In a recent LinkedIn post, product management expert Melissa Perri tackles a common dilemma faced by product managers: whether to develop a large, potentially risky feature or to release smaller, discrete features incrementally. Perri emphasizes that the core of this decision lies not in the size of the feature, but in understanding what is already known and determining the most appropriate next step.
Understanding the Core Question: Knowledge vs. Scope
Perri challenges the binary thinking of “big vs. small,” asserting that the critical factor is the level of validation already achieved. She explains that if extensive research and experimentation have already confirmed user demand for a comprehensive solution, then proceeding with the larger feature may be justified. However, if the value proposition of individual components remains unproven, these smaller features should be treated as experiments.
“The real question isn’t ‘big vs. small.’ It’s ‘what do we already know, and what’s the right next step?'”
This perspective shifts the focus from a feature-centric approach to a knowledge-centric one. According to Perri, the decision-making process should be guided by the existing evidence and the strategic goals of the product.
Treating Smaller Releases as Experiments
Perri highlights that discrete features, while seemingly smaller, can sometimes fully address a customer’s problem. In other instances, they might serve as stepping stones towards a more complete solution that will be needed later. The crucial element, as Perri points out, is honesty about the current state of understanding and the potential outcomes.
“If you’ve already validated that users want the complete solution through research and experimentation, then investing in the comprehensive approach makes sense. But if you haven’t proven those individual pieces deliver value, treat the smaller features as experiments first.”
This experimental mindset is vital for mitigating risk and ensuring that development efforts are aligned with actual user needs and market opportunities. By framing smaller releases as experiments, teams can gather valuable data and iterate effectively without committing significant resources to unvalidated concepts.
The Importance of Honesty and Validation
Ultimately, Perri advocates for a pragmatic approach grounded in continuous learning and validation. She suggests that product teams should be transparent about the assumptions they are making and the evidence they have gathered (or lack thereof) when making decisions about feature scope and release strategy.
“Sometimes the discrete features can solve the customer problem entirely. Sometimes they can’t, and you’ll need the full solution later. The key is being honest about which scenario you’re in.”
Perri further elaborated on this framework in her “Dear Melissa” episode and the Product Thinking podcast, encouraging a dialogue within the product management community about effective decision-making processes when faced with such choices. Her insights underscore the need for rigorous validation and strategic thinking in product development, moving beyond simplistic choices to a more nuanced understanding of risk and learning.
📝 About This Content
This article is based on insights shared by Melissa Perri on LinkedIn.
📅 Originally posted on November 16, 2025 | View original post on LinkedIn →