to be six, maybe it's three, I don't know.

所以也许这将是四个星期，也许是六个星期，也许是三个星期，我不知道。

And then getting to a place where we wrestle a bit with the problem to get the problem narrowed down.

然后我们会努力解决这个问题，以缩小问题的范围。

We get into our shaping session, and then we do our best.

我们进入塑造阶段，然后尽力而为。

Do you know what I mean?

你知道我的意思吗？

And usually, what happens too is if we have an engineering team that's going to become free to do this work for those X number of weeks, that's the upper limit on how long we can spend to shape, and that's another real life thing, is sometimes we talk about if...

通常，如果我们有一个工程团队可以在 X 周内自由地完成这项工作，那么也会发生这种情况，这就是我们可以花多长时间来塑造的上限，这是现实生活中的另一件事，有时我们会谈论如果......

Ryan Singer: On the one hand there's this universe of never ending documents back and forth to get feedback and comments, and then on the other hand there's like the team is going to be available.

Ryan Singer：一方面，为了获得反馈和评论，需要不断地来回文档，另一方面，团队也会随时待命。

We're trying to actually do this, so actually, we've got a week to shape because engineering needs to kick off next week.

我们正在尝试实际做到这一点，所以实际上，我们有一周的时间来塑造，因为工程需要在下周开始。

Do you know what I mean?

你知道我的意思吗？

That's a little bit more the real scenario when you're actually in this aligned world of we want to ship something now.

当你实际上处于这个我们现在想要运送一些东西的一致世界时，这更像是真实的场景。

Lenny Rachitsky: Yeah, real life constraints.

Lenny Rachitsky：是的，现实生活中的限制。

That's a really helpful way of telling you how much time you have to do this.

这是告诉您需要多少时间来完成此操作的一种非常有用的方法。

For people that are just like, "I don't know, any friends that are using this.

对于那些会说“我不知道有没有朋友在使用这个”的人。

It's like weird, this way of working.

这种工作方式很奇怪。

It's not a thing I hear about all the time." What can you say to them to help them be like, "Okay, I should actually give this a try.

这不是我一直听到的事情。”你可以对他们说什么来帮助他们，“好吧，我实际上应该尝试一下。

Here's how many people are using it.

这是有多少人正在使用它。

Here's impact that you've seen." Anything you can share that would help them get over that hump?

这是你所看到的影响。”你能分享什么来帮助他们克服困难吗？

Ryan Singer: I would say wait until it hurts more.

瑞安·辛格：我会说等到更疼的时候。

If the unfamiliarity is the big problem with it, then maybe the things are fine.

如果不熟悉是大问题，那么也许一切都很好。

Because it's not like this is the only way.

因为这并不是唯一的方法。

It's more like, changing is really hard, and if there's a good reason to do it and it's like, look, we've done it the old way.

更像是，改变真的很难，如果有充分的理由去做，就像，看，我们已经用旧的方式做了。

We've tried different experiments.

我们尝试过不同的实验。

We've even already churned through a new head of product, or we've got a different CTO in and we're still having the same problems, then there comes a point where it's like, I know that this is uncomfortable, and I don't know somebody who's done it, but I think we need to try something different because we can't continue this way.

我们甚至已经更换了新的产品主管，或者换了一位首席技术官，但我们仍然遇到同样的问题，然后就会出现这样的情况，我知道这很不舒服，我不知道有人这样做过，但我认为我们需要尝试一些不同的东西，因为我们不能继续这样下去。

Lenny Rachitsky: That is a great answer.

Lenny Rachitsky：这是一个很好的答案。

Following that same thread, just what are signs that it's time to try something?

遵循同样的思路，什么迹象表明是时候尝试一些东西了？

What sort of pain do you often see that's like, okay, you shouldn't look into this seriously?

你经常看到什么样的痛苦，就像，好吧，你不应该认真对待这个问题？

Ryan Singer: There are pains all along the journey.

瑞恩·辛格：一路上都有痛苦。

So I think the place where it's most obvious is at the end of the line when we thought we were going to be done and this thing is just dragging and dragging and dragging.

所以我认为最明显的地方是在行尾，当我们认为我们要完成的时候，这件事只是拖、拖、拖。

The teams, we're not shipping things.

团队，我们不运送东西。

We're running in place.

我们原地奔跑。

We keep going in circles on this like we don't see the end.

我们一直在这个问题上兜圈子，就像看不到尽头一样。

Of course, that's the culmination, but there's also a lot of pain points along the way.

当然，这就是顶峰，但一路上也有很多痛点。

Ryan Singer: So if we go all the way upstream, if we go to the source of a project, sales talk to a customer...

Ryan Singer：因此，如果我们一路向上游走，如果我们走到项目的源头，销售人员就会与客户交谈......

You know what I mean?

你知道我的意思吗？

Or sales talk to a lead, and they have this idea of this thing we need to build, or the CEO had this idea in the shower the other day, or the product team did a whole bunch of research and they have a big case for why this is the thing that's important to build next.

或者销售人员与领导交谈，他们对我们需要构建的东西有这个想法，或者首席执行官前几天在淋浴时有这个想法，或者产品团队做了一大堆研究，他们有一个很好的案例来解释为什么这是下一步要构建的重要东西。

Whatever it is, there's a source from the business perspective of this is the thing we should do next.

不管是什么，从商业角度来看，这是我们下一步应该做的事情。

Ryan Singer: If we just say dashboard and we don't negotiate what that means, if we just say calendar and we don't negotiate what that actually is, then what do we experience?

Ryan Singer：如果我们只说仪表板而不讨论它的含义，如果我们只说日历而不讨论它实际上是什么，那么我们会经历什么？

This fuzzy thing where it's really hard to get to a conclusive answer about, yeah, that's what we need to go do.

这个模糊的事情真的很难得到一个结论性的答案，是的，这就是我们需要做的。

It's like the ever expanding blob.

它就像不断膨胀的斑点。

So if you've felt that before, that's already a first pain.

因此，如果您以前有过这种感觉，那么这已经是第一次痛苦了。

And then of course, where does it go from there?

当然，它从那里去哪里？

So we say calendar, so we don't know what it means, but we say calendar, so now we give it to product and we've either got a whole bunch of Figma files or we have the PRD with a million requirements about what a great calendar is.

所以我们说日历，所以我们不知道它意味着什么，但我们说日历，所以现在我们把它交给产品，我们要么有一大堆 Figma 文件，要么有 PRD，其中有一百万个关于什么是优秀日历的要求。

Of course, I don't want to be cruel to the people who are putting their hearts into that work, because the Figma file is beautiful.

当然，我不想对那些全身心投入这项工作的人残酷，因为 Figma 文件很漂亮。

It's just coming a little early.

只是来得有点早。

And the PRD is full of a lot of true things that are probably really important for decision-making in the project, but the way that it's packaged at that moment isn't something that gets absorbed.

PRD 充满了很多真实的东西，这些东西对于项目的决策可能非常重要，但当时它的打包方式并没有被吸收。

You write this document and I'm sorry, who actually reads it?

你写了这份文件，抱歉，谁真正阅读它？

You know what I mean?

你知道我的意思吗？

I know it's painful, but it's like that.

我知道这很痛苦，但就是这样。

And then even when we try to read it, because it wasn't shaped and we didn't get down to it's this, it's that, it's that, and that's how it works, it's hard to walk away from reading that and have anything that's in your head as, this is what we're going to go build.

然后，即使当我们尝试阅读它时，因为它还没有成型，我们没有认真思考它是这个，它是那个，它是那个，这就是它的工作原理，很难离开阅读它并在你的脑海中拥有任何东西，因为这就是我们要构建的东西。

It's like a million puzzle pieces that you're going to have to solve.

这就像你必须解决的一百万块拼图。

So what we see is either there's the Figma file and then there's the pushback from engineers.

所以我们看到的要么是 Figma 文件，要么是工程师的抵制。

There's the PRD, but then it's like, okay, but we still don't actually know what to build.

有 PRD，但是我们仍然不知道要构建什么。

Ryan Singer: There's all those things where, instead of moving forward, there's more and more questions, more and more pushback, more and more going back to the drawing board.

瑞安·辛格：在所有这些事情中，我们没有继续前进，而是有越来越多的问题、越来越多的阻力、越来越多的回到绘图板。

So that's another big indicator that something is going wrong.

这是另一个重要指标，表明出现了问题。

And then when we're in the building and we thought we knew what we agreed to, we thought we all said, "Yeah, this is what we want to go make," and it's just more and more questions coming out.

然后，当我们在大楼里时，我们以为我们知道我们同意什么，我们以为我们都说，“是的，这就是我们想要做的，”只是越来越多的问题出现了。

More and more unexpected complexity, things that we didn't anticipate, and it just doesn't feel like we're getting warmer and coming closer.

越来越多意想不到的复杂性，我们没有预料到的事情，而且感觉我们并没有变得更温暖、更接近。

It just feels like it's getting harder and harder.

就是感觉越来越难了。

Those are all the signs that whatever process you use, that there's a lack of clear shaping and there's a lack of clear framing because there's a lack of clarity around what it is that we're doing.

这些迹象都表明，无论你使用什么流程，都缺乏清晰的塑造和框架，因为我们正在做的事情缺乏明确性。

Lenny Rachitsky: Before we started recording, you made this interesting point that there's always talk of feature factories and that rarely are they actually efficient factories.

Lenny Rachitsky：在我们开始录制之前，您提出了一个有趣的观点，即总是有人谈论特征工厂，但它们实际上很少是高效的工厂。

They don't actually work.

它们实际上不起作用。

Talk about that.

谈谈那个。

Ryan Singer: Yeah.

瑞安·辛格：是的。

Well, I understand what the feature factory critique is supposed to be.

好吧，我明白特征工厂的批评应该是什么。

It's actually to the framing point of we're not negotiating the value and the outcome we're trying to get from something.

实际上，我们并没有就我们试图从某件事中获得的价值和结果进行谈判。

We're just taking it and building it.

我们只是接受并构建它。

And then of course, in the end, according to the feature factory critique, we just built it because somebody said we should build it, and then people didn't use it and didn't value it, and the product is just getting bloated.

当然，最后，根据功能工厂的批评，我们只是构建了它，因为有人说我们应该构建它，然后人们没有使用它，也不重视它，而产品只是变得臃肿。

The thing is that, I would say if you have a feature factory, meaning you're continually cranking out features, you're probably quite healthy.

问题是，我想说，如果你有一个功能工厂，这意味着你不断地生产功能，那么你可能非常健康。

All you need to do is feed a different input to the beginning of the factory.

您所需要做的就是向工厂的开头提供不同的输入。

Ryan Singer: What most teams are struggling with is that they don't have predictable repeatable shipping of things.

Ryan Singer：大多数团队都在苦苦挣扎，因为他们没有可预测的可重复运输。

At least from my experience, the bigger really widespread struggle is, stuff isn't moving, it's dragging.

至少从我的经验来看，更大、更广泛的斗争是，东西不是在移动，而是在拖拽。

I can't see the end.

我看不到结局。

I'm losing my...

我正在失去我的...

I'm feeling burned out.

我感觉精疲力竭。

You know what I mean?

你知道我的意思吗？

It's not exciting to work on this anymore, all that a thing.

从事这一切已经不再令人兴奋了。

Lenny Rachitsky: Maybe last question here is what's the sweet spot stage for a company to start using Shape Up?

Lenny Rachitsky：也许最后一个问题是公司开始使用 Shape Up 的最佳阶段是什么？

You basically worked in this way from the very beginning when it was just three people.

从一开始只有三个人的时候，你们基本上就是这样工作的。

What do you find...

你发现了什么...

Should startups that are just starting out start working in this way, or do you find it's more useful later on?

刚刚起步的初创公司是否应该开始以这种方式工作，或者您是否发现它以后更有用？

Ryan Singer: We didn't formalize it until we had to, and there was a long time where there wasn't a fixed length for projects.

Ryan Singer：直到必要时我们才将其正式化，并且很长一段时间项目没有固定的长度。

There was just an understanding of the urgency and a feeling of what too long felt like.

只是对紧迫性的理解和对时间太长的感觉的感觉。

And it didn't actually click into, oh, this is a cycle length and this is six weeks, and then we pause, and this is who comes together to make the decision of what's the next project, and here's who is mainly doing the shape.

它实际上并没有点击进入，哦，这是一个周期长度，这是六周，然后我们暂停，这是谁聚集在一起决定下一个项目是什么，这是谁主要做形状。

You know what I mean?

你知道我的意思吗？

All that stuff didn't get solved until we had reached a certain size.

直到我们达到一定规模后，所有这些问题才得到解决。

Usually, the main tipping point if we start from smaller to big is there's a phase when the founders are still involved in everything, and so it doesn't matter what your process is, it's going to be fine.

通常，如果我们从小到大开始，主要的转折点是有一个阶段，创始人仍然参与所有事情，所以无论你的流程是什么，都会好起来的。

Ryan Singer: But then you start to hire the first other people and then for the first time you try to delegate some of those things and the founders try to be less involved, and that's often where a lot of these problems start to appear.

瑞安·辛格（Ryan Singer）：但是，当你开始雇佣第一批其他人时，你第一次尝试将其中一些事情委托给其他人，而创始人则试图减少参与，这通常就是很多问题开始出现的地方。

And the founders start to ask themselves like, "We used to be fast, and now we hired people because we needed to scale, but now we're slow.

创始人开始问自己，“我们过去速度很快，现在我们雇佣人员是因为我们需要扩大规模，但现在我们速度很慢。

So how do we be fast again?

那么我们如何才能再次快速呢？

Because we know what-

因为我们知道什么——

Ryan Singer: ...

瑞安·辛格：...

well.

好吧。

So like, "How will we be fast again?" Because we know what it's like.

就像“我们怎样才能再次变得快？”因为我们知道那是什么样子。

If we just got back in there as founders and got our hands dirty, like we could make this go.

如果我们作为创始人回到那里并亲自动手，就像我们可以成功一样。

But how do I get the people that we've brought in to make these trade-offs and make these decisions and how do I get the work to flow again?

但是，我如何让我们引入的人员做出这些权衡并做出这些决定，以及如何让工作再次顺利进行？

So that's something that we definitely see there.

所以这就是我们肯定会看到的事情。

So that's a really good moment.

所以这真是一个美好的时刻。

I'm onboarding new people.

我正在招募新人。

I don't know what to tell them how to work.

我不知道该告诉他们如何工作。

I don't want to introduce a bunch of scrum rituals.

我不想介绍一堆 Scrum 仪式。

Just winging it on Kanban isn't working, because they don't have enough clarity around what to go after.

仅仅在看板上即兴发挥是行不通的，因为他们对于要追求什么没有足够的清晰度。

So I have to babysit them all the time.

所以我必须一直照顾他们。

You know what I mean?

你知道我的意思？

Like these kinds of things.

诸如此类的事情。

Ryan Singer: There is another extreme, which is I...

瑞恩·辛格：还有另一个极端，就是我……

We've already gone past that.

我们已经过去了。

We've been scrum or whatever for years.

多年来我们一直在进行 scrum 或其他活动。

The company has been growing, like revenue is coming in, like sales is doing their job, like things are running.

公司一直在成长，就像收入正在增加，就像销售正在做他们的工作，就像事情正在运转。

But man, nothing is getting out the door.

但是，伙计，什么也没有走出门外。

And we're years in and we have an entrenched development.

我们已经经历了多年，并且已经有了根深蒂固的发展。

We have like an entrenched engineering team, which is a wall away from an entrenched product team and everybody's apart.

我们有一个根深蒂固的工程团队，它与根深蒂固的产品团队隔着一堵墙，每个人都是分开的。

And this thing is like, we're like stuck.

这件事就像，我们被困住了。

Ryan Singer: And that is more where there's going to be some tensions that are starting to appear at the executive level.

瑞安·辛格（Ryan Singer）：更多的是，行政层面开始出现一些紧张局势。

There's going to be some finger pointing.

会有一些人指责。

There's going to be some like, "Why isn't this moving?

可能有人会问，“为什么这不动？

Why isn't this happening?

为什么这没有发生？

How can we be spending so much money in all these engineers and we don't have anything to show for it?" And that's a point where there can be kind of a...

我们怎么能在这些工程师身上花这么多钱，而我们却没有任何成果呢？”这就是可能存在某种...

Some hard conversations need to start happening about, "How do we actually start to negotiate around how we spend time?" And we can't just have endless refactorings and infrastructure projects, but we need to be actually building things that we can sell again.

需要开始一些艰难的对话，“我们如何真正开始协商如何度过时间？”我们不能只是进行无休止的重构和基础设施项目，而是需要实际构建可以再次销售的东西。

Ryan Singer: Yeah.

瑞安·辛格：是的。

You know?

你知道？

But it can...

但它可以...

There are a lot of engineering orgs that have been standing around for a while and it's all refactoring all day and tech debt and stuff like that.

有很多工程组织已经存在了一段时间，整天都在重构和技术债务之类的东西。

And there's reasons why all those things got there, but there comes a point where we have to figure out how to cut through it and make some hard choices so that we can carve out time to build the stuff that's actually going to be needle moving again and not just sustaining us where we are to run in place.

所有这些事情的出现都是有原因的，但到了某个时刻，我们必须弄清楚如何突破它并做出一些艰难的选择，这样我们就可以腾出时间来构建实际上会再次发生变化的东西，而不仅仅是维持我们原地踏步。

Lenny Rachitsky: I imagine this latter bucket is who you mostly work with, the kind of companies that bring you in.

Lenny Rachitsky：我想后一种情况是你最常与之合作的公司，是那些吸引你加入的公司。

Ryan Singer: It's been a lot of the folks who still remember what it was like to be fast and they're kind of newly too big and they don't like being slow.

瑞安·辛格（Ryan Singer）：很多人仍然记得快的感觉，但他们现在太大了，不喜欢慢。

I've had a lot of that.

我经历过很多这样的事。

I think that your intuition is right.

我认为你的直觉是对的。

That the market for the last category is the biggest, but it's hard to reach them.

最后一类的市场是最大的，但很难达到。

It's not easy to talk about these things.

谈论这些事情并不容易。

These are sensitive topics.

这些都是敏感话题。

Do you know what I mean?

你知道我的意思吗？

Like, "Our engineering team isn't shipping," and it's happening at leadership level.

就像，“我们的工程团队不发货”，而这发生在领导层。

There's a ton of complaints happening deeper in the org, but nobody down in the org can change anything.

组织内部存在大量抱怨，但组织内部没有人可以改变任何事情。

At the end of the day, it's actually the interface at the executive level of being able to say, "How are we using our time?

归根结底，它实际上是执行层的接口，可以说：“我们如何利用我们的时间？

We have to change something."

我们必须改变一些事情。”

Lenny Rachitsky: To make it even more concrete in that first bucket, what's the size of org that you find is most in need of this?

Lenny Rachitsky：为了让第一个桶中的问题变得更加具体，您发现最需要这个的组织规模有多大？

It's like, "How many engineers?" Or is it like when they hire the first PM?

就像“有多少工程师？”或者就像他们雇佣第一位产品经理时那样？

Like what's kind of the-

就像什么样的-

Ryan Singer: I sometimes have the like, "How the heck do I hire the first PM and what do they do?" conversation.

Ryan Singer：我有时会想，“我到底如何聘请第一位产品经理，他们是做什么的？”对话。

But usually, it's later than that.

但通常情况下，会晚于这个时间。

It's after they hired the first PM, after they hired the second PM, and maybe even the third.

这是在他们聘请了第一位 PM 之后，在他们聘请了第二位 PM 之后，甚至可能是第三位 PM 之后。

And they're getting to the...

他们即将到达...

Product and engineering together are like 30, 50 people and it's like, "We thought we put everybody in the right roles.

产品和工程部门总共有 30、50 个人，就像是，“我们认为我们把每个人都安排在了正确的角色上。

We kind of did what we were supposed to do and everything is just grinding.

我们做了我们应该做的事情，但一切都只是磨蹭。

And why are we so slow?

为什么我们这么慢？

Lenny Rachitsky: Perfect.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：完美。

So 30 to 50-ish people seems like a good time to...

所以 30 到 50 岁左右的人似乎是一个好时机......

Basically, you're finding that's when things start to really break down.

基本上，你会发现事情开始真正崩溃的时候。

Ryan Singer: That's when they show themselves and I think...

瑞安·辛格：那是他们展示自己的时候，我想......

I mean, if someone hears this and it all starts to make sense and they're earlier in that wave, then of course the earlier that you can anticipate it, the better, right?

我的意思是，如果有人听到这个并且一切都开始有意义，并且他们处于这一浪潮的早期，那么当然，您可以预见到它，越早越好，对吧？

Lenny Rachitsky: When it's too late is when they come out so-

Lenny Rachitsky：当他们出来的时候就太晚了——

Ryan Singer: I mainly hear about it when it's too late.

Ryan Singer：我主要是在为时已晚的时候才听到的。

That's why they're reaching out-

这就是为什么他们伸出援手——

Lenny Rachitsky: Got it.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：明白了。

So maybe closer to 30.

所以可能接近30。

Okay.

好的。

Ryan Singer: Honestly, I think it starts the first project where, for example, the founding engineer is hands off and then the new hire is taking over responsibility.

Ryan Singer：老实说，我认为它启动了第一个项目，例如，创始工程师放手，然后新员工接管责任。

Or the person who was like sort of founder/CEO is first giving it to a PM to kind of thinking they're going to carry it through.

或者像创始人/首席执行官一样的人首先将其交给项目经理，让其认为他们将执行它。

And then, it's not exactly meeting their expectations of what they thought was going to happen.

然后，这并没有完全满足他们对即将发生的事情的期望。

I think that's when those disconnects actually start.

我认为那是那些脱节真正开始的时候。

It's the first step away from the work where the seeds of all of these problems actually start.

这是远离所有这些问题的种子真正开始的工作的第一步。

Lenny Rachitsky: I want to talk about Basecamp and how maybe not every company can operate like Basecamp.

Lenny Rachitsky：我想谈谈 Basecamp，以及为什么不是每家公司都能像 Basecamp 那样运作。

Before we get there, is there anything else along the lines of Shape Up that you want to add or share?

在我们讨论之前，您还有什么想要添加或分享的关于 Shape Up 的内容吗？

Ryan Singer: Yeah.

瑞安·辛格：是的。

There's one key thing, which is the role of the PM.

有一件关键的事情，那就是总理的角色。

I think what we see today, out of necessity in a lot of teams, is that the PMs spend a lot of time chasing around inside of the build phase, inside the time box, to try and make sure that people aren't stuck and getting lost in the weeds and try and keep things moving.

我认为我们今天看到的情况是，出于许多团队的需要，PM 花费了大量时间在构建阶段、时间范围内四处奔波，试图确保人们不会陷入困境并迷失在杂草中，并努力让事情继续进行。

And it can sometimes be too close to project management rather than product management.

有时它可能过于接近项目管理而不是产品管理。

Ryan Singer: And what we see in Shape Up teams when they hit their stride is that the PM moves upstream.

Ryan Singer：我们在 Shape Up 团队中看到，当他们大踏步前进时，PM 就会向上游移动。

So the PM is less busy with, "How do I get this project to not be in a bad state when it's getting built?" And they're way more in, "How do I understand the business context?

因此，PM 不再忙于“如何让这个项目在建设时不处于糟糕的状态？”他们更关心的是，“我如何理解业务环境？

How do I narrow down the problem?

我如何缩小问题范围？

How do I negotiate back and forth with maybe the CPO who brought this to me to understand where the core of it is?" That really getting the deeper understanding of the business and the problem and the customer domain and like what problem is worth solving and what's even slice of that problem is the valuable slice to argue that we should spend a few weeks on.

我如何与给我带来这个问题的首席产品官来回谈判以了解其核心在哪里？”真正深入了解业务、问题和客户领域，以及什么问题值得解决，甚至是该问题的一部分，是我们应该花几周时间争论的有价值的部分。

That's the place where the PMs can really contribute a lot in the Shape Up world.

这就是 PM 在 Shape Up 世界中真正可以做出很大贡献的地方。

That's kind of what they do, rather than shepherding the process or being a ritual master or something like that.

这就是他们所做的，而不是引导整个过程或成为仪式大师或类似的事情。

Lenny Rachitsky: That sounds pretty wonderful.

Lenny Rachitsky：听起来很棒。

I've been doing some thinking about what an AI-oriented world does to the role of PM and it feels like very similar to that actually, where the building now is going to happen for you with AI tooling.

我一直在思考面向人工智能的世界对 PM 角色的影响，感觉与实际上非常相似，现在的建筑将通过人工智能工具为你发生。

And that means the bigger question now is like, "What the hell should I build?

这意味着现在更大的问题是，“我到底应该建造什么？

And is the thing I've built right and correct and likely to work?" And it feels like this is similar, it's like the PM spending a lot more time upfront thinking through what to build.

我构建的东西是正确的、正确的并且可能起作用吗？”感觉这很相似，就像 PM 花了更多的时间预先思考要构建什么。

And then, the building is a lot more hands off.

然后，这座建筑就不再受人干涉了。

So hands off it gets done in like five minutes when you're just like, "Well, build this thing for me." "There it is."

因此，当你想“好吧，为我构建这个东西”时，它会在大约五分钟内完成。 “就在那里。”

Ryan Singer: Yeah.

瑞安·辛格：是的。

Let's see.

让我们看看。

Let's see.

让我们看看。

Yeah.

是的。

Lenny Rachitsky: Oh, man.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：哦，伙计。

What a wild time.

多么狂野的时光啊。

Okay.

好的。

Let's talk about Basecamp.

我们来谈谈Basecamp。

I think we talked about this ahead of the podcast that...

我想我们在播客之前讨论过这个......

You want people to know that Basecamp is very unique and not everyone can work the way Basecamp works.

您希望人们知道 Basecamp 非常独特，并不是每个人都能按照 Basecamp 的方式工作。

Just talk about your insight there and your advice there when people see all this advice coming out of Basecamp.

当人们看到来自 Basecamp 的所有这些建议时，只需谈谈您的见解和建议即可。

Ryan Singer: I got to tell you, I had no idea how unique we were until I was outside and there are so many things.

瑞安·辛格（Ryan Singer）：我必须告诉你，直到我到了外面，我才知道我们有多么独特，那里有很多东西。

For example, it's a lot of the things that people ask me about that are not in the book that started to reveal those things to me.

例如，人们问我的很多事情都没有在书中开始向我揭示这些事情。

That's so many things that I was just taking for granted.

有很多事情我都认为是理所当然的。

I mean, every designer codes.

我的意思是，每个设计师都会编码。

Ryan Singer: Imagine, if every designer codes and I don't just mean HTML.

Ryan Singer：想象一下，如果每个设计师都编码，而我不仅仅指 HTML。

I mean, like running the app locally, going in to the place where that view is rendered to make that thing look the way that they want it to look or whatever, right?

我的意思是，就像在本地运行应用程序一样，进入渲染视图的位置以使该东西看起来像他们想要的样子或其他什么，对吗？

I mean, like really codes, every designer.

我的意思是，就像真正的代码一样，每个设计师都是如此。

So every designer codes, where's the wall between design and engineering?

那么每个设计师都会编码，设计和工程之间的界限在哪里？

Where is the moment where you arrive with the Figma file and then the disappointment and all of your hopes get destroyed because the engineer is telling you no, right?

当你带着 Figma 文件到达时，然后失望和你所有的希望都破灭了，因为工程师告诉你不，对吗？

Like those moments don't even exist in that world.

就像那些时刻根本不存在于那个世界一样。

Ryan Singer: And then, also, I think also there was this lack of distance between sort of the business objective, the thing that we're trying to...

瑞安·辛格（Ryan Singer）：然后，我认为我们正在努力实现的业务目标之间也缺乏距离......

The reason we want to maybe do this project and the blessing of the founders and the...

我们想做这个项目的原因以及创始人和......的祝福

Like, there wasn't this kind of executives far away with some big targets and then some layer of PM and then some building.

就像，没有这样的高管远离一些大目标，然后是一些 PM 层，然后是一些建筑。

I mean, the founders were always there, right there in the problem definition still.

我的意思是，创始人始终在那儿，就在问题定义中。

Ryan Singer: I mean, I can't say today, but I mean up until 2021 when I was still there.

Ryan Singer：我的意思是，我今天还不能说，但我的意思是直到 2021 年我还在那里。

So it meant that there was so much clarity all the time around what we're solving and why and why we're making time for it.

因此，这意味着我们始终非常清楚我们正在解决什么问题，以及为什么我们要为此腾出时间。

And then, of course, on the engineering side as well.

当然，还有工程方面。

I mean, imagine, you have no sales org, you have no marketing.

我的意思是，想象一下，你没有销售组织，没有营销。

That all of selling and marketing is happening by the unicorn founders.

所有的销售和营销都是由独角兽创始人进行的。

So it means that there isn't contention for engineering time, that there isn't like all these different sources of requests that you have to wrestle with,

因此，这意味着不存在工程时间的争用，也不存在您必须处理的所有这些不同来源的请求，

Ryan Singer: And David did such an extraordinary job of...

瑞恩·辛格：大卫做得非常出色......

I mean, the more I see the real world, the more I'm amazed at how every six weeks, there was clear runway in engineering of like, "We have time for whatever the...

我的意思是，我对现实世界了解得越多，我就越惊讶于每隔六周，工程领域就会出现一条清晰的跑道，比如“我们有时间做任何事情……”

Whatever we'd agreed together is the most important thing." Just blank check like six weeks at a time.

无论我们共同商定什么，都是最重要的。”就像一次六周那样的空白支票。

Not a blank check, but you know what I mean?

不是一张空白支票，但你知道我的意思吗？

Like a blank six weeks, yeah?

就像空白的六周，是吗？

Ryan Singer: Again and again and again, years without end.

瑞安·辛格：一次又一次，岁月永无止境。

Keeping that engineering capacity focused on readiness for product and totally leaning into what's exciting to do to build for the product.

将工程能力集中在产品准备上，并完全专注于为产品构建令人兴奋的事情。

And not getting lost in all this refactoring and new infrastructure and technical debt and stuff like that.

并且不要迷失在所有这些重构、新的基础设施和技术债务以及类似的东西中。

I mean, those are amazing.

我的意思是，那些太棒了。

So those are some really big differences.

所以这些是一些非常大的差异。

And it doesn't mean that you have to be Basecamp to do Shape Up.

这并不意味着您必须在 Basecamp 才能进行 Shape Up。

But what it does mean is that when we say, "Oh, just have a shaping session and if you have the pressure of the time box, then you can make trade-offs together." It's like, "Well, if we are used to having a big wall between, for example, engineering and design, then we're going to have to learn..." Somebody who wants to start shaping is going to have to learn like, "Well, oh, I need to figure out who to bring together and how to have that session and how do we interact with each other.

但它的真正含义是，当我们说：“哦，只要进行一次塑造会议，如果你有时间限制，那么你可以一起做出权衡。”就像，“好吧，如果我们习惯了在工程和设计之间存在一堵大墙，那么我们就必须学习……”想要开始塑造的人必须学习，“好吧，哦，我需要弄清楚要召集谁，如何进行会议以及我们如何彼此互动。

So that we are combining all of that knowledge that maybe at Basecamp was all in the same head in a lot of cases."

因此，我们将所有这些知识结合起来，在很多情况下，这些知识可能在 Basecamp 都集中在同一个头脑中。”

Lenny Rachitsky: This is such an important point for people to hear, because there's so many people that come on podcasts like this and share, "Here's how to do it," based on their experience.

Lenny Rachitsky：这对人们来说非常重要，因为有很多人参加这样的播客并根据他们的经验分享“这是如何做到的”。

And there's so many just assumptions about their resources, the people they hire, the way the founders operate.

关于他们的资源、他们雇用的人员、创始人的运作方式，有很多只是假设。

Like no sales team, I think that's like...

就像没有销售团队一样，我认为这就像......

I don't even think about that.

我什至没有想到这一点。

Ryan Singer: Yeah.

瑞安·辛格：是的。

Imagine, no such thing as a request from sales, yeah?

想象一下，没有销售人员的要求，是吗？

No such thing as pressure of like, "We need this thing in order to upsell or to close this deal." Never.

没有诸如“我们需要这个东西来追加销售或完成这笔交易”之类的压力。从来没有。

Lenny Rachitsky: It sounds like you're in this Basecamp...

Lenny Rachitsky：听起来你在这个大本营......

By the way, was it called 37signals?

顺便问一下，它叫 37signals 吗？

Like it's interesting you call it Basecamp not 37signal.

有趣的是，您将其称为 Basecamp，而不是 37signal。

Ryan Singer: Yeah.

瑞安·辛格：是的。

I mean, so it's just like the timing of when I left.

我的意思是，这就像我离开时的时间一样。

We were originally 37signals and then Basecamp became so big that we renamed ourselves to Basecamp.

我们最初是 37signals，后来 Basecamp 变得太大了，我们更名为 Basecamp。

Ryan Singer: Yeah.

瑞安·辛格：是的。

And then, so for example, on the book, it says Shape Up and there's a Basecamp logo on the bottom, not a 37signals logo.

然后，例如，在书上，它写着“Shape Up”，底部有一个 Basecamp 徽标，而不是 37signals 徽标。

But then, since I went back, so it's 37signals again.

但自从我回去之后，又变成了 37signals。

So I sometimes struggle with I don't know what to call it but it's both.

所以有时我很挣扎，我不知道该怎么称呼它，但两者兼而有之。

Whatever people can recognize, it's the same powerhouse.

无论人们能认出什么，那都是同一个强者。

Lenny Rachitsky: Okay.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：好的。

Cool.

酷。

I'm glad I'm not the only one that's confused.

我很高兴我不是唯一一个感到困惑的人。

But 37signal is the current name.

但 37signal 是当前名称。

Great.

太棒了。

Lenny Rachitsky: So you said that it felt like you left and it was like this bubble you got out of.

Lenny Rachitsky：所以你说感觉就像你离开了，就像你摆脱了这个泡沫。

Was there like a moment where you're like, "You wrote this book.

有没有那么一瞬间，你会说：“这本书是你写的。

Everyone..." You're like, "Hey, this is how you should work," and then you're like, "Oh, wait.

每个人......”你会说，“嘿，这就是你应该如何工作，”然后你会说，“哦，等等。

This doesn't actually work in real life for a lot of people."?

这在现实生活中对很多人来说实际上行不通。”？

Is there a moment there?

有那么一刻吗？

Ryan Singer: It wasn't that this doesn't work, I was just in a foreign country.

Ryan Singer：并不是说这不起作用，我只是在国外。

It was like we tried it and it didn't work.

就好像我们尝试过但没有成功。

One of the common things I would hear is the projects kept running over.

我听到的最常见的事情之一是项目不断超期。

"We weren't finishing them at the end of the cycle.

“我们没有在周期结束时完成它们。

They kept running over and running over." And then, I would be like, "Huh.

他们不停地跑过来。”然后，我会说，“嗯。

So can you show me your shaping work?" And then, they would show me a PRD and I'd be like, "That doesn't look like what's in the book." And again like, "Can you show me your shaping work?" And they'd show me like a bunch of Figma files.

那么你能给我展示一下你的塑造作品吗？”然后，他们会向我展示一个 PRD，我会说，“这看起来不像书中的内容。”又会说，“你能给我展示一下你的塑造作品吗？”然后他们会向我展示一堆 Figma 文件。

Ryan Singer: And then, what I started to understand was like we have some people in a role who were used to making a certain artifact at a certain step and they just kept doing that.

Ryan Singer：然后，我开始了解到，我们有一些人担任某个角色，他们习惯于在某个步骤中制作某个工件，并且他们只是继续这样做。

And I didn't appreciate...

而我却没有欣赏...

It took me a while to realize like, "There's no engineer in the picture here." And it was when we started to actually do the course, I said...

我花了一段时间才意识到，“这里的照片中没有工程师。”当我们开始实际学习这门课程时，我说……

Well, I did actually a couple projects where I helped teams hands-on and I learned that they...

嗯，我实际上做了几个项目，我亲自帮助团队，我了解到他们......

Ryan Singer: It was the first actually consulting project that I did where I helped a team who was stuck.

Ryan Singer：这是我所做的第一个真正的咨询项目，我帮助了一个陷入困境的团队。

And what we did was we chose the engineer who was best suited to come over to product and be there in the shaping.

我们所做的就是选择最适合产品并参与塑造的工程师。

And that was the moment when it was like, "Ah.

那一刻就像是，“啊。

Now, I'm in the world I know again," when we had all of that mixed in the same room again.

现在，我又回到了我所熟悉的世界，”当我们再次将所有这些混合在同一个房间里时。

And so, that was kind of like...

所以，这有点像......

That was really something...

那确实是一件事情……

I mean, it was a total learning curve for me and there's a lot of things like that.

我的意思是，这对我来说是一个完整的学习曲线，有很多类似的事情。

But that was, for example, a really big one.

但这是一个非常大的例子。

It's like, "Oh, we have to get engineering in there."

就像，“哦，我们必须在那里进行工程设计。”

Lenny Rachitsky: You're the type of guest I most love having on this podcast, because you basically work with many, many companies, study what's working, what's not.

Lenny Rachitsky：你是我最喜欢的播客类型，因为你基本上与很多很多公司合作，研究什么有效，什么无效。

You're not in the clouds pontificating about something.

你并不是在云端武断地谈论某事。

You're working with teams to make things better.

您正在与团队合作以使事情变得更好。

And then, you take all of that learning, put it into a book, and share with us all.

然后，你将所有的学习内容写成一本书，并与我们所有人分享。

And so, the ROI is just incredible for us all because you've spent so much time doing this and you've actually done the work.

因此，投资回报率对我们所有人来说都是令人难以置信的，因为您花了很多时间来做这件事并且您实际上已经完成了工作。

You're not just in theory about it.

你不仅仅停留在理论上。

So this is amazing.

所以这太棒了。

But we're not done yet.

但我们还没有完成。

One question I wanted to ask is, Jason was tweeting that there's...

我想问的一个问题是，杰森在推特上说……

He's working on a follow-up Shape Up book.

他正在写一本后续的《Shape Up》书。

What's happening there?

那里发生了什么事？

Are you involved in that?

你参与其中吗？

What's the story?

这是什么故事？

Ryan Singer: So I also saw the tweet.

瑞安·辛格：所以我也看到了这条推文。

And I have to admit, I was a little surprised when I saw this tweet, but I had had a conversation with Jason a year earlier.

我必须承认，当我看到这条推文时，我有点惊讶，但一年前我曾与杰森进行过交谈。

And he reached out and he said, "Hey, we're thinking about doing a second edition of the book." And my first reaction...

他伸出手说：“嘿，我们正在考虑制作这本书的第二版。”而我的第一反应...

Imagine, I was actually really in the middle of learning all these things that teams need to learn in order to catch up to what was natural for Basecamp to do.

想象一下，我实际上正在学习团队需要学习的所有这些东西，以便赶上 Basecamp 自然要做的事情。

And so, for me, it was like, "Interesting.

所以，对我来说，就像是，“有趣。

I have a lot of new things.

我有很多新东西。

I have a lot of new ideas.

我有很多新想法。

Maybe collaborating on the second edition could make sense."

也许在第二版上进行合作是有意义的。”

Ryan Singer: But what I understood was that what he wanted to do was to make an updated version of how they work, because that's always been a big thing of how...

瑞安·辛格（Ryan Singer）：但我的理解是，他想做的是更新他们的工作方式，因为这一直是一件大事……

I should use the right name, 37signals, of how they market and also how they lead is they like to really show a clear example.

我应该使用正确的名称，37signals，他们的营销方式以及他们的领导方式，他们喜欢真正展示一个清晰的例子。

Not like, "This is how you could do it.

不是这样的，“这就是你可以做到的。

This is how some people do it," but like, "This is how we do it."

有些人就是这样做的，”但就像，“我们就是这样做的。”

Ryan Singer: And I think it's their strength that they are very, very clear like, "This is how we do it and take it or leave it." What I understood was that if I did another version of the book that was just how Basecamp does it, I think it would leave so much opportunity on the table.

瑞安·辛格：我认为他们的优势在于他们非常非常清楚，“这就是我们做事的方式，要么接受要么放弃。”我的理解是，如果我按照 Basecamp 的做法制作这本书的另一个版本，我认为它会留下很多机会。

Like there's so many people where what they need to learn is more like, "How can it come closer to where I am?

就像有很多人需要学习的更像是，“如何才能更接近我现在的水平？

If I have the wall today between product and engineering, how do I bring the right people together into a shaping session?

如果我现在在产品和工程之间有一道墙，我如何将合适的人聚集在一起参加塑造会议？

How do we actually do that?

我们实际上如何做到这一点？

How do I overcome all of these little challenges because this is so far from our current way of working?"

我如何克服所有这些小挑战，因为这与我们目前的工作方式相去甚远？”

Ryan Singer: So the work that I'm doing with, for example, with shaping in real life is all about those gaps.

瑞安·辛格：所以我正在做的工作，例如，现实生活中的塑造，就是关于这些差距的。

And then, I don't know what's going to be in the second edition because they are...

然后，我不知道第二版会是什么，因为它们......

I guess someone there is going to be working on that.

我想那里会有人致力于这方面的工作。

But what I'm guessing is it's going to be an update on kind of, "Up on top of the mountain over here, this is what Basecamp is doing." So hopefully, it'll be a cool thing to look at as like, "Here's a model of what they're doing." And then the question is, "What can I take from that and what do I need in order to actually be able to make it work in the real situation I'm in?" And that's kind of where...

但我猜测这将是一种更新，“在山顶上，这就是 Basecamp 正在做的事情。”所以希望，“这是他们正在做的事情的模型”会是一件很酷的事情。接下来的问题是，“我能从中得到什么？我需要什么才能真正使其在我所处的真实情况下发挥作用？”这就是……的地方。

Well, that's my focus.

嗯，这就是我的重点。

Lenny Rachitsky: This is so interesting.

Lenny Rachitsky：这太有趣了。

Thank you for sharing.

谢谢您的分享。

It sounds like a fork.

听起来像叉子。

You forked it and these are going potentially in different directions but inspired by each other.

你分叉了它，这些可能会朝着不同的方向发展，但彼此受到启发。

Lenny Rachitsky: So interesting.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：太有趣了。

Ryan, is there anything else that you want to share before we wrap up?

Ryan，在我们结束之前您还有什么想分享的吗？

Ryan Singer: One thing I could throw out there is sometimes people reach out to me because their projects aren't shipping, there's a lot of struggle, there's a lot of lack of clarity.

Ryan Singer：我可以抛出的一件事是，有时人们会联系我，因为他们的项目没有交付，有很多困难，有很多缺乏清晰度。

But the root cause is actually that the input at the very beginning of the process is too unclear or...

但根本原因其实是流程一开始的输入太不清楚或者……

Like we don't actually know what's important to customers or we're not actually sure where the value is or this kind of a thing.

就像我们实际上并不知道什么对客户来说是重要的，或者我们实际上不确定价值在哪里或诸如此类的事情。

So there is this link, this framing step that we talked about of, "What is really the problem?", before we go into shaping.

因此，在我们进行塑造之前，我们讨论了这个链接，这个框架步骤，“真正的问题是什么？”。

Ryan Singer: This is the link to product strategy also.

Ryan Singer：这也是与产品策略的联系。

And this is the place where it can be really useful to reach for a lot of, for example, Bob Moesta stuff with the Jobs-to-be-Done and the demand-side work, trying to get clear about big...

在这里，接触到很多东西是非常有用的，例如，鲍勃·莫埃斯塔（Bob Moesta）关于待完成工作和需求方工作的东西，试图弄清楚大的……

So that's the tool that I reach for at that phase.

这就是我在那个阶段所使用的工具。

And you can think of kind of this...

你可以想到这样的......

Before the problem definition, there's this question of like, "What's the demand?

在问题定义之前，有这样的问题：“需求是什么？

Where are people struggling?

人们在哪里挣扎？

Where is really the place, the itch they're trying to scratch?

他们想要抓的痒处到底在哪里？

Ryan Singer: And then, a lot of the Shape Up stuff is kind of when I have something where I think there's an opportunity or I think there's something meaningful there because of what we learned from customers or the job to be done, research, or whatever it was.

Ryan Singer：然后，很多 Shape Up 的事情都是当我认为有机会或者我认为那里有一些有意义的东西时，因为我们从客户那里学到了东西，或者要做的工作，研究，或者其他什么。

Now, how do I turn that into something that we can actually go do and ship in a reasonable amount of time?

现在，我如何将其变成我们可以实际去做并在合理的时间内发货的事情？

That's the supply side.

这就是供给侧。

That's where the Shape Up part fits in.

这就是 Shape Up 部分的用武之地。

So maybe it just might be cool for people to see a link there.

所以也许人们看到那里的链接可能会很酷。

Lenny Rachitsky: That's a great plug for a Bob Moesta episode.

Lenny Rachitsky：这是鲍勃·莫埃斯塔剧集的一个很棒的插件。

We talked in-depth about the Jobs-to-be-Done framework and how to actually apply it.

我们深入讨论了“待完成的工作”框架以及如何实际应用它。

What's the book you'd recommend there?

你在那里推荐什么书？

It sounds like basically it's like Shape Up plus this book gives you a lot.

听起来基本上就像《Shape Up》一样，而且这本书给了你很多东西。

Ryan Singer: Actually, the one that I recommend the most is Demand-Side Sales 101 and it's funny because it's like sales.

Ryan Singer：实际上，我最推荐的是需求方销售 101，这很有趣，因为它就像销售一样。

Especially for a product person, you're like, "I'm the product person, not the sales person." But it's such a good dive into, "What are people really trying to solve?" And getting into that mindset of, "What's the struggle?

尤其是对于产品人员来说，你会说，“我是产品人员，而不是销售人员。”但这很好地深入探讨了“人们真正想要解决什么问题？”并进入这样的心态：“挣扎是什么？

What's the problem?" I think that's a really good entry point for that.

有什么问题吗？”我认为这是一个非常好的切入点。

Lenny Rachitsky: Yeah.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：是的。

I don't love that title.

我不喜欢这个标题。

I feel like you could have done better there with that book's title because-

我觉得你可以用那本书的标题做得更好，因为-

Ryan Singer: What's interesting about it is that it's very, very pointy for like if you are trying to make progress on sales, then it's this other kind of sales, this demand side sales.

瑞安·辛格（Ryan Singer）：有趣的是，如果你想在销售方面取得进展，那么这就是另一种销售，这种需求侧销售，这是非常非常尖锐的。

So I think maybe it's more for us who are kind of using it for different purposes.

所以我认为也许这更适合我们将其用于不同目的的人。

Like we're the product people trying to pull something out of it.

就像我们是人们试图从中提取某些东西的产品一样。

That it's a little bit less aligned, but it's still useful.

虽然它有点不太对齐，但仍然很有用。

Lenny Rachitsky: Yeah.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：是的。

But basically it's like the Jobs-to-be-Done book is what-

但基本上这就像《待完成的工作》一书的内容——

Ryan Singer: Yeah.

瑞安·辛格：是的。

It's kind of like the Jobs-to-be-Done book that's a bit more tactical.

这有点像《待完成的工作》一书，更具战术性。

If you're really curious about the general spirit of Jobs-to-be-Done, then Competing Against Luck is a really good intro.

如果您真的对“待完成的工作”的一般精神感到好奇，那么《与运气竞争》是一个非常好的介绍。

That's the one that Clay Christensen wrote with a lot of...

那是克莱·克里斯滕森写的，里面有很多……

I think there's a lot of stuff that Bob worked on that's in there.

我认为鲍勃在那里做了很多工作。

But for a little bit more tactical like, "What's it look like to do the interview?

但对于更具策略性的问题，比如“面试是什么样子的？

And how to think about the struggling moment?" and stuff like that, this Demand-Side Sales is good for this strategy stuff.

以及如何思考挣扎的时刻？”诸如此类的东西，需求方销售对于战略方面的东西很有好处。

Lenny Rachitsky: Awesome.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：太棒了。

And we'll also link to this episode where you could get the gist of it in one hour's time.

我们还将链接到这一集，您可以在一小时内了解其要点。

Ryan Singer: Oh, that's right.

瑞安·辛格：哦，没错。

You did...

你做了...

That episode was great by the way.

顺便说一句，那一集很棒。

That's...

那是...

Yeah-

是啊-

Lenny Rachitsky: Thanks, Ryan.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：谢谢，瑞安。

Thanks, Ryan.

谢谢，瑞安。

Okay.

好的。

We did it.

我们做到了。

This was amazing.

这太棒了。

I think this is going to help so many people-

我想这会对很多人有帮助——

Lenny Rachitsky: We're not done yet.

Lenny Rachitsky：我们还没有完成。

Two final questions for you.

最后有两个问题要问你。

Where can folks find the book, find you if they want to work with you?

如果人们想与您合作，可以在哪里找到这本书，找到您？

Anything else that you want to share?

您还有什么想分享的吗？

And how can listeners be useful to you?

听众如何对你有用？

Ryan Singer: Well, they can find me at my website.

瑞安·辛格：嗯，他们可以在我的网站上找到我。

That's ryansinger.co. I'm also on X on RJS.

那是 ryansinger.co。我也在 RJS 的 X 上。

I'm on LinkedIn.

我在领英上。

So just reach me there.

所以请联系我。

And how can people be useful to me?

人们如何对我有用？

I love hearing from people who are having these problems.

我喜欢听到遇到这些问题的人的来信。

If you're having these problems where it's like, "Things are dragging," or, "We can't see the end and we're not getting the quality we need," and all this stuff like man.

如果你遇到这些问题，比如“事情进展缓慢”，或者“我们看不到结局，我们没有得到我们需要的质量”，以及所有这些像人一样的东西。

I mean, this is how I learned all this stuff is by talking to people who are in it.

我的意思是，这就是我通过与其中的人交谈来了解所有这些东西的方式。

So even if it's not clear what's the next step yet.

因此，即使目前还不清楚下一步是什么。

If that problem is real, it would be cool to hear about it.

如果这个问题确实存在，那么听到这个消息就很酷了。

I'd love to chat.

我很想聊天。

Lenny Rachitsky: Be careful what you wish for about Moesta.

Lenny Rachitsky：小心你对莫埃斯塔的期望。

He was just on the podcast and he told me he's got over a hundred LinkedIn DMs with people sharing their struggles with their job search.

他刚刚在播客上告诉我，他有一百多个 LinkedIn 私信，人们分享了他们在求职过程中遇到的困难。

So here you go.

那么就到这里吧。

Ryan Singer: Oh, yeah.

瑞安·辛格：哦，是的。

Job moves, that's a big one.

工作变动，这是一件大事。

I think that's a broad appeal.

我认为这是一个广泛的吸引力。

Yeah.

是的。

Lenny Rachitsky: Yeah.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：是的。

That's true.

这是真的。

I'm going to ask you to explain that when you do consulting work, just like how does that work?

我想请您解释一下，当您从事咨询工作时，就像是如何运作的？

Who's that for?

那是给谁的？

Just because I know that's something else you do.

只是因为我知道那是你做的其他事情。

Ryan Singer: So it basically starts with uh, either often first CPO or CTO often reaches out first.

Ryan Singer：所以它基本上是从呃开始的，通常是第一个 CPO 或 CTO 通常首先伸出援手。

And when it works well is when we actually get them together and then they understand that they need to change something or we have like a head of product and a head of engineering, that kind of a thing.

当它运作良好时，我们实际上将他们聚集在一起，然后他们明白他们需要改变一些东西，或者我们有产品主管和工程主管之类的东西。

If those two are both seeing eye to eye that there's a problem, then we can start a conversation around, "Okay.

如果这两个人都一致认为存在问题，那么我们可以开始对话，“好吧。

So who would be the right people for a pilot team?

那么谁是试点团队的合适人选呢？

What are the things that are going on business-wise that could be a good pilot project?"

从商业角度来看，哪些事情可以成为一个很好的试点项目？”

Ryan Singer: And then, I can help to figure out like, "How do we actually..." So almost like guiding through, like narrowing down that pilot project framing so that they have the support that it's going to be successful in shaping.

瑞安·辛格：然后，我可以帮助弄清楚，“我们实际上如何......”所以几乎就像指导一样，就像缩小试点项目框架的范围，以便他们获得成功塑造的支持。

And then, coaching the team so that they actually learn those shaping skills so that they can get through a session and come out with much more clarity.

然后，指导团队，让他们真正学习这些塑造技能，这样他们就可以完成课程并更加清晰地表达出来。

Like how do they actually run those sessions.

就像他们如何实际运行这些会话一样。

Ryan Singer: So it's kind of first working with leadership, "Who do we need to get to do this work?

瑞安·辛格（Ryan Singer）：因此，这首先是与领导层合作，“我们需要谁来做这项工作？

Who are the right people?

谁是合适的人？

How do we bring them into a pilot project?" Narrowing down, doing some framing work on the pilot, so it's going to be clearer in the shaping.

我们如何将它们纳入试点项目？”缩小范围，对试播集做一些框架工作，这样塑造起来就会更加清晰。

And then, giving some guidance on how to get through that shaping with some feedback rounds.

然后，通过一些反馈轮次，就如何完成这一塑造提供一些指导。

This is usually a good approach.

这通常是一个很好的方法。

Lenny Rachitsky: Amazing.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：太棒了。

And they can find this on your website if they want to explore this?

如果他们想探索这个，可以在您的网站上找到这个吗？

Lenny Rachitsky: Amazing.

莱尼·拉奇茨基：太棒了。

Ryan, thank you so much for being here.

瑞安，非常感谢你来到这里。

Ryan Singer: Yeah.

瑞安·辛格：是的。

Thanks a lot.

多谢。

You had amazing questions.

你提出了令人惊奇的问题。

It's a subject that can go in so many directions and you kept bringing us onto some kind of a main track, so I'm really pleased.

这是一个可以朝很多方向发展的主题，你不断地将我们带入某种主轨道，所以我真的很高兴。

It was really nice.

真的很好。

Thanks a lot.

多谢。

Thanks, Ryan, and bye, everyone.: Thank you so much for listening.

谢谢瑞安，再见，大家：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。

中文为机器翻译，仅供参考。