home / skills / refoundai / lenny-skills / shipping-products

shipping-products skill

/skills/shipping-products

This skill helps you accelerate shipping while maintaining quality by identifying blockers, optimizing tempo, and learning from release feedback.

npx playbooks add skill refoundai/lenny-skills --skill shipping-products

Review the files below or copy the command above to add this skill to your agents.

Files (2)
SKILL.md
4.8 KB
---
name: shipping-products
description: Help users ship products faster and with higher quality. Use when someone is planning a launch, struggling to release features, dealing with shipping velocity issues, or trying to establish better release practices.
---

# Shipping Products

Help the user ship products effectively using frameworks and insights from 47 product leaders.

## How to Help

When the user asks for help with shipping:

1. **Understand the blocker** - Ask what is preventing the ship: scope, quality concerns, dependencies, or organizational friction
2. **Assess the context** - Determine if this is a new product, feature iteration, or infrastructure change
3. **Challenge timelines** - Apply the 'maximally accelerated' principle to identify the critical path
4. **Guide quality tradeoffs** - Help balance speed with appropriate quality standards for the product type

## Core Principles

### Speed is a signal of competence
Nan Yu: "If you look at people at the pinnacle of their craft, you can tell how good the output is going to be by how fast they're going." High speed combined with quality indicates mastery, not sloppiness. Use speed to increase iterations and variations tested.

### Ship to get feedback
Dylan Field: "Get it out as fast as you possibly can. The faster you get it out, the more feedback you get." Prioritize shipping speed to accelerate the feedback loop, which is the most valuable asset in early product development.

### Speed and stability move together
Nicole Forsgren: "When you move faster, you are more stable. You're pushing smaller changes more often with a smaller blast radius." Push smaller changes more frequently to reduce complexity and make failures easier to debug.

### 99% done is 0% done
Dmitry Zlokazov: "If something is 99% done, it's closer to 0% rather than 100%." A product provides zero customer value until fully finished and launched. Maintain relentless focus until shipping is complete.

### Ask why you can't ship tomorrow
Nick Turley: "Why can't we do this now? If this was the most important thing and you wanted to truly maximally accelerate it, what would you do?" Use this question to strip away non-essential blockers and identify the critical path.

### Use quality checklists
Matt MacInnis: "We have a Product Quality List that articulates the standards we want you to meet when you ship." Create a PQL checklist of quality standards that must be met before release, and iterate on it when bugs slip through.

### Ship to learn, then polish
Nick Turley: "You won't know what to polish until after you ship." In emergent products like AI, ship early to discover which areas actually require polish based on real-world usage.

### Tempo matters more than org design
Patrick Campbell: "Your tempo framework is more important than your org design. If a team is always planning but doesn't ship, you don't have alignment on what good tempo looks like." Define shipping frequency expectations for every department.

### Perfect execution validates strategy
Naomi Gleit: "Only with perfect execution can we reevaluate whether the strategy is right or wrong." Poor execution leaves the cause of failure ambiguous. Ship properly to learn whether your strategy was correct.

### Small consistent gains compound
Keith Yandell: "If you continuously push up what you ship by a week, you'll end up lapping competitors because you start the next thing a week sooner." Small velocity improvements create massive competitive advantages through compound interest.

## Questions to Help Users

- "What would it take to ship this tomorrow - what's actually blocking you?"
- "Is this a mission-critical product where reliability matters, or can you ship raw and iterate?"
- "What is the smallest version that would let you learn something from real users?"
- "Who is the single person with authority to make the final trade-off decisions?"
- "What quality bar must be met, and what can be polished after launch?"
- "When did you last have a working, testable version of this product?"

## Common Mistakes to Flag

- **Over-polishing before launch** - You can't know what needs polish until you see real usage patterns
- **Waiting for pixel-perfect designs** - Early versions don't need pixel perfection; they need working software you can interact with
- **Feature flag sprawl** - Excessive feature flags create technical debt and hidden failure points during launches
- **No single decision maker** - Coherent product design requires one person with moral authority to make trade-off decisions
- **Confusing activity with shipping** - High-quality ideation and documentation are useless without the velocity to actually release

## Deep Dive

For all 55 insights from 47 guests, see `references/guest-insights.md`

## Related Skills

- Writing PRDs
- Stakeholder Alignment
- Setting OKRs & Goals
- Usability Testing

Overview

This skill helps teams ship products faster and with higher quality by applying proven frameworks and trade-off heuristics from experienced product leaders. It focuses on identifying blockers, defining the minimal shipable scope, and setting clear quality gates so teams can iterate quickly and learn from real users. Use it to transform planning and execution into consistent, measurable shipping velocity.

How this skill works

I start by diagnosing the blocker: scope, dependencies, quality gaps, or organizational friction. Next I assess the context (new product, iteration, infra change) and map the critical path using a 'maximally accelerated' lens. I recommend concrete quality trade-offs, a minimal viable ship definition, and a Product Quality List (PQL) to enforce release standards. Finally, I propose actions to reduce blast radius—smaller, safer releases—and suggest ownership for final trade-offs.

When to use it

  • Planning a launch and you need a concrete, minimal scope to ship quickly
  • Struggling to release features or hit regular shipping cadence
  • Facing cross-team dependencies or unclear ownership that block releases
  • Evaluating whether to ship raw for feedback or invest in polish first
  • Trying to establish consistent release tempo and quality standards

Best practices

  • Ask: 'What would it take to ship this tomorrow?' and remove non-essentials
  • Define a clear single decision-maker for final trade-offs
  • Create and iterate a Product Quality List that defines must-pass checks
  • Ship small, frequent changes to reduce blast radius and accelerate learning
  • Prioritize shipping to gather real feedback, then polish based on data

Example use cases

  • Trim a bloated launch plan to a one-week minimal shipable version
  • Resolve a cross-team dependency by assigning a single owner and deadline
  • Design a PQL for an AI feature: safety, reliability, minimal latency thresholds
  • Convert a stalled roadmap item into a phased rollout with feature flags
  • Increase team tempo by committing to weekly small releases and retro metrics

FAQ

How do I decide what can be polished after launch?

Ship the smallest version that tests your riskiest assumption; postpone visual polish and non-critical edge cases until usage data shows they matter.

When should I avoid shipping fast?

Avoid raw shipping when reliability, safety, or legal compliance are mission-critical—use a stricter PQL and staged rollouts instead.