Spot on about surfacing risks instead of forcing consensus. I've watched PMs spin wheels on alignment workshops when execs hadnt decided which failure mode they could tolerate. The risk gradient framework is cleaner than most models. Default path vs judgment often gets politcal because stakeholders want it to favor thier domain. Framing as 'where does risk live' depersonalizes it nicely.
Getting into a risk discussion is more productive than pushing for alignment. Defaults vs judgment are important to show the cost of indecision. Product managers need a way to move on even if there is no decision. Thank you for the thoughtful comments!
Spot on about surfacing risks instead of forcing consensus. I've watched PMs spin wheels on alignment workshops when execs hadnt decided which failure mode they could tolerate. The risk gradient framework is cleaner than most models. Default path vs judgment often gets politcal because stakeholders want it to favor thier domain. Framing as 'where does risk live' depersonalizes it nicely.
Getting into a risk discussion is more productive than pushing for alignment. Defaults vs judgment are important to show the cost of indecision. Product managers need a way to move on even if there is no decision. Thank you for the thoughtful comments!