The Perils of Too Much Process

When your process is heavy, execution suffers

Freedom of the Startup

The slowest product team I ever worked on was my very first product job after leaving my startup. I was used to working unencumbered. As a founder, I could jump from idea to idea and task to task. I had no process holding me back. I was also the product manager, the designer, and the tech lead. That might sound overwhelming to some, but to me it meant freedom. My creativity was not tied to the ground by the rope of a heavy process. The only "required" approval of my work came from my co-founder. The stress of that approval is certainly not the same as approval from a boss. I recall being able to go from discovery to execution on many initiatives in a matter of weeks. Was this execution level only because we were the only two people making decisions? I don't think so.

The Promise of Small Product Teams

The goal of the small product squad working on one product area is to replicate the creativity and speed of execution often found in startups. In theory, this concept can work. But for it to work, it requires the squad to be given full autonomy over the outputs and outcomes. Managerial oversight and gate-checking must be minimal. In my first product role after leaving my startup, the number of gate checks bogged down the process. An initiative that would typically take three months would end up taking six months.

Inefficiencies of Unnecessary Process

The negative, unintended impacts of having too many gate-checks, as well as having an ill-fitting organizational structure, were most evident in the design review process. The team was structured so that there was a UX design team AND a UI design team. However, where the authority of the UX team ended and where the authority of the UI team began was a mystery.

If we follow the journey of a solution from wireframe to final design, this is what it might look like in this process:

1. Based on the discussed requirements, the UX designer creates a lo-fi wireframe.

2. The product manager reviews the lo-fi wireframe with the UX designer to ensure the concept delivers the value sought.

3. The UX manager (the boss of the UX designer) reviews the lo-fi wireframe. Any comments at this point are typically easy to implement.

4. The UX designer turns the final lo-fi wireframe into a hi-fi wireframe.

5. The product manager reviews the hi-fi wireframe with the UX designer to ensure the concept delivers the value sought.

6. The UX manager reviews the hi-fi wireframe. Again, any comments at this point are typically easy to implement.

7. Here is where things get loopy. The UX designer then hands off the final hi-fi wireframe to the UI designer.

8. The UI designer creates the first draft of the final design.

9. The UI manager reviews the draft of the final design.

10. The UX manager reviews the draft of the final design.

11. The product manager reviews the draft of the final design.

12. At least another round of amendments takes place. Steps 8 to 11 repeat until the final design is reached. The final design is signed off by the UI manager, the UX manager, and the product manager.

The Costs of Organizational Silos

To add complication to the complexity, the UX manager and the UI managers were often at odds with each other, hindering the delivery of the solution. Assuming that the relationship between these two people was dysfunctional, they still were not helped by the organizational structure and the cumbersome process they were forced to follow. In fact, it is my opinion that their participation in the review process was unnecessary. If the product team was left to operate as the efficient squad they were set up to be, then I believe value would have been delivered quickly and with the expected quality that the customer expects.

Striking the Right Balance

While some process is necessary in product development to ensure quality, too much process can hinder speed and creativity. The most effective product teams are small, cross-functional squads with autonomy to make decisions. They move fast by eliminating unnecessary gatekeeping and only involving additional oversight when critical. Though organizational silos and hierarchical approvals may provide the illusion of control, they often introduce inefficiencies and interpersonal conflicts that slow progress. The key is striking the right balance between structure and freedom, understanding that autonomy fuels innovation.