In a recent LinkedIn post, Janna Bastow, CEO of ProdPad, shares a valuable lesson learned from a customer call regarding the automation of product roadmaps. The discussion highlighted a common misconception about how product development tools should function, particularly concerning the automatic inclusion of ideas into a roadmap.
Bastow recounts a moment of palpable relief from a customer when she explained that ideas generated from feedback should not automatically land on the roadmap. This reaction underscores a broader industry concern about the seductive nature of automation in product management.
“Automation is seductive. It promises speed. But in product, speed without judgment is how roadmaps turn into commitments no one meant to make.”
Bastow argues that while automation can be a powerful tool, its uncritical application in product roadmapping can lead to unintended consequences. The core of her message emphasizes that the process of deciding what to build is fundamentally a human leadership act, requiring context, political awareness, and nuanced judgment.
The Nuance of Prioritization: Beyond Automated Surfacing
Bastow elaborates on why fully automating product prioritization is a complex challenge. She points out that such decisions are inherently multifaceted, involving elements that cannot be easily quantified or delegated to algorithms.
“There’s a reason we hesitate to fully automate prioritization. Deciding what to build is a leadership act. It’s contextual. It’s political. It’s imperfect.”
According to Bastow, the true value of product development systems lies not in making decisions for users, but in empowering them to make better ones. These systems should serve as sophisticated assistants, surfacing patterns and providing data, rather than replacing human accountability.
Informing, Not Dictating, Decisions
The CEO of ProdPad stresses that the objective of effective product management tools is to enhance human decision-making capabilities. This means equipping product managers with the insights and data necessary to make informed choices, rather than removing them from the decision-making process altogether.
“Good systems should inform decisions, not make them for you. They should surface patterns, not bypass accountability.”
Bastow’s perspective is that the goal is not to minimize human involvement but to augment it, ensuring that decisions are made with a comprehensive understanding of the landscape.
The Risk of Accidental Commitments
Bastow concludes by posing a critical question to her network, inviting them to share their experiences with similar situations where automation has inadvertently led to unwanted commitments. This open-ended query encourages a broader industry discussion on the responsible implementation of technology in product development.
“The goal isn’t to remove humans from product decisions. It’s to help them make better ones, with eyes wide open.”
Her insights suggest that while technology offers immense potential for efficiency, it must be wielded with a clear understanding of its limitations, especially in the inherently human-centric domain of product strategy and roadmap planning. The emphasis remains on leveraging tools to support, not supplant, the critical judgment of product leaders.
📝 About This Content
This article is based on insights shared by Janna Bastow on LinkedIn.
📅 Originally posted on January 26, 2026 | View original post on LinkedIn →