I don't think so.
From elementary to advanced in product positions, the more elementary you are, the more you can "base" by learning some standardized knowledge/skills, with the purpose of raising the lower limit. At the director level, by default, you already know the basic methodology and domain knowledge (if you don’t know, you should also have the ability to learn by yourself), and the improvement at this time is to pursue breaking through the upper limit.
Then, the way of learning and growing will also pay more attention to practice. The proportion of On Job Training has greatly increased. By the way, training (referring to classes in a narrow sense) seems to be a bit like the AI model "Pre-Training".
However, the cost of learning through practice is too high. You can also imagine how "destructive" it is for a product director to use real products to practice.
So what to do? I think there are two models that look like training, which can be low-cost and can effectively improve the ability of product directors.
One is master sharing. Sharing is different from training (courses). The content is strongly related to the sharer. It talks about what you have done and your refined cognition. There can also be more targeted interactions, which are heuristics. The other is the workshop, with the topic, learning by doing under the guidance of the coach, and I will introduce it next.
Among the light consulting services we provide, a typical delivery form is the workshop.
Many people think, isn't this just training? At most, some group interaction or something has been added.
In my opinion, from the simplest training/sharing to the most complex workshop, there is a continuous spectrum in the middle. It is hard to say where each specific implementation is, but I believe it can give you some understanding by comparing the two ends.
Let's start with something simple.
1. For the level requirements of the students, the workshop is greater than the training, and there must be a reserve of pre-requisite knowledge and skills. Because in the workshop, the typical value of the teacher's teaching time is 20-30%, and most of the time is discussion. If the students are too junior, it will affect the quality of the final output.
2. The identity of the teacher, the training is more one-way output, the workshop is a two-way interaction, the role of the teacher is more like a guide, coach, inspirer, catalyst, midwife, host...students have "data" (domain knowledge, etc.) , The teacher has "algorithms" (process design, environment construction, methodology, etc.), and data and algorithms must work together to produce good output.
3. There are more generalized teachers and more workshops. At the implementation site or "second site", we will set up observation groups, off-site experts, user representatives, etc. to participate in appropriate discussion sessions as needed. For example, in the process of screening product concepts, go to key stakeholders within the company for confirmation, and in the process of prototyping to interact with user representatives.
4. For the purpose of implementation, the workshop must carry some real product innovation topics throughout. That is, students are here to solve problems, not (like training) to learn knowledge and skills, nor to complete the "homework/task" assigned by the teacher.
5. According to our experience, the more realistic the topic, the better. It can be a "propositional composition" written by the bosses before the implementation, or it can be kept open to a certain extent. The on-site students discussed the "exploration direction". The two modes have their own advantages and disadvantages. The proposition composition is more in line with the company's strategic needs, and the bottom-up questions raised on the spot often bring surprises to the company.
6. There is also an additional requirement for the venue and the workshop, that is, a large amount of wall space is needed to display the discussion content. We hope that all the discussion sessions + background information can be seen at any time to continuously inspire the participants. This is actually a kind of 3D panoramic thinking visualization.
7. We have also tried open-class workshops, that is, the recruitment of students and the recruitment of projects are separated. In other words, some companies throw out topics and use non-employee students in the workshop as external brains to try to gain inspiration. This is also a bit like the "product marathon" of the proposition.
8. The workshop can be played in more ways, such as on-site "red and blue" confrontation on a specific topic, or multi-team "horse racing" for the same topic, and can even be derived into internal "product innovation week" and other activities .
9. From the perspective of HR, this kind of workshop has many potential purposes related to "people", such as inspecting high-potential employees, potential recruitment, team building (polishing of consensus), internal coach training... We have implemented In the workshops, some companies that developed the questions recruited participants, and there were also cases where companies recruited in-depth users as employees.
10. Therefore, from the perspective of user ecological complexity, the workshop is far greater than the training, and the implementation site is actually an interactive field, where various roles give full play to expect good results. As controllers, our core job is to find suitable participants, build a good (physical) environment, design a reasonable process, guide a reliable discussion atmosphere, and so on.
11. The core of training and workshops is also very different. Training is more about design content, and workshop is more about design process. The training content can be designed in advance, and on-site according to the design. Although the workshop process can be designed in advance, the degree of customization is higher. After all, different topics will make the methodology, participants, and discussion methods to be used different each time.
12. The most exciting thing in the workshop process is that the script can not be performed according to the design. Therefore, the design process is a branched process that needs to be adaptable. Sometimes it is even found that the prepared PPT is no longer needed, and it is more efficient to communicate directly with the participants. If you regard the workshop as a real "product exploration/planning meeting", you will understand. For example, maybe before the opening, we designed the discussion of "user journey" according to the topic, but we found that the user ecology of the product is not as simple as imagined, so we may need to introduce some stakeholder analysis links.
13. This has led to higher requirements for the consultants in the workshop. The consultants need to have a rich toolbox in their hands so that they can come up with suitable tools to deal with various situations. At the same time, in the case of flexible small links, it can ensure the relative certainty of big goals.
14. This also leads to the fact that the pre-work of the workshop is very important, and the typical time period is one or two months, which is far longer than the training. Project confirmation and process alignment must be done, diverging and converging constantly, although the site will still change. Informing customers of various situations that may occur on site is also a kind of expectation management.
15. At the end of the workshop, a report + task acceptance will always be arranged, and key stakeholders need to come to "accept the results". For the workshop, "there is a follow-up", that is, the discussed products continue to advance, which is the greatest success. Subsequent follow-up is to accompany specific products.
16. Regarding the value of the workshop, we hope that it will be different from the "learned, very good" of the training, but the divergent "see the insight that I didn't have before", or the convergent "end the wrong investment as soon as possible". After the workshop is over, a to do list must be generated.
PS: The following are also several articles written for HR/managers for reference
Talk about the product manager's ability model/training method to HR/training manager
User Ecological Case Analysis: Taking a training session as an example
_________
Su Jie (iamsujie), product innovation consultant, author of "Everyone is a Product Manager" series of 4 books, former Ali product manager for 8 years, head of the Group's product university, and founding partner of Liangcang Incubator.
If you need training and consulting services in product manager/product thinking/product innovation related fields, please contact this WeChat (13758212411).