Back to Details

bet-sizing

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English
🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese
Size product bets by separating reversible from irreversible decisions and shaping work to fit an appetite. Most product bets are Type 2 decisions — reversible, low-cost to try, high-cost to deliberate. Move fast on those. Save deliberation for Type 1 decisions that are hard to undo.
通过区分可逆与不可逆决策，并调整工作以匹配投入意愿，来规划产品赌注的规模。大多数产品赌注属于Type 2决策——可逆、试错成本低，但反复斟酌的成本高。对于这类决策应快速推进。将充分斟酌的精力留给难以撤销的Type 1决策。

Type 1 vs Type 2 Decisions (Bezos)

Type 1 vs Type 2 决策（贝佐斯）

Type 1 (Irreversible): One-way doors. Hard to undo once committed.
  • Choosing a core technology/platform
  • Pricing model changes that affect existing customers
  • Killing a product line
  • Public commitments (partnerships, integrations)
Type 2 (Reversible): Two-way doors. Easy to undo or iterate.
  • Most new features (can ship, measure, remove)
  • UI/UX changes (can A/B test or revert)
  • Internal tooling decisions
  • Most API additions (harder to remove, but additive is safer)
Rule: Use lightweight process for Type 2. Use deliberate process for Type 1. Most product teams over-process Type 2 decisions and under-process Type 1 decisions.
Type 1（不可逆）： 单向门。一旦投入就难以撤销。
  • 选择核心技术/平台
  • 影响现有客户的定价模型变更
  • 砍掉产品线
  • 公开承诺（合作、集成）
Type 2（可逆）： 双向门。易于撤销或迭代。
  • 大多数新功能（可发布、衡量、移除）
  • UI/UX变更（可进行A/B测试或回滚）
  • 内部工具决策
  • 大多数API新增（移除难度较高，但增量式添加更安全）
原则： Type 2决策采用轻量化流程，Type 1决策采用审慎流程。大多数产品团队在Type 2决策上过度流程化，而在Type 1决策上流程不足。

Shape Up Pitch Format

Shape Up 提案格式

When proposing a bet, structure it as a Shape Up pitch:
当提出赌注提案时，按照Shape Up的结构组织：

1. Problem

1. 问题

A specific story showing real pain. Not an abstract need — a concrete situation with a real user.
"When a PM finishes a customer interview, they spend 45 minutes transcribing notes into a PRD. By the time they're done, the emotional context is gone and the PRD reads like a requirements list."
一个展示真实痛点的具体案例，而非抽象需求——要有真实用户的具体场景。
"当产品经理完成客户访谈后，要花45分钟将笔记转录到PRD中。等他们完成时，访谈中的情感语境已经消失，PRD读起来就像一份需求清单。"

2. Appetite

2. 投入意愿

How much time is this worth? Not how long it will take — how much you're willing to invest.
  • Small bet: 1-2 weeks
  • Medium bet: 3-4 weeks
  • Large bet: 6 weeks (maximum for Shape Up)
If you can't fit the solution in the appetite, reshape or kill it.
这项工作值得投入多少时间？不是预估耗时，而是你愿意投入的时间。
  • 小赌注：1-2周
  • 中等赌注：3-4周
  • 大赌注：6周（Shape Up框架下的最大值）
如果解决方案无法在既定投入意愿内完成，要么调整方案要么放弃。

3. Solution

3. 解决方案

Breadboard-level, not pixel-perfect. Show the key interactions and flows without getting into visual design. Fat-marker sketches, flow diagrams, or written walkthroughs.
处于原型草图级别，而非像素级完美。展示关键交互和流程，无需涉及视觉设计。可以是粗笔草图、流程图或文字版流程说明。

4. Rabbit Holes

4. 潜在陷阱

Known risks and unknowns that could blow up the timeline. For each: what's the risk and how will you mitigate it?
可能导致项目进度失控的已知风险和未知因素。针对每个陷阱，要说明风险是什么以及如何缓解。

5. No-Gos

5. 明确排除项

What's explicitly excluded. This is as important as what's included — it prevents scope creep during execution.
明确说明不包含的内容。这和包含的内容同样重要——能防止执行过程中出现范围蔓延。

Expected Value Assessment

预期价值评估

For larger bets, estimate expected value:
EV = (Upside x P(success)) - (Downside x P(failure)) + Learning Value
  • Upside: Best-case outcome (metric improvement, revenue, users)
  • P(success): Probability it works (be honest — most features have 30-50% success rate)
  • Downside: Cost if it fails (time, opportunity cost, technical debt)
  • Learning value: What you'll learn even if it fails. High learning value makes negative-EV bets worthwhile for early-stage products.
对于较大的赌注，估算预期价值：
EV =（上行收益 × 成功概率）-（下行损失 × 失败概率）+ 学习价值
  • 上行收益： 最佳结果（指标提升、收入增长、用户增加）
  • 成功概率： 项目成功的可能性（要实事求是——大多数功能的成功率在30-50%之间）
  • 下行损失： 失败的成本（时间、机会成本、技术债务）
  • 学习价值： 即使失败也能获得的经验。对于早期产品，高学习价值让负EV的赌注也值得尝试。

Guidelines

指导原则

  • CRITICAL: Classify every decision as Type 1 or Type 2 before deciding how much process to apply.
  • NEVER spend 6 weeks deliberating a Type 2 decision. Ship it, measure it, adjust.
  • NEVER rush a Type 1 decision because of artificial urgency. These are worth slowing down for.
  • ALWAYS include No-Gos in a pitch. Without explicit exclusions, scope will grow.
  • ALWAYS include Rabbit Holes. The risks you name are less dangerous than the ones you don't.
  • NEVER pitch without a stated appetite. "Build this" without a time budget is an open invitation to over-engineer.
Built on Shape Up (Basecamp) and Jeff Bezos's Type 1/Type 2 decision framework. Skills from productskills.
  • 关键：在决定采用何种流程之前，务必将每个决策归类为Type 1或Type 2。
  • 绝对不要为Type 2决策花费6周时间斟酌。发布、衡量、调整即可。
  • 绝对不要因为人为制造的紧迫感而仓促做出Type 1决策。这类决策值得放慢脚步。
  • 提案中务必包含明确排除项。没有明确的排除范围，项目规模就会膨胀。
  • 务必列出潜在陷阱。你明确指出的风险比未察觉的风险更可控。
  • 绝对不要在未说明投入意愿的情况下提交提案。只说‘做这个’却没有时间预算，无异于放任过度设计。
基于Basecamp的Shape Up框架和杰夫·贝佐斯的Type 1/Type 2决策框架构建。技能来源：productskills。