Project Management

Stuck in an endless loop of client changes? Lost track of what revision this constitutes? Yeah. Been there. Done that. The secret? It's not about saying no. It's about saying yes to the right things upfront. Every project that goes sideways starts the same way: Vague agreements. Fuzzy boundaries. Good intentions. Six weeks later you're bleeding money and everyone's frustrated. Here's my framework after 30 years of running two 8-figure businesses: The SOW is your salvation. Not some boilerplate template. A real document that covers: • Exact deliverables (not "design work" but "3 homepage concepts, 2 rounds of revisions") • Hours of operation ("We respond M-F, 9-5 PST. Weekend requests get Monday responses") • Revision rounds spelled out ("Round 1 includes up to 5 changes. Round 2 includes 3.") • Feedback cycles defined ("48-hour turnaround for client feedback or the project may be delayed or additional fees may be incurred") But here's what most people miss— Don't work on client notes immediately. Client sends 37 pieces of feedback at 11pm Friday? Producer sends conflicting notes from the CEO? Marketing wants one thing, sales wants another? Stop. Collect everything first. Resolve the conflicts. Get on the phone and discuss it with your client to get alignment. Separate the "have to haves" from the "nice to haves". Then present unified changes. "Based on all feedback received, here are the 8 changes we'll implement. This constitutes revision round 2 of 3." Watch how fast the random requests stop. No extra work that goes unappreciated. No more feelings of being taken advantage of. Communicate before the crisis, prevents the crisis from happening. "Just so you know, we're entering round 2. You have one more included. After that, it's $X per additional round." No surprises. No awkward money conversations. No resentment. Scope creep isn't a them problem. It's a you problem. And that's good news, because that means you are in control. They're not trying to take advantage. They just don't know where the boundaries are because you never drew them. Draw the lines early. Communicate them clearly. Everyone wins. What's your most painful scope creep story? What boundary would've prevented it? Small Business Builders #projectmanagement #clientmanagement #businessgrowth

🎣 “They didn’t even cc me.” This was how Yumi, a senior marketing director, found out her billion-dollar product had been repositioned, without her input. The project she had been leading for 18 months was suddenly reporting into someone else. She didn’t mess up. She wasn’t underperforming. She just wasn’t "there". Not at the executive offsite. Not at the Friday “golf and growth” circle. Not at the CEO’s birthday dinner her male peer casually got invited to. She was busy being excellent. They were busy being bonded. 🍷 When she asked her boss about the change, he was surprised: “You’re usually aligned with the bigger picture, so we assumed it’d be fine.” In Workplace politic-ish: Yumi was predictable. Available. Yet not powerful enough to be consulted. 🔍 What actually happened here? Women are told to build relationships. Men build alliances. Women maintain connections. Men maintain relevance in power circles. It’s not about how many people like you. It’s about how many people speak your name when you’re not in the room. And in most companies, the real decisions - about budget, headcount, succession, are made off-the-clock and off-the-record. 📌 So, how do you stop getting edited out of influence? Try these: 1. 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗸 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹 𝗽𝗼𝘄𝗲𝗿 𝗺𝗮𝗽.    Not the org chart. The whisper network / shadow organistion.    Who gets invited to early product reviews?    Who influences without title?    Start mapping that!     2. 𝗔𝘂𝗱𝗶𝘁 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗻𝗮𝗺𝗲-𝗱𝗿𝗼𝗽 𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁.    If your name hasn’t been mentioned by 3 different people in senior leadership this month, you are invisible to power, even if you’re a top performer.     3. 𝗥𝗲𝗱𝗲𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗻𝗲𝘁𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴.    Skip the webinars and female empowerment panels.    Start showing up where strategy happens: QBRs, investor briefings, offsite planning, cross-functional war rooms.     4. 𝗖𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗼𝘄𝗻 𝗯𝗮𝗰𝗸𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗲𝗹.    Schedule recurring 1:1s with lateral stakeholders, not to “catch up,” but to co-build. Influence travels faster across than up.     5. 𝗕𝗲 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝗮𝗯𝘀𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗵𝘂𝗿𝘁𝘀.    If you vanished for 2 weeks and no one noticed, you’re not central enough to promote.     🧨 If any of this feels raw, it’s because it is. Brilliant women are being rewritten out of their own stories, not for lack of performance, but for lack of positioning. That’s why Uma, Grace and I created 👊 𝗙𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗢𝘂𝘁𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝘁𝗼 𝗜𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗿: 𝗠𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗪𝗼𝗿𝗸𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗰𝗲 𝗣𝗼𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗰𝘀👊 A course for women who are done watching strategic mediocrity rise while they wait for recognition. It’s not about becoming someone else. It’s about learning the rules that were never designed for us, and playing like you intend to win. 🔗 Get it if you’re ready, link in comment. Or wait until they “assume you’d be aligned,” too.

Writing software, especially prototypes, is becoming cheaper. This will lead to increased demand for people who can decide what to build. AI Product Management has a bright future! Software is often written by teams that comprise Product Managers (PMs), who decide what to build (such as what features to implement for what users) and Software Developers, who write the code to build the product. Economics shows that when two goods are complements — such as cars (with internal-combustion engines) and gasoline — falling prices in one leads to higher demand for the other. For example, as cars became cheaper, more people bought them, which led to increased demand for gas. Something similar will happen in software. Given a clear specification for what to build, AI is making the building itself much faster and cheaper. This will significantly increase demand for people who can come up with clear specs for valuable things to build. This is why I’m excited about the future of Product Management, the discipline of developing and managing software products. I’m especially excited about the future of AI Product Management, the discipline of developing and managing AI software products. Many companies have an Engineer:PM ratio of, say, 6:1. (The ratio varies widely by company and industry, and anywhere from 4:1 to 10:1 is typical.) As coding becomes more efficient, teams will need more product management work (as well as design work) as a fraction of the total workforce. Perhaps engineers will step in to do some of this work, but if it remains the purview of specialized Product Managers, then the demand for these roles will grow. This change in the composition of software development teams is not yet moving forward at full speed. One major force slowing this shift, particularly in AI Product Management, is that Software Engineers, being technical, are understanding and embracing AI much faster than Product Managers. Even today, most companies have difficulty finding people who know how to develop products and also understand AI, and I expect this shortage to grow. Further, AI Product Management requires a different set of skills than traditional software Product Management. It requires: - Technical proficiency in AI. PMs need to understand what products might be technically feasible to build. They also need to understand the lifecycle of AI projects, such as data collection, building, then monitoring, and maintenance of AI models. - Iterative development. Because AI development is much more iterative than traditional software and requires more course corrections along the way, PMs need be able to manage such a process. - Data proficiency. AI products often learn from data, and they can be designed to generate richer forms of data than traditional software. - ... [Reached length limit; full text: https://lnkd.in/geQBWz6s ]

It’s easy as a PM to only focus on the upside. But you'll notice: more experienced PMs actually spend more time on the downside. The reason is simple: the more time you’ve spent in Product Management, the more times you’ve been burned. The team releases “the” feature that was supposed to change everything for the product - and everything remains the same. When you reach this stage, product management becomes less about figuring out what new feature could deliver great value, and more about de-risking the choices you have made to deliver the needed impact. -- To do this systematically, I recommend considering Marty Cagan's classical 4 Risks. 𝟭. 𝗩𝗮𝗹𝘂𝗲 𝗥𝗶𝘀𝗸: 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗦𝗼𝘂𝗹 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁 Remember Juicero? They built a $400 Wi-Fi-enabled juicer, only to discover that their value proposition wasn’t compelling. Customers could just as easily squeeze the juice packs with their hands. A hard lesson in value risk. Value Risk asks whether customers care enough to open their wallets or devote their time. It’s the soul of your product. If you can’t be match how much they value their money or time, you’re toast. 𝟮. 𝗨𝘀𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗥𝗶𝘀𝗸: 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗨𝘀𝗲𝗿’𝘀 𝗟𝗲𝗻𝘀 Usability Risk isn't about if customers find value; it's about whether they can even get to that value. Can they navigate your product without wanting to throw their device out the window? Google Glass failed not because of value but usability. People didn’t want to wear something perceived as geeky, or that invaded privacy. Google Glass was a usability nightmare that never got its day in the sun. 𝟯. 𝗙𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗶𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗥𝗶𝘀𝗸: 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗔𝗿𝘁 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗣𝗼𝘀𝘀𝗶𝗯𝗹𝗲 Feasibility Risk takes a different angle. It's not about the market or the user; it's about you. Can you and your team actually build what you’ve dreamed up? Theranos promised the moon but couldn't deliver. It claimed its technology could run extensive tests with a single drop of blood. The reality? It was scientifically impossible with their tech. They ignored feasibility risk and paid the price. 𝟰. 𝗩𝗶𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗥𝗶𝘀𝗸: 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗠𝘂𝗹𝘁𝗶-𝗗𝗶𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗖𝗵𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗚𝗮𝗺𝗲 (Business) Viability Risk is the "grandmaster" of risks. It asks: Does this product make sense within the broader context of your business? Take Kodak for example. They actually invented the digital camera but failed to adapt their business model to this disruptive technology. They held back due to fear it would cannibalize their film business. -- This systematic approach is the best way I have found to help de-risk big launches. How do you like to de-risk?

Avoiding tough talks is a direct path to losing team trust. Here's how top leaders handle conflict: 1/ The Real Problem → Leaders stall, hoping conflict resolves itself → Feedback gets softened until it’s meaningless → The issue festers, and performance suffers 2/ Why It Matters → Projects halt because no one says what needs to be said → The wrong people stay in the room, the right ones leave → Culture declines and misalignment becomes the norm 3/ The CLEAR Framework → Cut the Fluff: Skip the warm-up and get to the point → Label the Behavior: Focus on actions, not identity → Explain the Impact: Make it real, why does it matter? → Ask for Alignment: Invite a response, not a lecture → Recommit or Redirect: Don’t end vague, end with clarity 4/ What Happens Next → Tension goes down, not up → People feel respected, not ambushed → Projects move forward, with trust, not silence 5/ Why You Need This → Leading isn’t about avoiding discomfort → It’s about creating clarity when others won’t → This framework gives you the words to do it right What's your biggest takeaway?

As a junior lawyer, I had to learn how to make it easy for supervisors to review my work. In case it helps, here's a step-by-step guide (with an example): 1️⃣Make it clear what the matter / document is and when input is needed. 2️⃣ Set out the context and approach to preparing the deliverable What needs to be reviewed, how was it prepared, and what’s the timeline? If you're attaching a document, include the live link to your file management platform (e.g. iManage or Sharepoint) as well as a static version. 3️⃣ Set out the next steps and your ask Make it clear what your supervisor needs to review. Set this out at the top of your email and proactively provide some recommendations. You can also follow up in person to make sure deadlines aren't missed. 4️⃣ Explain how the draft is marked up Make it easy to navigate with specific questions (either in the document or extracted in the email). If there are mark ups against a particular document / version, identify what that is. 5️⃣ Summarise your inputs Let them know what your draft reflects, and attach the relevant inputs so they can see everything in one place. This will give your supervisor confidence that you've captured everything, and make it easier for them to check your work. 6️⃣ Flag key aspects / assumptions If there are key assumptions / principles that have a big impact on how your draft is prepared, it's helpful to set them out in the email as a point of focus. Try to also set out the relevant clause / section / reference where possible. Is there anything else that you'd add? What else have you found helpful in making drafts easier to review, either as a junior lawyer or a supervisor? ------ Btw, if you're a junior lawyer looking for practical career advice - check out the free how-to guides on my website. You can also stay updated by sending a connection / follow. #legalprofession #lawyers #lawstudents #lawfirms

Most people are taught how to be high performers. But too few are taught how to perform in a team. And that’s a problem, because in most roles, you’re not an individual contributor. You’re part of a larger entity, working with others to build something. Yet, I see founders spend hours refining their product or systems,  But don't devote time to team development. At HomeServe, I approached team performance with purpose,  And it was one of the best decisions I made. Here are 7 tools I’ve used (and still use) to build high-performing teams,  Based on real lessons from building a £4.1bn business: 1️⃣ Start With Why (Simon Sinek) ↳ Before you focus on what or how...get clear on why. WHAT – The product you sell or the service you provide HOW – What makes you different WHY – Your deeper purpose or belief Every great team needs a reason to get out of bed in the morning. 2️⃣ The 70-20-10 Rule (McCall, Lombardo & Eichinger) ↳ How people actually learn on the job: 70% from challenging experiences 20% from coaching and mentoring 10% from formal training Most teams over-invest in training, and under-invest in real development. I'm amazed at how few founders or CEOs have a coach or mentor. 3️⃣ The Trust Triangle (Frances Frei, Harvard) ↳ Trust isn’t built with perks. It’s earned in three ways: Authenticity – Are you real? Logic – Do your decisions make sense? Empathy – Do you care? Without trust, you can’t build speed or loyalty. 4️⃣ The 5 Stages of Team Development (Tuckman Model) 1. Forming – Team gets together 2. Storming – Conflicts surface 3. Norming – Ground rules form 4. Performing – Results roll in 5. Adjourning – Project ends or evolves Don't panic during ‘storming’. It’s necessary friction. 5️⃣ The Johari Window (Luft & Ingham) ↳ Self-awareness is a team sport. Open – You know, they know Hidden – You know, they don’t Blind Spot – They know, you don’t Unknown – No one knows (yet) This helps surface feedback, build confidence, and avoid surprises. 6️⃣ The Energy/Impact Matrix (Inspired by McKinsey) ↳ Map every team member’s impact vs. energy. Use it to: Make smart hiring/firing decisions Spot burnout early Retain high performers High-performing teams don’t tolerate drift. 7️⃣ The RAPID Decision-Making Model (Bain & Company) ↳ High-performing teams make fast, clear decisions. Recommend – Suggest the course of action Agree – Those who must sign off Perform – Executes the decision Input – Provides relevant facts or opinions Decide – Final decision-maker This clears up delays, dropped balls, and blame. Building a great team is about building an environment where talent can actually thrive. I go deeper into team-building in my new book. Order it today: https://lnkd.in/eRYDKXdT ♻️ Repost if you believe team performance should be built, not assumed. And for more on how I scaled teams to build a £4.1bn business, Follow me Richard Harpin.

Explaining the Evaluation method LLM-as-a-Judge (LLMaaJ). Token-based metrics like BLEU or ROUGE are still useful for structured tasks like translation or summarization. But for open-ended answers, RAG copilots, or complex enterprise prompts, they often miss the bigger picture. That’s where LLMaaJ changes the game. 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝗶𝘁? You use a powerful LLM as an evaluator, not a generator. It’s given: - The original question - The generated answer - And the retrieved context or gold answer 𝗧𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗶𝘁 𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘀: ✅ Faithfulness to the source ✅ Factual accuracy ✅ Semantic alignment—even if phrased differently 𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗺𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝘀: LLMaaJ captures what traditional metrics can’t. It understands paraphrasing. It flags hallucinations. It mirrors human judgment, which is critical when deploying GenAI systems in the enterprise. 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗼𝗻 𝗟𝗟𝗠𝗮𝗮𝗝-𝗯𝗮𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝗺𝗲𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗰𝘀: - Answer correctness - Answer faithfulness - Coherence, tone, and even reasoning quality 📌 If you’re building enterprise-grade copilots or RAG workflows, LLMaaJ is how you scale QA beyond manual reviews. To put LLMaaJ into practice, check out EvalAssist; a new tool from IBM Research. It offers a web-based UI to streamline LLM evaluations: - Refine your criteria iteratively using Unitxt - Generate structured evaluations - Export as Jupyter notebooks to scale effortlessly A powerful way to bring LLM-as-a-Judge into your QA stack. - Get Started guide: https://lnkd.in/g4QP3-Ue - Demo Site: https://lnkd.in/gUSrV65s - Github Repo: https://lnkd.in/gPVEQRtv - Whitepapers: https://lnkd.in/gnHi6SeW

WEF's Global Risks Report 2026 is out 👉 (https://lnkd.in/eaMrdW67).. I put the findings in a 20-year perspective. I mapped 20 years of risk rankings. Two patterns stand out. Both troubling. The headline findings in this report: 🔵 geoeconomic confrontation is now the #1 risk in the short term, 🔵 economic risks are spiking, 🔵 50% of experts expect a turbulent or stormy outlook over the next two years. But the deeper signal only appears when you track the rankings over time (what I did, see 👇 ). ⚫ 𝐏𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧 𝟏 – 𝐋𝐨𝐧𝐠-𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐦 𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐤𝐬 𝐦𝐢𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐫𝐭 𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐦 Not overnight. Not mechanically. But persistently. In 2007–2010, short-term risks were concrete and immediate: asset bubbles, oil shocks, chronic diseases. Fast forward to today. The long-term top risks for 2026 are: 🌪️ extreme weather 🌍 biodiversity loss 🧠 misinformation 🤖 adverse AI outcomes What changed is not that economic risks disappeared. It’s that structural risks began to act as crisis amplifiers. Extreme weather didn’t replace financial shocks, it reshaped them. Climate risks first entered the short-term top 5 around 2014. By 2020, climate action failure topped the list. “Tomorrow’s risks” became today’s stress multipliers, and increasingly, direct crisis drivers. The future didn’t wait. ⚫𝐏𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧 𝟐: 𝐍𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐠𝐨𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐧, 𝐚𝐠𝐚𝐢𝐧 This year, environmental risks dropped sharply in the short-term rankings. More worrying: their severity scores also declined in absolute terms. Yet over the 10-year horizon, environmental risks dominate the top 10. Twenty years of WEF risk data tell the same story: we consistently recognise long-term environmental threats, then consistently deprioritise them when short-term pressures mount. It's not that we don't know. It's that our attention economy is structurally biased toward the urgent over the important. The most interconnected risk for the second year running? Inequality (👇). It fuels everything else: polarisation, migration, political instability, resistance to climate policy. Perhaps that's where to start: 𝐢𝐟 𝐰𝐞 𝐰𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐚𝐝𝐝𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐥𝐨𝐧𝐠-𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐦 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐬, 𝐰𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐫𝐞𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐡𝐨𝐫𝐭-𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐦 𝐝𝐞𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐤𝐞𝐞𝐩𝐬 𝐮𝐬 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐬 𝐦𝐨𝐝𝐞. #GlobalRisks #WEF #ClimateChange #Sustainability #SystemChange

Atlassian has been fully distributed for almost five years. We don’t have all the answers, but we’ve learned a lot about how to keep teams thriving across time zones—and we’re applying those insights every day.  ➡️ Asynchronous work: Async tools are at the core of how we operate. Confluence is our virtual hub where we share stories, celebrate new hires, and collaborate effortlessly. We also use Loom to share videos and give feedback on our own time—avoiding those dreaded “this could have been an email” moments. In fact, we’ve saved nearly half a million meetings using Loom! ➡️ Designing workdays: We’ve learned to structure workdays for focus, collaboration, and meetings (only when absolutely necessary). Teams work across no more than two time zones, ensuring at least four hours of overlap to get things done together. ➡️ Intentional connection: Data shows that real connection happens when teams meet regularly—not sporadically in an office. We provide Intentional Togetherness Gatherings (ITGs), curated experiences, and focused in-person time to collaborate. ➡️ Adapting for different needs: It’s not one-size-fits-all. For example, new hires and grads often benefit from more frequent in-person meetups, so we make sure to offer opportunities for them to connect early on. https://lnkd.in/g2sSbe3v