I am working on maturing my thought processes. I worry that my thinking remains tactical at times when it should be more strategic. But what does that mean?
Tactics usually cover what thing to do now whereas strategy asks "where are we going, and how do we get there?" This may be an oversimplification, and let's not get into debating definitions. They are well established and my descriptions are more for context than for Oxford.
So, when presented with a problem, a tactically minded PM is going to identify solutions that solve the problem, right? That means a Strategic PM will think about the larger implications of this problem and possible solutions? How will this problem impact us downstream? How can we turn this into a win? What are the consequences of solution A vs solution B?
But what is thinking like an ML engineer? The recent post by Moe Ali talks about a hypothetical PM solving AI error with a test agent and a robust testing scenario. Valid strategy, but is this strategic thinking or tactical thinking?
This PM is surely solving problems and there are a lot of outputs. But what is the outcome? How down in the weeds is this approach and does it set up the product for success, or just move past one pothole on the roadmap? A PM's role extends well beyond testing and validation. And does a heavy focus on engineering skill turn a creative thinker and problem solver into a hammer in search of a nail?
Does getting too technical eliminate strategic thinking? Does getting too strategic overlook the tactics that actually win the daily fights? Where does one need to land to optimize outcomes?
I think the answer lies in your job title and seniority as well as team composition.
Principal PMs, Director Level, and up should be focused on 2nd and 3rd order effects — very strategic. There should be others on the team, project managers, a lead engineer, etc., who can contribute valid approaches to solve technical problems.
Senior PMs balance some Tactics and Strategy and leverage problem solving. A Senior PM should look past the solution to the intended outcome and any unanticipated consequences that may arise. This is closer to systems thinking and shifts the focus to outcome versus outputs.
Junior PMs should solve problems, overcome hurdles, and move the product along. There should be senior staff to mentor and guide these PMs to mature their thinking as they move from 0 to 1.
One caveat: All of this hedges on team composition. If the other members of the product team are empowered, there's likely some good tactical contributions coming from those skilled and competent team members. If it's a feature team, or worse, outsourced work, then even a Principal PM is going to be forced to operate at the tactical level to overcome obstacles.
