Code for America Brigade volunteers consider thousands of projects for local civic engagement and innovation apps; we build only a handful in each city. How can we choose better? A little intention could dramatically improve the quality of our project portfolios. I propose we score proposals across four dimensions: - The value our products will produce. (More users, more usage, building capacity, leaving infrastructure behind) - Risks of the journey (taking the right level of risks around customer clarity, effort & cost, tech difficulty, political risk) - Alignment with our values - Stakeholders engaged and affected

1. Which projects
are worthy?
A few thoughts on
product portfolio
management for
Code for America
brigades
Phil Wolff
Product Manager
OpenOakland
配称

#prodmgmt
#productmanagement
#openoakland #pmo
#productportfolio
#planning #strategy
#cfa #codeforamerica
#cfabrigade
@EVANWOLF

2. Four legs for selection
“How would you score
prospective projects for
your brigade?”
@EVANWOLF

3. We talk
about four
factors
Value our product
makes
Risks of the journey
Alignment with our
values
Stakeholders engaged
and affected
@EVANWOLF

4. We were opportunistic at the start
OpenOakland released five apps
in our first 18 months.
• Relationship builders:
OO + City of Oakland
• Low risk:
Low difficulty, Low effort.
• Low value:
Low impact, Symbolic usage
@EVANWOLF

5. High
Value:
• Impact
• Users
• Usage
• Capacity
• Infrastructure
Value
Risk:
• Customer
Clarity
• Effort & Cost
• Tech Difficulty
• Political Risk
Low
Low
Risk
High
@EVANWOLF

6. High
Value
Project
Name
Low
Low
Risk
High
@EVANWOLF

7. We are not here to augment the
City’s IT budget.
Volunteers can’t make a dent in the
City’s technology debt.
@EVANWOLF

8. What can we do with the handful of
projects we can do each year?
@EVANWOLF

9. We can choose projects that matter
more.
@EVANWOLF

10. Value
@EVANWOLF

11. We build to create
value
Our apps and services create various
flavors of value
@EVANWOLF

12. Impact
How are we changing
someone’s life?
• Access to Services
• Convenience
• Insight &
Understanding
• Engagement and
Action
• Social, Political,
Economic Capital
@EVANWOLF

13. Impact
How much impact?
• Low
• Saving five minutes
• Access to
information
• High
• Saving a life
• Reducing
homelessness
@EVANWOLF

14. Users
How many people
can this product
serve?
Some projects
serve more people
than others.
How big is the
potential “market”?
@EVANWOLF

15. Usage
How much is the
service used?
How many times?
How long each
time?
@EVANWOLF

16. Capacity
How will this project increase
the Brigade’s capabilities?
• Will the experience leave us
with new technologies we can
use on future projects?
• Relationships to build on?
• Volunteers with deeper skills?
@EVANWOLF

17. Infrastructure Are we adding to
the commons?
Will this project
leave knowledge,
systems, and tools
that others can
build on?
@EVANWOLF

18. • Impact
• Users
• Usage
• Capacity
• Infrastructu
re
Value
@EVANWOLF

19. Risk
@EVANWOLF

20. We pick projects
that balance risk,
effort, and reward
We assess and manage project risk
@EVANWOLF

21. We pick projects
that where we can
manage the risk
Some risks can’t be managed
@EVANWOLF

22. We pick projects
with risks right for
the team
We assess and manage project risk
@EVANWOLF

23. Customer
Clarity
Do we understand who
we’re creating value
for?
Can we quickly learn
their needs deeply
enough to make good
decisions
@EVANWOLF

24. Stakeholder
engagement
Naming the persons carrying the
torch for the customers drives
success
Finding our “Executive support”,
“Citizen champion”, or “Issue
advocate” can be the difference in
building the right things for the
right people in the right way with
the best resources. Or not.
@EVANWOLF

25. Effort & Cost
Projects are always resource
constrained.
Is there enough of the right
volunteer time, open data,
technology, and capital to deliver?
@EVANWOLF

26. Tech
Difficulty
Too easy or too hard for the
available talent?
Can we make up for gaps with
recruiting?
Are there process challenges that
could disrupt the product
lifecycle?
@EVANWOLF

27. Political Risk
Could this “utility” app become a
political football?
What enemies could this attract?
Do we have the capacity to engage
in that type of struggle?
Will this affect other CfA Brigades
if we undertake this project?
@EVANWOLF

28. Alignment
Risk
Is this consistent with the
Brigade’s core values?
What is the potential for
misuse, for drifting from
our values, along the
development cycle? Once
released?
@EVANWOLF

29. Risk
• Customer cla
rity
• Stakeholder
engagement
• Effort & Cos
t
• Tech Difficult
y
• Political Risk
• Alignment Ris
k
@EVANWOLF

30. ALIGNMENT
@EVANWOLF

31. We want our efforts well
aligned with our culture
We hold some truths dearly
@EVANWOLF

32. Well aligned with our culture
Open Culture
Open Source
Open Data
Creative Commons
Free (as in freedom) Internet
@EVANWOLF

33. Well aligned with our culture
Government that works well
for its people
Effective
Efficient
Responsive
Strategic
@EVANWOLF

34. Well aligned with our culture
Pluralism
Civic Engagement
Inclusion
Diversity
@EVANWOLF

35. • Open Culture
• Government t
hat
works well fo
r
its people
• Pluralism
ALIGNMENT
@EVANWOLF

36. STAKEHOLDERS
@EVANWOLF

37. Products build
relationships
Our projects affect people.
We choose products for their
direct benefits on Oaklanders
Who benefits from our products?
Who is harmed or put at risk?
@EVANWOLF

38. Brigade
Volunteers
How will working on this
product benefit the
participants?
Will they learn new
product-related skills,
knowledge, awareness?
Will they be satisfied by
the journey as much as the
destination?
@EVANWOLF

39. Beneficiaries
Who benefits directly from
this product?
Are we serving them now
with other products?
How will our serving them
this way affect the services
they receive from others?
What is the potential for
harm through our actions?
@EVANWOLF

40. Interest
Groups
What interest groups could
be engaged to make this
product better? To find
users and drive usage?
What groups or
organizations might
oppose or support this
product?
@EVANWOLF

41. Data
Providers
Will this project improve
the range, quality, and
depth of open data from
the City?
Will it build trust with
those providers?
@EVANWOLF

42. City Staff
How will this project help
the City’s workforce better
engage their publics?
Can this project build
support for openness and
transparency among City
workers?
@EVANWOLF

43. Elected
Officials
How will this product help
elected officials like
council members and the
mayor be more
accountable, effective, and
engaged?
@EVANWOLF

44. City
Commissions &
Commissioners
How will this product
help elected officials
like council members
and the mayor be
more accountable,
effective, and engaged?
@EVANWOLF

45. Code for
America
Is this project consistent with
Code for America’s principles and
values?
Will this reflect well on the CfA
Brigade program?
@EVANWOLF

46. • Volunteers
• Beneficiaries
• Interest
Groups
• Data provider
s
• City Staff
• Electeds
• Commissions
• Code for
America
STAKEHOLDERS
@EVANWOLF

47. Value, risk, alignment,
stakeholders
Value
Risk
Alignment
Stakeholders
Impact
Customer
Clarity
Open Culture
Volunteers
Government
that works
well for its
people
Beneficiaries
Users
Usage
Capacity
Infrastructure
Stakeholder
Engagement
Effort & Cost
Tech Difficulty
Pluralism
Interest
Groups
Data
providers
Political Risk
City Staff
Alignment
Risk
Electeds
Commissions
Code for
America
@EVANWOLF

48. Next steps?
CHOOSE OUR
PROJECT
PORTFOLIO ON
PURPOSE
@EVANWOLF

49. Project portfolio processes
• Ideation activities
• attracting proposals we find
attractive
• Screening process
• Formal approval
• Ongoing portfolio management
• Including abandonment and
retirement
@EVANWOLF

50. Intentionality
We create more value,
together, by choosing how
we invest our time and build
our relationships
@EVANWOLF

51. Phil Wolff
Hi!
Email or tweet
your stories,
suggestions,
referrals
or just call/skype
e
skype
v
t
phil@LetMyDataGo.org
evanwolf
+1-510-343-5664
@evanwolf @letmydatago
bio
cv
blog
About.me/evanwolf
Linkedin.com/in/philwolff
Letmydatago.org
Phil Wolff is a consulting product manager in
Oakland, California. Phil co-founded four startups,
worked as a programmer, project manager, business
analyst, technology architect, industry analyst,
operations researcher, and tech journalist at Bechtel
National, Wang Labs, LSI Logic, Adecco SA, NavSup,
and privacy NGOs. He volunteers in Code for
America’s #OpenOakland brigade.
@EVANWOLF