The Danger with Optimizing for Persistent Peace

The most successful Product teams are comfortable with a fair amount of animosity between its team members.

I barely slept last night.

At the time of this writing, I’m engaged in a firestorm with the Engineering department. It keeps me up at night. It’s causing disruption. It’s also not the first time I’ve experienced friction with my Engineering counterpart. For background, I’ve asked for a large swath of work for the upcoming sprint, with an offer to discuss and compromise. Engineering has escalated to leadership that the changes are too grand. Like most issues, communication needs improvement. Yet, our leadership team gets irked and overly involved when these issues arise.

I spent most of the night staring at the ceiling, thinking about how to fix it. I came to a strange conclusion. I ultimately asked myself, “Do I need to fix this?”

My first boss once asked someone , “You may not like me, but do you respect me?” This was back in 2001. I still think about that comment a lot, maybe more so since I joined Product Management.

In my most successful days as a PM, there was more friction and yet more success. Back in the heydays of the 2010’s, it seemed like companies cared less about petty squabbles. They’d blow over. I can’t recall a time when a work-related argument blew up.

Typically, the arguments came about because Product wanted more stuff and Engineering were trying to protect the team from over-promising. There are plenty of articles that exist that can guide one around this problem. Some will cover methodology, others will talk about culture.

I am thinking that it’s okay to accept the friction. I wonder if it would be more important if leadership lent an ear but ultimately accepted that the friction was okay.

Think about it: As a Product Manager, I’m going to draw up an ideal state for the customer. Engineering is resource constrained. Engineering may feel that the cost of the work eclipses the value. Still, Product persists, describing the value that may be less measurable and how the work fits into a larger product vision. Eventually, a compromise is made and something pretty good gets built. It’s economics.

I’ve seen the other side. I’ve witnessed leadership teams that do whatever it takes to squash friction. The perception is that any argument or disagreement is demoralizing to the culture. But it’s not! (I’m tempted to add a paragraph about remote work being the potential culprit. It’s at least a factor here.)

Friction is good. If companies promote a culture where no one ever quarrels, then you have a Product Management team that essentially takes the path that makes the work easiest for the Engineering team. That’s not the right path for the customer. In fact, it’s typically in these disagreements that the best ideas are born.

I want a Product team that is fighting for the customer, shooting for the moon but expecting to land back on Earth, only in a better location than they were before. I want an Engineering team that defends its time and integrity with commitments and push back on Product decisions. Even if that means a bit of locking horns along the way.

As long as folks are respectful, trusting smart and hard-working, let’s add in a bit of disagreement. Let’s add in a bit of friction. Let’s see what comes out of it. I predict two outcomes: Stronger products and stronger teams.