I used to believe that a company with a Chief Product Officer and a commitment to Scrum must have some form of quarterly planning. There had to be a roadmap, a shared rhythm, a narrative of progress.
But reality has been... disconcerting.
More and more companies - particularly in what I’ll call “Old Europe” - operate without a clear compass. No OKRs. No unified roadmaps. No meaningful quarterly planning ceremonies. Instead of collaborative strategy sessions, teams exist in isolated archipelagos, each with its own priorities and no shared outcomes.
What did disciplined planning look like in my experience? It wasn’t about rigid structures. It was about creating alignment. Before each quarter, product managers and tech leads would collaborate, sketching out initiatives with rough estimates of scope. These plans would be shared across teams, dependencies discussed openly, and priorities adjusted through negotiation. There was always an unspoken understanding: we owed each other outcomes, not just tasks.
Now? That structure has eroded. Teams work in silos, their efforts never converging. Even when Agile frameworks like Scrum (or else) are “implemented” (20+ years after its inception!), there’s no shared vision or accountability.
The most alarming trend? Companies are now pouring AI integrations into these poorly planned products like it’s a silver bullet. But AI doesn’t fix unit economics. It doesn’t magically create product-market fit.
In fact, it worsens the problem.
Fresh product managers - often still grappling with analytics and business fundamentals - are now tasked with justifying AI features that promise utility but deliver none. The result? Products with no clear revenue model, no way to measure success, and an ETA that perpetually recedes into the future.
They have said, 54% of roadmaps are designed around outputs (features shipped) rather than outcomes (value delivered). When you layer AI onto an output-driven mindset, you end up with features that don’t solve problems - just shiny distractions.
This isn’t just bad for products. It’s toxic for talent. Ambitious professionals want to build legacies, not tidy AI-powered features on zombie products. They want to work on things that matter - products that solve real problems. But in these companies, the economics are so murky that even LLM-driven automation can’t justify their existence.
The collapse of planning discipline isn’t a death knell - it’s a reset. For product managers who embrace first principles thinking, this is the opportunity of our generation.
The right approach looks like this:
1. Clarity of Purpose: Define a product vision rooted in real market needs.
2. Outcome-Driven Roadmaps: Use OKRs to prioritize measurable business outcomes over feature lists.
3. Economic Rigor: Understand unit economics before adding AI. If the product can’t generate value without it, the foundation is unstable.
Ultimately, the path forward starts with discipline. First, build a product with undeniable utility and clear economics. Only then can AI (or any technology) expand its value.
AI isn’t the first story you build - it’s the second floor of a house that’s already standing.
Until then? We’re all just building castles in the air.
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.