How would you handle conflicting feedback from user testing impacting the product roadmap?

It's also important to keep your ideal customer profile / person (ICP) in mind. There will be certain customers or prospects whose feedback is not as relevant or as a high a priority as others. The determination will be based on the Mission, Vision, Strategy and Goals of your organization.

Ensure the feedback is aligned with the product's vision. Feedback may be specific to a customer's issue, but you can't change your desired product to satisfy one customer. Analyze the impact in conjunction with the other feedback. It is also important to remember that you cannot please everyone all the time.

When facing conflicting user feedback, I'd approach as follows: Validate quickly: Conduct follow-up research to clarify underlying needs and pain points. Assess impact objectively: Use data to evaluate potential outcomes, prioritizing based on: Alignment with company vision and strategy Strategic importance of user segments Projected ROI Adapt roadmap agilely: Break feedback into actionable items Integrate priorities into upcoming sprints Set clear success metrics Implement and learn: Make incremental changes Monitor KPIs closely Be ready to pivot based on results Communicate transparently: Share decisions and rationale with stakeholders and users Explain alignment with business goals Provide regular updates on progress

It’s important to be clear on what you are attempting to learn. Being clear about your learning objectives can help you filter and prioritize how you respond to the feedback.

Most of the prioritization frameworks like RICE and MOSCOW are really based on intuition and experience. They are valuable within the product team, but might not resolve gaps between the product and the overall business or company strategy. I find that most product teams lack a clear and standardized vision that connects to the broader priorities of the company, which often leads to friction between their stakeholders and the product leads. If you want to avoid being the ping pong ball of the broader business, make sure to ask for clear long-term strategic priorities (not just the annual priorities or goals) and connect to those.

Es importante antes del análisis ver la coyuntura , variables que puede afectar la percepción . Es importante que los resultados no importando el método se cruce con los objetivos del negocio y perfil de usuario definido

For effective prioritization, I would categories the feedback into Must-have, Should-have , nice-to-have and wont-have. Consider the potential impact on user experience, business goals and KPIs and create prioritization matrix based on the impacts and development efforts. Implement the right solution that aligns with overall product vision and road map

Prioritizing the feedback on roadmap can be done through various frameworks. There is no single framework that fits all. RICE can be excellent for few organizations but for others, the impact can be categorized into high/medium/low based on the customer/seller experience, P&L/finance, compliance/regulations and costing/efforts. Business Continuity will always take priority - inputs related to GO/NO-GO decision or government regulations and compliance. Internal P&L can be at the end after fitting in user experience and budget/funding aspects into play. I have seen organizations using RICE as well as the ones using an excel sheet. Depending on the scale/size and complexity of your product/tech, you can choose the format that works well.

Prioritization when done correctly can be a work of art. As several people indicated in their answers, it is the Impact part in RICE model that matters the most. It is important to remember that Impact is a moving target. So if for example you develop a conversational AI application and you reached a certain maturity level, the impact will be different than the one you measure when making the first steps. Prioritization of users’ feedback is an ever changing task, with checks and balances, taking into account: long term goals, customers churn, low hanging fruits, the long tail, product maturity level, and impact.

Prioritize user testing feedback based on it's impact on workflow, address critical issues, or align with the product vision and goals. In the meanwhile, revisit the roadmap items and try to focus on the key critical deliverables that have high revenue impact.

Aligning the roadmap requires flexibility and communication. During a major overhaul of our app, conflicting feedback suggested a need to rethink our timeline. We paused and held a workshop with key stakeholders to re-prioritize features based on user value and strategic goals. This collaborative approach not only aligned the roadmap with user needs but also secured stakeholder buy-in. We adjusted our priorities to focus on high-impact features first, ensuring a balanced approach that catered to both user satisfaction and business objectives.

Estoy de acuerdo, los usuarios pueden identificar promesas que no está definido por el grupo, en ese caso se debe ajustar la comunicación. También puede existir funciones nuevas que el usuario lo considera como elemental y en ese sentido debemos ajustar las definiciones si la evaluación valora ese cambio

Alinear la hoja de ruta de un producto implica asegurarse de que el desarrollo y la evolución del producto estén en sintonía con los objetivos estratégicos de la empresa, las necesidades de los clientes y las tendencias del mercado. 1. **Definir la Visión y los Objetivos Estratégicos** Alinear la hoja de ruta de un producto es un proceso continuo que requiere una clara comprensión de la visión del producto, una comunicación constante con los interesados y la capacidad de adaptarse a cambios en el mercado y en las necesidades del cliente. Implementar estas prácticas asegurará que tu producto evolucione de manera coherente con los objetivos estratégicos y las expectativas del mercado.

After prioritizing feedback based on its impact and feasibility, such as using the RICE framework to distinguish between critical enhancements and nice-to-haves, integrate these insights thoughtfully into your roadmap. For instance, consider how Netflix navigated conflicting viewer feedback when introducing autoplay previews; while some users appreciated the feature for its convenience, others found it intrusive. By aligning these insights with their roadmap, Netflix adjusted autoplay settings to allow user control, striking a balance between innovation and user preference. This approach ensures your roadmap evolves dynamically to reflect user needs while staying aligned with your product's strategic direction.

After receiving the feedback, actionable steps are as under: 1. Identify the expectations of customers 2.Volume of business expected after value addition 3 Whether your competitors are offering similar or higher quality 4. Analysis of costing after customization 5. Test the price acceptability after customization 6. Check the availability of raw materials in country of product to remain competitive 7. Give your inputs on price appreciation after accommodating the required changes

As a product manager, I've found that balancing speed with thoughtful development is crucial in our agile processes. We use sprints to develop minimum viable changes that address key user needs. This approach allows us to quickly get features in front of users, gather real-world data, and refine based on actual interactions. Our AI-driven simulations have also been useful in this process. We can rapidly prototype new features or tweaks to our product and get immediate, data-rich feedback. This helps us make informed decisions quickly, keeping our product’s evolution aligned with user needs while maintaining our agility.

Iterating quickly is about maintaining momentum without sacrificing quality. In one project, we received feedback that a new feature was too complex. Instead of a full redesign, we implemented small, iterative changes, releasing updates bi-weekly. This allowed us to gather ongoing feedback and make continuous improvements. Users appreciated the rapid responses to their concerns, and the feature evolved into a highly valued tool. This iterative process helped us stay agile and responsive to user needs.

Agile Approach: Adopt an agile methodology to iterate on feedback quickly. Break down feedback into smaller, manageable tasks that can be tested and implemented in short sprints. Rapid Prototyping: Use rapid prototyping to test solutions. Gather quick feedback on prototypes before investing in full development. Continuous Improvement: Foster a culture of continuous improvement. Regularly review and iterate on the product based on ongoing feedback and testing.

Balancing the development speed and implementing the right solution are crucial throughout the iteration. Focusing on delivering a small set of high value feature in each iteration are vital to the iteration success. Using the development practices like Test-Driven Development (TDD) and continuous integration & delivery allows effective and faster completion of the feature delivery.

Managing expectations involves clear and consistent communication. When we faced conflicting feedback on a key feature, we hosted a series of stakeholder meetings to explain our decision-making process and the resulting changes to our roadmap. By being transparent about the challenges and the steps we were taking to address them, we built trust and understanding. Regular updates and an open channel for feedback ensured that stakeholders felt involved and informed, reducing potential frustration and aligning everyone towards the same goals.

The cadence of your communication channel can be based on the size/scale and dependency of the teams and stakeholders involved - but a weekly product roadmap review is a very good sign of managing stakeholders and their expectations. Sometimes, you might need to review the changes/roadmap bi-weekly (initial days of NPI) and sometimes you might need to do it twice a week (launch/GTM readiness). What goes into the review and summary email, or a conference call makes the difference. You wouldn't foresee any issue as long as all stakeholders have clear understanding of what is happening and what they are expected to do. Sharing the channel of communication and cadence early in the game and aligning stakeholders about the format will do the job.

One technique I use for managing expectations is generating a report for management after collecting and analyzing feedback. This report includes an action plan for the identified items, ensuring everyone is on the same page. As I work with my team in short 3-week sprints, I report the progress of these actions to management at the end of each sprint. For clients, I usually leave this to the communication department, suggesting responses for the most critical cases or the most important clients.

Transparency: Maintain transparency with users and stakeholders about how feedback is being addressed. Share updates on the progress and any changes to the roadmap. Set Realistic Timelines: Provide realistic timelines for when users can expect changes. Avoid over-promising and under-delivering. Feedback Loops: Create feedback loops to keep users informed about the status of their feedback. Show appreciation for their input and demonstrate how it is being used to improve the product.

Communicate transparently with stakeholders and users about how their feedback is being addressed. Set realistic expectations regarding what changes will be made and when they can expect to see them. This helps build trust and keeps everyone informed about the product’s direction.

Leveraging data means combining quantitative and qualitative insights to inform decisions. In a recent project, user analytics showed low engagement with a new dashboard. Surveys revealed users found it unintuitive. By correlating these data points, we identified specific pain points and redesigned the interface. Post-launch metrics showed a significant increase in usage and satisfaction. This blend of hard data and user narratives provided a comprehensive view that guided our improvements effectively.

Presenting a mix of hard numbers and user stories is far more compelling than either alone.I always try to triangulate feedback with analytics. It's amazing how often the data tells a different story than we expect.

Use quantitative data to support feedback prioritization. Analyze usage data, customer satisfaction scores, and other relevant metrics. Ensure decisions are backed by data. Combine qualitative feedback with quantitative data to create a holistic view of user needs and product performance.

Excluding the "financial perspective" here's a checklist I would use to assess retirement as a product manager to know when to retire: Did you achieve all of the milestones you're looking for? This could be the types of products you worked on, the level of impact you drove for people/companies, etc. Did you get to the level that you wanted to? This could be the position of influence and leadership - maybe you wanted to be a Principal Product Manager (Individual Contributor Track) or maybe a CPO (Chief Product Officer)? Did you get the recognition and awards that you were after? In the company? In the industry? Are you satisfied with your job? Did you feel like you did what you loved and to the fullest? Is it time to go?

To handle conflicting feedback, use a hypothesis-driven approach. Formulate hypotheses based on the feedback, then prioritize and test them incrementally. Launch small, controlled experiments to validate each hypothesis. Analyze results and iterate based on data, ensuring decisions are evidence-based and aligned with user needs and overall product objectives

Understand the perspective of the person/group providing feedback. Clearly feedback comes from how one's experience with the product/service matches one's expectations. Every individual is different, no one's right, non one's wrong. Understand where people are coming from. Three options will then arise: 1. The feedback comes from a person/group that is not your targeted profile/segment. This feedback can thus be put in perspective 2. The feedback originates from your targeted profile/segment. Priority must be put to adapting the product/service in view of the feedback 3. You may decide, in front of the whole data, to redefine the marketing strategy for your product/service.

One key lesson from handling conflicting feedback is the importance of empathy. Understanding the human element behind each piece of feedback can transform how we approach product development. I recall a time when a user’s frustration highlighted a critical gap in our accessibility features. Addressing this not only improved our product but also reinforced our commitment to inclusivity. Always remember, behind every feedback is a person whose experience can guide us towards creating more user-centered products.

Working on an internal product can be particularly challenging when facing conflicting feedback. In such cases, it is crucial to ensure that users become advocates for your product to secure its deployment in production :)