Kicking off the Q&amp;A with a question to <@U04EQ...
# platform-culture
t
Kicking off the Q&A with a question to @Bryan Ross and your "

Platform-as-a-Superpower

" talk, which I enjoyed tremendously. You state that a platform team should only build things into the platform that are of use to everybody, not just one team or a select number of teams. I guess this can be a tough one because it may lead to a team turning away from the platform entirely because they depend on that particular capability being present. You can and should certainly try to generalize the feature so it becomes more universally applicable. But given that is not possible, would you be totally adamant about your rule or open to exceptions?
b
Hey @Tobias Babin - thanks for taking the time to watch the session!
As you say, there’s a fine art of product management to include features in such a way that they can attract the largest audience. If a feature is only going to be of use to one customer currently and you cannot see further adoption in the future, then I’d be really careful. One exception quickly leads to ten…. and you need to continue to support that feature for the duration of the lifespan of the platform. At very best, it’s most likely not a great investment.
Saying “no” is hard, but you have to consider the long term view of the platform, rather than the immediate demand. That said, it might be worth it … this is why it’s so valuable to have a great Product Manager 👍
t
Thanks @Bryan Ross for your insights. Yes, taking a long term view is probably the best advice. Several speakers mentioned that the platform does not have be for everyone from the start, and that it should not be mandatory to use. So in real life this leads to adopters and (a hopefully shrinking number of) non-adopters, which is a perfectly valid state and nothing to be afraid of. Thanks again for sharing your thoughts!