How should Information Abstraction Vary Across Different Levels of Growth Reviews?
Introducing the concept of information abstraction is crucial as we often have varying depths of Growth Plan & Roadmap Reviews across different organizational levels.
This concept will help in tailoring the communication of complex information according to the audience's needs. Let's see how, with examples of multiple common settings.
Board Review Best Practices:
Board reviews involve high-level stakeholders who face significant context switching and meet infrequently. To maintain clarity and focus, it’s crucial to use standardized measurements and terms during these meetings.
The focus should be kept on core metrics such as user acquisition and cost efficiency, and on very high-level growth levers. Essentially, the goal is to distill the discussion to two key narratives, at the most, that board members should remember and carry forward.
Leadership Group Review Best Practices:
Leadership reviews occur more frequently than board reviews and thus can go slightly deeper into strategic details. These sessions should still employ standardized measurements to facilitate clear and concise communication.
However, the scope here broadens to include initiatives impacting multiple teams or requiring cross-departmental support. This level of review focuses on strategic adjustments and understanding interdependencies within the organization.
Internal Team Review Best Practices:
Internal team reviews happen with the highest frequency and involve detailed discussions among members who share a common context. This allows for the use of specialized metrics and terms, focusing in-depth on specific tasks and their impacts.
The scope of these reviews can be as detailed as necessary, providing a platform to address nuanced operational issues and enable a comprehensive understanding among team members.
Takeaway:
Effective growth reviews require tailored levels of information abstraction:
→ board reviews should distill essential narratives using standardized metrics;
→ leadership reviews can explore team interdependencies with a broader scope;
→ internal team reviews benefit from detailed, specialized discussions that address operational specifics.
This alignment of detail with the audience’s context ensures that strategic discussions are both efficient and impactful.