danielpradilla Roadmap Review Outline
Build roadmaps that tell a strategy story - not just a list of features with dates. Every roadmap output is audience-calibrated: executives get outcomes, teams get specificity, customers get value.
Required Inputs
Ask the user for these if not provided:
- Audience (executive/board, cross-functional, engineering, customers - changes format significantly)
- Prioritised initiative list with rough timelines or quarters
- Company OKRs or strategic goals (to anchor the narrative)
- Period covered (Q1, H1, full year, etc.)
Audience Calibration
Always ask who the audience is before building:
| Audience | They care about | Format |
|---|---|---|
| Executive / Board | Business outcomes, revenue, risk, strategic alignment | Outcome-led, 3 columns (Now / Next / Later), no sprint detail |
| Cross-functional stakeholders | Dependencies, timelines, their team's involvement | Theme-based, with dependency callouts |
| Engineering team | Specificity, sequencing, technical constraints | Detailed, with epics and rough sizing |
| Customers / External | Value delivered, no internal detail | Benefits-focused, no dates - "Coming soon / In progress / Done" |
The Now / Next / Later Framework
Standard output structure:
NOW (Current quarter - high confidence, committed)
- What we're building and why
- Expected outcomes
NEXT (Following quarter - medium confidence, directional)
- Themes and initiatives
- Key hypotheses being tested
LATER (6–12 months - low confidence, aspirational)
- Strategic bets
- Dependencies that need to resolve first
⚠️ Never put specific dates on "Later" items. Use quarters or halves.
Roadmap Narrative Template
Every roadmap needs a narrative, not just a timeline. Structure it as:
- Where we are - current product state and key metrics
- The problem we're solving - what's holding customers or the business back
- Our strategic bets - the themes that guide this roadmap
- What we're building - Now / Next / Later breakdown
- How we'll know it's working - success metrics per theme
- What we're not doing - explicit deprioritisation with rationale
Output Format
Product Roadmap - [Product Area] - [Quarter/Year]
Audience: [Executive / Team / Customer] Roadmap Owner: [product management Name] Last Updated: [Date] Confidence Level: Now = High | Next = Medium | Later = Low
Strategic Context:
[2–3 sentences: what company/product goal does this roadmap serve?]
Guiding Themes This Period:
- [Theme 1] - [1-line rationale]
- [Theme 2] - [1-line rationale]
- [Theme 3] - [1-line rationale]
NOW - [Quarter]
| Theme | Initiative | Outcome Expected | Team | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [Theme] | [What we're building] | [Metric it moves] | [Owner] | In Progress / Starting |
NEXT - [Quarter]
| Theme | Initiative | Hypothesis | Dependencies |
|---|---|---|---|
| [Theme] | [What we plan to build] | [If we build X, we expect Y] | [What needs to be true first] |
LATER - [H2 / Next Year]
| Theme | Strategic Bet | Why Later |
|---|---|---|
| [Theme] | [What we might build] | [What's blocking or uncertain] |
What We're NOT Building (and Why):
- [Requested initiative] - Deprioritised because: [reason]
- [Requested initiative] - Deprioritised because: [reason]
Success Metrics for This Roadmap:
| Metric | Now Target | End of Year Target |
|---|---|---|
| [Metric] | [X] | [Y] |
Guidelines
- Never let a roadmap become a commitment list - frame everything outside "Now" as directional
- Always include a "not doing" section - it prevents the roadmap from becoming a wish list in disguise
- For executive audiences: lead with the outcome the roadmap delivers to the business, not the features
- Recommend a roadmap review cadence: monthly for Now items, quarterly for Next/Later
- If dates are demanded for Later items: use quarters (Q3 2026), not specific dates
Quality Checks
- Format matches the audience (executives don't get sprint-level detail)
- NOW items are committed with owners; NEXT items are directional; LATER items are aspirational
- "What We're NOT Building" section has at least 2 items with rationale
- Success metrics are specified per theme (not just a list of features)
- Language is free of internal jargon - tested by asking: "could an external stakeholder understand this?"