At large companies like Meta, product reviews can become performative ("product theater"), focusing on pre-wiring executives rather than engaging in messy, ambiguous problem-solving. This focus on efficient alignment can stifle true innovation, pushing builders toward smaller, more dynamic companies.
Related Insights
An influx of Meta alumni, now 20% of staff, is causing internal friction. A 'move fast' focus on user growth metrics is clashing with the original research-oriented culture that prioritized product quality over pure engagement, as exemplified by former CTO Mira Murati's reported reaction to growth-focused memos.
In large companies, a culture of A/B testing every decision can become a crutch that stifles innovation and speed. It leads to risk aversion and organizational lethargy, as teams lose the muscle for making convicted, gut-based decisions informed by qualitative customer feedback.
The product management role exists on a spectrum between building and bureaucracy. The profession has now skewed heavily toward the bureaucratic end, focusing more on process, frameworks, and coordination than on the creative act of building valuable products, losing its original "magic."
Artist's CPO notes that while frameworks and processes can feel productive, the best product work is often messy and uncomfortable. It involves fighting with stakeholders and making bets on uncertain features rather than fixing known, smaller issues. This contrasts with the idealized view of smooth, process-driven development.
If a company creates a siloed "innovation team," it's a sign the main product organization is stuck in "business as usual" maintenance. Innovation should be a mindset embedded across all teams, not an isolated function delegated to a select few.
Companies fail at collaboration due to behavioral issues, not a shortage of good ideas. When teams operate in silos, believing "I know better," and are not open to challenging themselves or embracing "crazy ideas," progress stalls. Breaking down these habitual, protective behaviors is essential for creating a fluid and truly innovative environment.
Measuring engineering success with metrics like velocity and deployment frequency (DORA) incentivizes shipping code quickly, not creating customer value. This focus on output can actively discourage the deep product thinking required for true innovation.
The new, siloed AI team at Meta is clashing with established leadership. The research team wants to pursue pure AGI, while existing business units want to apply AI to improve core products. This conflict between disruptive research and incremental improvement is a classic innovator's dilemma.
Product managers at large AI labs are incentivized to ship safe, incremental features rather than risky, opinionated products. This structural aversion to risk creates a permanent market opportunity for startups to build bold, niche applications that incumbents are organizationally unable to pursue.
The worship of founders like Mark Zuckerberg leads to a lack of internal pushback on massive, ill-conceived bets. Swisher points to the billions spent on the metaverse as a mistake made on an "awesome scale" because no one around the founder was empowered to challenge the idea.
