Просмотр новости
Найдите то, что Вас интересует
Спутники
РН
SpaceX
Роскосмос
NASA
СпутникиРНSpaceXРоскосмосNASA
Image
There is a company you used to love. Maybe it made your favorite tool, or the service you recommended to everyone. Then something shifted. The product got worse in small ways, the pricing got aggressive, the people whose names you knew left one by one, and within a couple of years the thing you loved was a husk with the same logo. When product people watch this happen, they usually reach for the word culture. The culture was lost, they say, as if culture were a fragile heirloom someone dropped.Marty Cagan just offered a colder explanation. In Great Products, Bad Companies, published at the end of June, he argues that great products are necessary for great companies but nowhere near sufficient, and that the success itself creates the danger. A company that has proven it can build great products becomes a very attractive target for people with very different motivations. They arrive through the board, replace founders and missionary leaders, and take apart the culture in pursuit of a quick financial win. The product did not fail. The product succeeded, and the success drew the predators.That framing deserves attention, because it relocates the problem. Product people spend their careers below a line they rarely look above. Everything we argue about, discovery, empowered versus feature teams, outcomes versus output, sits inside the company. Cagan is pointing at the layer that owns the company, and his uncomfortable observation is that nothing inside can survive a hostile change outside.The Corruption Is Structural, Not MoralCagan's article leans on a book that came out in May and went straight onto the bestseller lists, Eric Ries's Incorruptible. Ries, the same person who gave us The Lean Startup, spent a decade studying why values-driven companies drift away from their missions as they scale, and his conclusion is the interesting part. The corruption is not ethical. It is structural.He calls the force financial gravity, the cumulative pull of short-term incentives, shareholder primacy, and extractive governance that bends an organization's behavior whether or not anyone intends it. No one has to be a villain. Ordinary directors making locally reasonable decisions under quarterly pressure will, in aggregate, pull a mission-driven company off its mission the way gravity pulls a satellite out of orbit. The leaders change, the incentives stay, and the incentives win.This should sound familiar to anyone who read my June article on the project mindset. I argued there that you cannot train your way out of project thinking because the annual budget, the CapEx rules, and the stage gates manufacture it faster than any workshop can dissolve it. Beliefs follow incentives. Ries is making the same argument one level higher. You cannot culture your way out of an ownership structure. The offsite where everyone recommits to the mission is the workshop, and the shareholder agreement is the plumbing, and on Monday the plumbing wins again.The Companies That Locked the DoorThe useful half of Incorruptible is that some companies saw this coming and built defenses into their legal structure rather than their values poster. Ries calls them mission-locked, and the examples are not small idealistic outliers. Bosch, Novo Nordisk, Carl Zeiss, and the Danish pump maker Grundfos are held by industrial foundations that make the hostile-board takeover Cagan describes structurally impossible. Vanguard is owned by its own funds. Costco and Patagonia wired long-term commitments into their governance rather than trusting each successive CEO to feel the same way.Notice what these firms did not do. They did not hire better people and hope. They changed what the system is allowed to do, so that the mission survives leaders who are weak, boards that are greedy, and quarters that are bad. Stafford Beer's line applies as well here as anywhere: the purpose of a system is what it does. A governance structure that permits extraction will eventually extract, whoever happens to be sitting in the chairs. A structure that forbids it does not need heroes.There is a practical nuance worth keeping. Mission-locked does not mean slow or starved of capital. Novo Nordisk spent years as Europe's most valuable company while majority-controlled by a foundation. The lock does not prevent ambition. It prevents the specific failure mode where ambition gets redirected from customers to extraction.Why a Product Person Should Care About Any of ThisIt is tempting to file all this under founder problems. Cagan closes that exit. Corporate governance, he writes, reaches into the daily life of a product person, and anyone who has lived through the aftermath of a bad acquisition knows he is right. The empowerment you enjoy, the outcome-based goals, the discovery time, the standing team, every piece of a real product operating model exists at the pleasure of whoever controls the company. A single change in board composition can revoke all of it without ever announcing a reorg. The teams keep their standups and their OKRs for a while, the way a fan keeps spinning after the power cuts out.So the health of the operating model is not fully knowable from inside the operating model. Two companies can look identical at the team level, same rituals, same tooling, same product language, while one of them is structurally protected and the other is one activist letter away from becoming a cautionary tale. Product people are trained to assess strategy, market, and stack before joining a company. Almost nobody reads the ownership structure, which is the layer that decides how long any of the rest gets to exist.That is fixable, and it costs an afternoon. Before you join, or before you spend three years of your life on a transformation, find out who actually controls the company and what, if anything, binds them. Is there a foundation, dual-class stock, or a charter commitment, or is it a plain shareholder-primacy setup one bad quarter from a pivot to extraction? Do the people with control have a track record of building or of harvesting? When leaders talk about mission, is there any mechanism that would hold if those particular leaders left tomorrow?None of these questions appear in the standard product interview loop, and they matter more than the answers you will get about discovery practices, because they determine whether the discovery practices survive. Culture tells you how the company behaves this year. Governance tells you how it is allowed to behave forever. Great products will keep attracting people who want to strip them for parts. The companies that stay great are not the ones with the strongest values. They are the ones that made the values legally inconvenient to remove.Ralph Jocham is Europe's first Professional Scrum Trainer, co-author of "Professional Product Owner," and contributor to the Scrum Guide Expansion Pack. As an ICF ACC certified coach, he works with organizations to build Product Operating Models where strategic clarity, operational excellence, and adaptive learning create measurable competitive advantage. Learn more at effective agile.References[1] Cagan, M. (2026) 'Great Products, Bad Companies', Silicon Valley Product Group, 30 June. Available at: https://www.svpg.com/great-products-bad-companies/[2] Ries, E. (2026) 'Incorruptible: Why Good Companies Go Bad and How Great Companies Stay Great', Authors Equity. Available at: https://www.amazon.com/Incorruptible-Good-Companies-Great-Stay/dp/B0FWZZBPZB[3] Arkaro 'Eric Ries Incorruptible: Summary and Key Concepts'. Available at: https://arkaro.com/eric-ries-incorruptible-summary/[4] Jocham, R. (2026) 'You Can't Train Your Way Out of a Project Mindset', Medium, 16 June.
| # | Наименование новости | Тональность | Информативность | Дата публикации |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Culture Follows Structure. Most Transformations Bet the Other Way. | 0 | 13.06 | 26-07-2026 |
| 2 | Nobody Believes your Values Page. They're Watching the Deeds. | 0 | 6.22 | 23-07-2026 |
| 3 | Scrum Isn't for Stormtroopers | 0 | 15.26 | 28-07-2026 |
| 4 | The Dashboard Was Green. The Customers Were Angry. | 0 | 7.4 | 29-07-2026 |
| 5 | How to Manage Product Risk When You Can’t Predict Everything | 0 | 10.55 | 23-07-2026 |
| 6 | Der heimliche Feind jedes Product-Owners: 5 Mythen, die Karrieren ruinieren | 0 | 15.23 | 27-07-2026 |
| 7 | Wird Product-Ownership zum Flaschenhals im KI-Zeitalter? Warum viele Product-Owner schlecht priorisieren, warum KI das sichtbar macht und 10 Werkzeuge, um besser zu entscheiden | 0 | 7 | 07-07-2026 |
| 8 | You Can't Train Your Way Out of a Project Mindset | 0 | 5 | 21-06-2026 |
| 9 | Your People Stopped Telling You the Truth. You Trained Them To. | 0 | 5.48 | 16-07-2026 |
| 10 | The leadership tier that makes or breaks strategy keeps getting ignored | 0 | 7 | 06-07-2026 |