Saying 'no' to product ideas is often contentious. At GitHub, the process is simplified by first 'seeking the truth'—rigorously assessing if an initiative aligns with the team's definition of success. If it doesn't, the 'no' becomes an objective, logical conclusion rather than a subjective or political decision.

To avoid stakeholders undermining research results later ('you only talked to 38 people'), proactively collaborate with them before the study to define the minimum standard of rigor they will accept. This alignment shifts the conversation from a post-mortem critique to a pre-launch agreement, disarming future objections.

The 'fake press release' is a useful vision-setting tool, but a 'pre-mortem' is more tactical. It involves writing out two scenarios before a project starts: one detailing exactly *why* it succeeded (e.g., team structure, metrics alignment) and another detailing *why* it failed. This forces a proactive discussion of process and risks, not just the desired outcome.

When driving major organizational change, a data-driven approach from the start is crucial for overcoming emotional resistance to established ways of working. Building a strong business case based on financial and market metrics can depersonalize the discussion and align stakeholders more quickly than relying on vision alone.

When handed a specific solution to build, don't just execute. Reverse-engineer the intended customer behavior and outcome. This creates an opportunity to define better success metrics, pressure-test the underlying problem, and potentially propose more effective solutions in the future.

To prevent rigid plans that break, maintain consistency in your high-level strategic pillars for the year. However, build in flexibility by allowing the specific tactics used to achieve those pillars to change quarterly based on performance and new learnings.

Counteract the tendency for the highest-paid person's opinion (HIPPO) to dominate decisions. Position all stakeholder ideas, regardless of seniority, as valid hypotheses to be tested. This makes objective data, not job titles, the ultimate arbiter for website changes, fostering a more effective culture.

Before starting a project, ask the team to imagine it has failed and write a story explaining why. This exercise in 'time travel' bypasses optimism bias and surfaces critical operational risks, resource gaps, and flawed assumptions that would otherwise be missed until it's too late.

When strategic direction is unclear due to leadership changes, waiting for clarity leads to stagnation. The better approach is to create a draft plan with the explicit understanding it may be discarded. This provides a starting point for new leadership and maintains team momentum, so long as you are psychologically prepared to pivot.