Next Up Previous Contents Index
Next: Philosophy Up: Information Letter 1 Previous: The promise of


Some people have interpreted the product development structure suggested in the Working Paper as smacking too much of the kind of bureaucracy they dislike in their current jobs. I think that one of the great advantages a small company has is its ability to react rapidly and get things done before the competition does, and that any hardening of the arteries which prevents this spells disaster. On the other hand, if the organization is so loose that you don't know where the money is coming from, how can you decide what you should be doing? My goal is to provide the minimum level of structure needed to define, develop, market, and promote products, targeted at all times to maximizing our profits. I think the structure I suggested meets this criterion. I can think of nothing less that will serve. On reflection, I think that it may be wise to designate one partner as ``product manager'' for each product, even if several partners are collaborating on it. This isn't to introduce unnecessary hierarchy, but simply to provide one person who will coordinate user communications, contact with headquarters, integration of work by other partners, etc.

Editor: John Walker