►
Description
Join Jackie Porter and Kevin Chu are they walk through the Product CDF Working Group Charter and New CDF Proposal
https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/Product/-/issues/3044
B
All
right,
my
name
is
jackie
porter
and
I'm
here
with
kevin
chu,
we're
working
on
a
reframe,
a
redo
of
the
product,
career
development
framework,
and
we
have
this
third
iteration
of
the
cdf
proposal
and
kevin
has
been
invited
to
do
a
review
of
the
of
the
second
proposal
and
then
I
closed.
The
mr
and
then
kevin
took
a
second
look
at
the
third
proposal
and
offered
some
really
great
feedback
and
some
questions
on.
Why
are
we
even
changing
the
cdf?
B
A
A
B
We
also
wanted
to
evaluate
internal
expectations
of
product
manager
responsibilities,
so
the
internal
expectations
would
be
what
product
managers
felt
their
roles
and
responsibilities
were,
but
also
what
product
marketing?
What
sales
go
to
market
other
go-to-market
functions
thought
product
managers
should
be
doing
and
engineering
counterparts,
which
includes
infrastructure,
development,
tech
writing
and
product
design.
We
also
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we
established
clear
quantitative
measures
for
progress
in
the
cdf
and
then
finally,
some
other
exit
criteria,
included
training
and
a
pilot
program
for
how
to
use
the
cdf.
B
B
We
wanted
to
come
at
this
from
a
a
research
based
perspective
and
to
make
sure
that
we
were
understanding.
How
do
we
want
to
coach
and
grow
product
managers
in
the
best
the
best
way
when
we
did
a
product
engagement
survey
back
in
2021,
we
heard
feedback
that
people
weren't
particularly
satisfied
with
the
career
coaching
and
the
career
development
that
they
were
getting,
that
there
was
a
lack
of
guidance
and
a
lack
of
tangible
actionable
feedback
that
people
were
getting
and
that
their
results
weren't
necessarily
measured
tangibly.
B
B
So
those
are
sort
of
the
the
recap
from
like
an
exit
criteria
for
what
we're
trying
to
accomplish
from
all
the
inputs
into
the
working
group.
The
reason
why
we
started
the
working
group
was
from
a
suggestion
with
anup
and
farnoosh
and
scott,
so
farnu
suggested
that
we
establish
the
working
group
after
coming
up
this
proposal
and
getting
some
support
and
feedback
from
other
pms
and
other
leadership
that
this
was
a
worthwhile
pursuit.
B
So
when
I
what
I
mean
by
external
expectations,
we
interviewed
a
couple
of
project
led
organizations
and
they
came
back
with
the
things
that
they're
evaluating
their
product
managers
by
and
these
are
aspirational
companies
that
gitlab
wants
to
be
like,
and
this
is
where
we
found
our
current
cdf
didn't
really
didn't
really
measure
up
to.
So
we
found
that
our
current
cdf
is
very
get
loud
focused.
B
What's
also
interesting
is
that
these
five
competencies
are
inclusive
of
pricing
and
of
growth.
Our
current
cdf
model
is
unusable
by
pricing
and
growth.
They
have
to
kind
of
create
their
own
skills
and
their
own
competencies
to
coach
people
too.
So
the
only
thing
that's
changing
in
the
current
new
proposal
is
the
the
kpis
for
growth
and
for
pricing,
so
they're
able
to
still
use
product
vision
and
execution.
Sensing
mechanisms
and
the
other
you
know-
proposed
competencies
for
pricing
and
for
for
growth.
B
Pms,
just
like
the
other
product
organization,
which
is
different.
Keith
in
pricing,
has
a
completely
different
cdf
for
pricing
that
is
unconnected
to
the
product
organization
and
when
we
start
to
think
about
career
opportunities
and
lateral
or
vertical
growth
for
product
managers,
the
more
opportunities
that
we
can
afford.
Transparency
for
product
managers
to
go
to
pricing
or
go
to
growth
and
giving
them
transferability
of
skills
through
those
different
career
paths
we're
affording
them
that
that
growth
opportunity
with
the
cdf.
B
A
B
B
So
we
may
optimize
on
that
kpi,
rather
than
focusing
of
the
recording
of
competitive
tool
walkthrough.
So
this
is
where
you
can
scale
up
and
scale
down
based
off
of
where
you
need
to
grow
and
coach.
Your
product
manager,
instead
of
looking
at
each
individual,
kp
kpi
and
benchmarking,
each
individualistic
kpi
cool.
A
That's
that's
great
to
hear
because
I
at
first
read
I
was
thinking
oh
yeah.
Some
of
these
make
a
lot
of
sense.
Some
of
it
may
not
be
applicable,
but
what
you're
essentially
saying
is
these:
are
guidelines
choose
the
thing
that's
appropriate
in
whatever
instances
you're
you're
under
and
then
I
assume
that
also
means,
let's
say,
for
whatever
reason:
there
is
another
kpi
that
isn't
documented.
We
just
go
through
the
handbook
change
process,
say:
hey
we're
going
to
be
looking
at
this
added
boom.
Yes,.
B
A
A
Based
on
your
interpretation
of
the
cdf
like
cross-cutting
soft
skills,
that's
generally
useful,
which
is
also
embedded
in
many
of
the
competencies,
and
I
was
curious
like
developing.
Something
like
this
is
a
hard
exercise
period
and
to
widow
it
down
to
a
small
number
of
things,
you're,
actually
writing
down
and
looking
at
it's
really
difficult.
What
were
some
of
the
things
that
didn't
make
this
iteration
that
you
kind
of
really
struggled
to
cut
out.
B
Yeah
so
when
we
were
when
we
first
took
a
step
back,
we
had
seven
seven
tracks
and
we
ended
up
combining
quad
hive
alignment
and
values
first
into
aligning
teams
with
values,
and
we
felt
like
that
was
a
good
fit.
But
it
also
kind
of
dilutes
the
emphasis
on
striving
to
build
cohesive,
high-performing
teams.
Because
then
we
are
focusing
on
like
optimizing
people's
use
of
git
lab
values,
which
is
likely
the
tool
that
you'll
use
as
a
pm
anyways.
B
B
So
doing
those
kinds
of
motions,
internal
enablement
and
influencing
communication
skills
had
to
be
embedded
inside
of
that
measurement,
which
was
something
to
we
had
to
make
clear
in
this
competency.
But
it's
it's
a
different
altitude
so
like.
How
do
we
convey
that
this
elevation
of
competency
is
a
little
bit
higher
than
the
current
representation
of
competencies
that
we
have
today,
because
the
current
competencies
that
we
have
listed
in
the
handbook,
the
list
of
25
that
we
have
on
the
handbook
page,
are
all
very
granular
skills.
A
Got
it
cool,
that's
helpful
and
in
terms
of
the
the
pilot
that
we're
attempting
to
run
now?
What
what
do
you
expect
that?
What
do
you
want?
The
output
to
look
like,
like
what
type
of
feedback
are
we
running
like
simultaneously,
both
the
existing
cdf
and
the
proposal
together
so
that
you
get
you
get
a
you
get
both
sets
to
see
how
people
react
feel
like
we're
disliked
about
either.
That's.
B
And
it's
not
very
pretty,
and
I
mean
you
may
not
know
this-
I'm
ready
colorblind.
So
it
took
me
a
long
time
to
like
figure
out
how
to
like
use
the
tanooki
colors
and
like
brand
it
like
gitlab.
So
I
redesigned
the
template,
so
it
matches
like
the
spreadsheet
that
we're
used
to
using
you
would
use
this
new
template
and
run
it
alongside
your
existing
cdf
template.
B
B
It's
it's
going
to
have
you're
going
to
be
evaluated
on
like
four
different
dimensions.
One
of
it
will
be
that
the
person
receiving
the
feedback
will
be
the
quality
of
feedback
that
they're
getting
the
tangibility
of
like
the
kinds
of
feedback
like.
Are
they
able
to
be
actionable
on
what
they
need
to
do
next
to
get
to
the
next
level,
which
has
been
like
the
biggest
complaint
that
we
have
in
the
engagement
feedback
survey
of
the
existing
cdf?
B
Is
that
I
don't
know
what
to
do
next
to
progress
my
career
at
gitlab
and
then
the
applicability
of
the
product
career
development
feedback
to
outside
of
gitlab?
So
do
I
feel
like
I'm
getting
information
that
would
apply
to
my
career
development
generally
and
then
we'll
also
evaluate
the
manager
we
really
want
to
know?
B
Is
this
really
painful
for
you
to
grasp
these
new
competencies
and
are
you
doing
I
loved
how
you
put
it
the
mental
gymnastics
to
understand
how
your
product
manager
is
performing,
or
are
these
competencies
natural
as
they
do
their
job?
Are
you
able
to
see
how
they're
performing
these
tasks
in
their
day-to-day?
B
A
A
B
A
B
I
again,
I
really
appreciate
your
just
your
time
and
asking
the
thoughtful
questions
and
again
like
you're,
helping
us
just
be
better
and
asking
these
questions
is
just
invaluable.
If
we
don't
get
these
questions
and
we
don't
think
thoughtfully
about
it,
we're
going
to
cause
potential
harm
to
our
team,
and
I
don't
really
want
that.
I
want
us
to
be
better
and
stronger.
I
don't
want
to
like
cause
harm.
That's
not
my
intention.
I
want
us
to
grow
people
in
a
better
way.
That's
that's
the
whole
purpose
of
the
cdf.
You
know.