Egor Slyusarchuk

I generally agree. However, there are two reasons why startup founders — often intelligent and hardworking people — start with an idea. First, it’s hard to move forward without an idea, whereas a good idea can drive you to work 20-hour days and still feel energized. Second, the ability to work with a product concept makes it easier to adapt when user needs change, strong competitors emerge, or...

In my opinion, we should start building an audience as early as possible. If we can articulate the product idea clearly and vividly — which isn’t always the case, even with strong startups — and if we have the resources to create buzz and keep the audience engaged without a product, then it makes sense to do so before launch. However, if resources are limited and the investment in promotion...

Launching a product is always a series of launches. First, we create a conditionally functional version for a bodystorming test. Then, we present the product to investors and open access for early bird users. A successful launch on Product Hunt brings in many users, but they are often not the target audience and tend to be quite loyal. Marketing campaigns and other promotion strategies aimed at...

This is just one strategy. If executed properly, it can be an effective way to attract new clients and grow the business. However, personal branding demands significant personal effort and a certain mindset.

First, the founder should focus on finding the right people, especially for key roles. Ultimately, it’s not a perfect strategy or targeting a good audience but the team that will determine whether our startup succeeds or fails.

I will never know enough to have all the answers, even about my own product. It’s essential to learn to rely on the team, users, and market analysis аnd, of course, to establish an effective system for validating hypotheses.

The communication channel isn’t critical and depends on what’s customary in your company. What truly matters is the message itself — it’s important to offer users something new or showcase new use cases for existing features. This isn’t a love story; the relationship between the user and the product is built on mutual benefit, and delivering additional value is what matters most.

It is difficult, and many products have made mistakes in this regard. But the general principle is to direct new functionality, which complicates the experience but increases value, toward existing users. For scenarios aimed at new users, keep them as simple as possible.

There is no contradiction between usability and accessibility. By improving usability, we make a product user-friendly; by focusing on accessibility, we make it user-friendly for everyone.

We must follow a clear product strategy and user research, validating each decision through analytics. This process should be repeated consistently.

To some degree, the concept of subscriptions is built around the idea of earning money from users who pay but either don’t use the product or use it infrequently. As a user, I would prefer to pay only for what I consume and not commit to any subscriptions. However, as a product manager, my main question is: what can I afford to do? If I can implement a six-month or annual subscription without...

I think this is one of the most underrated strategies. The reason isn’t about saving money or time — that’s a misconception. Like everything in marketing, this approach requires creativity and control. The real value lies in breaking down the barrier between seller and buyer, enabling our current customers to communicate directly with future ones.

The biggest problem with remote interaction right now is the abundance of rituals. We must schedule a meeting in the calendar, open an app or tab, check the camera and microphone, upload and download images, and turn on screen sharing. Meanwhile, when we’re in the same room, we can ask a question and get an answer in seconds. This is partly due to privacy policies and partly due to...

By default, we should start with outlines refine them step by step, adding details with each iteration. In most cases, this approach delivers the best results. However, sometimes, when we have a clear understanding of what we’re doing and can see the big picture, it’s possible to move straight to the final version. This helps preserve inspiration and will likely save time as well.

If we are developing a feature or product, we need to have a target audience and expected outcomes. These are measured using product metrics, which are defined during the creation of business requirements. If it’s a feature update, we conduct a comparative analysis of the old versus the new. But if we are doing something genuinely innovative… we believe in ourselves for a while. And then, we...

Definitely unique components. Design systems are created to suit many use cases. At the same time, if we are developing a product with unique user scenarios, nine out of ten design systems will either not fit us or require significant customization. This means that if I come across a design system with components that fit our product well, it will definitely catch my attention.

A design system can be compact but must be consistent, based on simple principles, and customizable. It might have only 20 components, but we can easily scale it to 100 or more when new user scenarios require it in the future. In contrast, massive design systems with hundreds of pages of poorly organized documentation will inevitably lead to inefficiency and confusion over time.

I would like to automate the feedback I give employees regarding their performance. While these conversations are often engaging and productive, sometimes things don’t go as planned, and the discussions become a real nightmare for both sides.

The choice of a tool depends on the tasks and workflows. For our team, which develops products while being spread across different cities and countries, Figma is unrivaled. That said, I wish Figma had a strong competitor. It would drive innovation and help it become even better.