Discovery – Problem vs. Solution

Marty Cagan argues that the common split between a 'problem space' (owned by product) and a 'solution space' (owned by engineering) is overly simplistic and kills innovation. Validating that a customer problem is real is important, but most product failures come from weak solutions that customers don't see as better than alternatives, not from missing demand. Discovery therefore requires most of its effort on the solution, and it demands tight collaboration among product, design, and engineering. Technology often reveals solutions to needs customers didn't know they had, and understanding the problem deepens as solutions are explored. Teams should also pace themselves, since management's clock starts once a problem is being worked on.

01Key takeaways

• Validate that the customer problem is real before investing heavily, using fast discovery and demand validation techniques.
• Recognize that most product failures come from solutions customers don't see as better than alternatives, not from missing demand.
• Spend most discovery time iterating on the solution, not just defining the problem.
• Treat product, design, and engineering as jointly responsible for both understanding the problem and building the solution.
• Expect your understanding of the problem to evolve as you explore solutions, especially with technology.
• Pace your work so that enough time remains for solution development before leadership expects results.

02Key sections

Problem vs. solution thinking

Cagan notes the long-standing industry habit of separating the problem space from the solution space, and says he resists treating it as dogma. Breakthroughs often come from breaking down that wall.

Why the clean split fails

Teams that see discovery as only exploring the problem, with engineering merely building the answer, rarely achieve real innovation.

Validate the problem, but don't stop there

Confirming a real problem with fast techniques and including an engineer in customer visits is worthwhile, but most failures stem from weak solutions rather than absent demand.

Solutions must be valuable, usable, feasible, and viable

Good discovery balances value and viability (product), usability (design), and feasibility (engineering), and the most discovery time belongs on the solution.

Pacing and collaboration

Management expects results soon after work begins, so teams should avoid spending too long on the problem and keep the three disciplines working together.

03From the post

“A partnership dedicated to teaching best practices to product teams and product leaders”

04Frameworks mentioned

Summary and takeaways written by PM Atlas; quotes are short excerpts. © the original author.