Hi:
I'll be the first to post some thoughts about the Product Roadmap call that occurred a short while ago.
1) I like the increased communication. I'm a pre-anaconda user and remember the dark ages of poor communication. WorkFront is far, far more communicative than they were a year ago. Good job;
2) I like that this call wasn't rushed. People still read from a script, but they weren't rushing through it and then signing off, bang its over. I think the pacing was a little better. Fast is not good, as the information density is high and it takes a little bit to understand what is being said. Rushing through it doesn't give people time to assimilate what is being said;
3) The graphics in the corner are a nice touch. It is so critical to set expectations appropriately, so letting us know that this idea is being researched, being developed, or ready to be deployed is an excellent thing to do;
4) Once again, this Roadmap FELT like it was targeted to marketeers. The language used for functionality that had value for both traditional project managers and Marketing managers was in the vernacular of marketing. The concepts and language of project management are the same in every field, so it would be okay to use that language. Instead, the language of marketing was chosen. I was waiting for some nod to the fact that the User Community has made it clear there are concerns about WorkFront's apparent focus on Marketing to the exclusion of PPM. I thought SOMEONE would have mentioned how this feature or that feature has value to both PPM and Marketing. No one did. This Roadmap presentation wasn't for PPM, it was for Marketing. Thats my opinion. It doesn't have to be this way. A lot of the features WorkFront is pitching to marketing add a lot of value to PPM, but the PPM customers won't realize that because the language and examples and webinars only show the features used in context of marketing. By targeting features to Marketing, instead of targeting it one way to Marketing and another way to PPM, it creates the impression that WorkFront is not focused on the PPM market.
5) This is the first time I've heard WorkFront address the lack of time-based, or project-based, cost rates. Good job, people. While others were likely happy to see other features, I was very well pleased to see this on the roadmap. The lack of time-based cost rates for people have caused us to compromise our use of WorkFront to manage project costs. Releasing this functionality into GA is going to be transformative to how we manage and account for project cost. Again, good job WorkFront.
6) I love Q&A sessions. Instead of having us send questions to be answered offline, or at a future date, why not have a panel discussion of WorkFront people answering questions entered into the Webinar. There is plenty of time left over at the end of the presentation. Why not take questions and answer a few on the call? I learn a lot from questions other people ask. I feel as though the value of the call is diminshed because there is no Q&A portion of the call.
In the end, I really like these Roadmap calls. I like that they are becoming more polished, more relaxed, with higher production values. That means people are thinking these things through carefully before they put it out to the user community. The thinking and care show in the quality of the presentation and the wording of the scripts people read. Good job!
Anyone else have an opinion they'd like to share?
Eric
