Few posts from experienced PMs assert that product frameworks that one learns during PM prep/interviews are almost useless in the actual job.
Is that true?
My take: Frameworks are very useful. It is just that many PMs don’t explicitly discuss framework names but still apply the knowledge gained from them at work.
Let us see how –
1. Frameworks are codified common sense that you don’t need to reinvent: Practitioners use structured problem-solving and create frameworks from what they learnt from those problem-solving exercises.
Many years back, I simply used impact & effort as key levers (the equivalent to ROI) for prioritization. Then I found something interesting. The impact is usually an estimate which can have a large degree of unpredictability. I wanted to prioritise higher the features that had higher chances of succeeding. So I added ‘Confidence’ as a parameter to my model. I didn’t know about ICE framework at that time though it was exactly what I ended up doing.
Knowing the framework earlier would have helped me skip a few steps rather than having to reinvent the wheel.
2. Frameworks accelerate learning: When I was new to product-led growth, I used the AARRR framework (with modifications to suit the environment I was in). It provided a great way to start structuring our thinking around growth, goals and measuring progress.
When our approach became common knowledge across relevant teams, we stopped using the term AARRR framework but continued using the fundamental knowledge gained out of that framework
In summary, frameworks are helpful irrespective of whether you explicitly use them at work or not.
Word of caution: When you apply frameworks, just ensure you
a) Use choose the appropriate ones for the problem at hand and
b) modify them to suit the context of your problem/environment.
Otherwise, it becomes a purely theoretical exercise with results of nothing better than shooting in the dark.
What’s your take on frameworks in your day-to-day work?
