People, process, delivery and AI. Fixed properly, and measured.

Playbooks / Cadence · 2 min read

Ending the engineering vs product tug of war

It isn't a conflict between people. It's a conflict between two scorecards.

The problem

“Every planning session is engineering vs product”

In the model

Process · Cadence

In 30 seconds

  • Product is judged on what ships. Engineering is judged on what breaks.
  • Agree a capacity split once a quarter, not ticket by ticket.
  • Both leads ask one question: what's the best use of this team's next month?
70% 20% 10% Roadmapproduct owns the order Engineering healthengineering owns the order Unplanned
Agree the split once a quarter, and the argument happens once instead of every sprint.

The situation

Product wants features. Engineering wants time to fix things. Both sides feel like they're losing, and the two leads have quietly stopped liking each other.

What's really going on

Each side argues for the thing it will be blamed for. Nobody owns the whole. Change the scorecards and most of the argument goes away.

What to do

  1. Agree a split in advance. For example 70% roadmap, 20% engineering health, 10% unplanned. Once a quarter.
  2. Translate engineering work. Not "upgrade the ORM" but "cut checkout errors by 30%".
  3. Price product work. "This adds a payment provider we'll support forever."
  4. Share one question. "What's the best use of this team's next month for the business?"
  5. Meet weekly, without the team. Disagree in private, present one plan in public.

Signs it's working

  • The 20% gets spent without anyone asking permission.
  • The PM argues for an engineering-health item.
  • The EM argues against a quick fix because of product impact.
  • The team can't tell whose idea a priority was.

How you'll know it's working

  • Split: the agreed capacity split and the actual split are within 10%.
  • One plan: the team hears one plan from its two leads.
  • Care check: neither lead has had to fight for the 20% this quarter.

In the frameworks

  • SAFe: Capacity allocation is SAFe's answer: agree the split between features and enablers before planning.
  • Shape Up: The cool-down between cycles gives engineering time without a fight.
  • Team Topologies: Platform and enabling teams take load off product teams instead of competing with them.

In other industries

  • Healthcare Clinical leads want time for audit and training; management wants appointments delivered. Agree protected time each quarter.
  • Accountancy Partners want billable hours; the firm needs time for systems, training and quality. A fixed split ends the annual fight.
  • Manufacturing Production wants output; maintenance wants downtime. Planned maintenance windows are the capacity split.
  • Small business Today's customers or fixing how you work? Ring-fence half a day a week.

What to say

"I think we keep having the same argument because we're measured on different things. Can we agree a split for the quarter, say 70/20/10, and defend it together instead of fighting over every ticket?"

Try this week

Work out last quarter's actual split. It's usually not what anyone would have chosen.

Think about it

If your team could see the EM and PM's private conversations, would it trust the plan more or less?

More for Cadence

My team has lost its way and I need to reset itHow to reset a teamProcess · Cadence→