Management of work can be approached through two useful perspectives: the flow perspective and the product perspective. These perspectives provide valuable frameworks for understanding how work can be organized and managed effectively, depending on the context. These perspectives reflect different approaches to organizing work and lead to the adoption of different management methods. Understanding these perspectives is especially crucial in the context of organizations transitioning to product-oriented operating models, such as the Agile Product Operating Model (APOM).
The Flow Perspective
The first perspective — flow — focuses on the processing of work units by an organization. The organization (and each of its parts) receives certain work units, processes them, and then passes them on.
In this perspective, the key aspect is ensuring a smooth flow of work through subsequent stages of the process while maintaining the required quality of its results. This model originates from traditional industries, where a factory receives completed designs and focuses on efficiently transforming at scale incoming materials & components into finished products in accordance with those designs. The value and purpose of the product as well as its functionality & looks have already been determined elsewhere — by a design office or a marketing department. Similarly, selling the product to the customer is the concern of another department — the sales department. Factory’s concern is just production.
Another characteristic feature of this perspective is that work can be transferred between different specialists or even job positions. It is not necessary for many individuals or a team to handle a given work unit from start to finish; instead, each stage of processing focuses on performing specific tasks or actions as effectively as possible, with resources (people, machinery) allocated accordingly.
The Manager’s Role in the Flow Perspective
In the flow perspective, the manager is responsible for a specific area of the organization through which work units “flow.” The manager’s primary task is to ensure the smooth passage of these units through their area of responsibility. This role is typically associated with a line manager who oversees specific resources (people, equipment) and is accountable for their effective utilization. They are not, however, accountable for the product design or its success on the market.
Success in the Flow Perspective
Success within this perspective is primarily measured by flow parameters: the volume of processed work units, their processing time (cycle time), throughput, and efficiency defined as the ratio of these parameters to the cost of engaged resources. The manager focuses on optimizing the use of available resources and eliminating bottlenecks that could slow down the flow. Methods rooted in industry practices, such as Kanban or the Theory of Constraints (ToC), are particularly useful in addressing these aspects.
In this perspective, each work unit has a clear beginning (entry into the area of given manager’s responsibility) and end (exit from that area). Therefore, success is always measurable and relatively easy to define — units are either processed according to requirements or not. Improving efficiency involves reducing the average cost per processed work unit. Enhancing productivity means processing a greater number of work units within the same timeframe, ideally without increasing the average unit cost.
Importantly, in this perspective, the value of work units is not considered at all or is only considered in a limited way (e.g., a rough classification into “regular” and “priority” work units). This topic is the responsibility of other organizational units as already explained.
The Product Perspective
The product perspective presents a fundamentally different approach. Here, the central focus is on maintaining and enhancing the value of the product for customers (users), which translates into revenue or other benefits for its creators. Since a product is something that exists over a long period — it is not a one-time event — empirical discovery and delivery of what will provide the most value to customers at a given moment are crucial.
Such development requires a dedicated, engaged team that deeply understands the product and its users. This understanding is essential for making accurate decisions about the development direction, quickly responding to changes in the environment, and effectively selecting which changes to implement in the product at any given moment.
We can use a metaphor here. While the flow model can be likened to an industrial age factory, the product model can be compared to a park. A park is simultaneously a usable space — people can enter and enjoy it — and a work in progress — something always needs to be done, changed, trimmed, or planted. The gardeners, who often work in the park while visitors are also there, are responsible for keeping it as an enjoyable place. This is similar to modern digital products, which are used while the teams that create them continuously make various changes, which are often quickly released and not always immediately noticed by the customers.
Organizational Models
Within the product perspective, two main organizational models can be distinguished:
The first — “our product” model — is characteristic of situations where there are many customers (hundreds, thousands, or more). In this approach, a single coherent product is developed for all users, and the organization is usually built around functional areas as seen from the customer perspective (“customer-facing product areas” term from LeSS describes this very well). The direction of product development is centrally managed, allowing for consistency and controlled evolution.
The second model — “our client” — works well when there are a few significant customers. Here, close cooperation with each customer is key, often carried out entirely or largely by dedicated teams. To keep the base product version consistent and avoid incompatible branches, technical synchronization mechanisms are needed to maintain coherence across different versions, even when there are functional differences for various clients.
Empirical Discovery of Value
A significant feature of the product perspective is that product development is based on a series of “bets” about which changes will bring value. Unlike the flow perspective, where value is assumed (predetermined), in the product perspective, value must be discovered empirically through experiments and gathering feedback from the market (customers).
Every decision regarding product development is essentially a hypothesis that can be fully verified only after delivering changes to users. This is a fundamental difference compared to the flow perspective, here we cannot know in advance if our decisions are correct, and thus cannot plan far in advance which features will be implemented and when. Instead, the product perspective requires an iterative and experimental approach.
The Manager’s Role in the Product Perspective
In the product perspective, the manager’s situation is fundamentally different. The focus is not on an area through which work flows, but on a product that is never “finished”—on the contrary, it requires constant evolution and development. The manager does not manage the flow of work as much as they are responsible for the product’s growth and long-term success.
Success in this perspective is measured through product outcomes and their changes over time. These may include market metrics (market share, revenue), usage metrics (number of active users, frequency of use), or customer satisfaction metrics. Importantly, these measures are not binary (“done/not done”) — they are more of a continuum that requires ongoing monitoring and improvement.
This fundamental difference in how success is perceived has profound implications for management practices. So, in the product perspective, a manager focuses on making strategic decisions about the product’s development direction, tactical decisions about immediate changes to be introduced into the product - and building and maintaining a capable team.
Comparison of Perspectives
When comparing the two perspectives, fundamental differences can be seen in the approach to management and measuring success.
Outputs versus Outcomes
The key difference between the perspectives reveals itself in what managers focus on. In the flow perspective, the main emphasis is on outputs — measurable process results, such as the number of work units processed or the rate of their processing. Success is defined by process efficiency and resource utilization.
In the product perspective, on the other hand, the focus is on outcomes — the actual business results of our actions. It is not about how many “things we did,” but about the impact those actions had on the product’s value and its market position. This fundamental difference has deep implications for how work is organized and decisions are made.
Differences in Management Approaches
Coexistence of Perspectives
Although these perspectives are fundamentally different, they are not mutually exclusive. In organizational reality, they often coexist and can even complement each other. For example, a product team can successfully use tools from the flow perspective to manage repetitive elements of their work.
However, it is crucial to understand which perspective is dominant in a given context. Attempts to blindly transfer tools from one perspective into another often end in failure.
For instance:
- Using Scrum (a highly product-oriented method) in a team primarily focused on processing service tickets (flow perspective) often leads to frustration.
- Attempting to organize a product team solely according to flow principles usually results in a loss of the ability to empirically discover value.
Implications for Introducing the Product Model
Understanding the differences between these perspectives is particularly important in the context of organizations transitioning to product-oriented operational models. Such a transition requires not only changes in organizational structure or processes but also a fundamental shift in thinking about work including what constitutes success in the context in which we operate.
Adopting the product perspective necessitates fundamental changes within the organization, which is particularly challenging for companies with a long history of managing from the flow perspective. Changing the way the organization is viewed requires rebuilding success measurement systems and rethinking team organization. It also deeply affects planning and decision-making processes. Moreover, success in the product perspective demands building a culture where empirical discovery of value becomes a natural way of working.
Broader Implications and Significance
Understanding the fundamental differences between the flow perspective and the product perspective has significant implications for modern organizations, especially in the context of digital transformation and the growing importance of digital products.
Historical Evolution
It is worth noting that the flow perspective dominated management throughout most of the 20th century, which was natural in the context of the industrial economy of that time. The model of separating design, production, and sales worked well in a stable environment, where product life cycles were long, and changes in products were relatively rare (the same product might have been produced for years, with only minimal changes, by the same assembly line in the same factory).
However, in today’s digital economy, characterized by rapid changes and shorter product change cycles, this model often proves insufficient. Digital products require constant evolution and adaptation, and the boundary between their design and “production” is completely blurred. This is why the product perspective is gaining in importance.
Significance in the Context of APOM
Understanding both perspectives is particularly important in the context of the Agile Product Operating Model (APOM). APOM represents a deliberate shift of the organization towards the product model, but for this change to be effective, organizations must first understand the fundamental differences between the perspectives.
Many organizations that have undergone “Agile transformations” have undoubtedly succeeded in improving the efficiency of software development. By bringing together different technical specialists in cross-functional teams, they managed to significantly increase the pace of delivering functionality and improve the technical quality of products. However, in most cases, these organizations have fundamentally remained in the flow perspective — the teams have simply become a better, more efficient “feature factory,” still focusing on the quantity of delivered functionalities (outputs) rather than the actual value for users (outcomes). True empowerment of teams over their products has for the most part not occurred.
APOM proposes a deeper change — a shift towards genuinely product-focused thinking, where teams not only efficiently develop software but, above all, are responsible for creating value through their products.
Summary
Understanding the fundamental differences between the flow and product perspectives is key for organizations aiming to function effectively in today’s digital economy. It is not about completely rejecting one perspective in favor of the other—both have their place and applications. The important thing is to consciously choose the appropriate perspective for a given context and to understand the implications of that choice for how work is organized and how success is measured.
In particular, organizations transitioning towards product models like APOM must be aware that this is not just a change in processes or structures but a fundamental shift in how value is created. It requires not only new tools and methods but, above all, a deep understanding of the differences between the perspectives and a conscious effort to shape an organizational culture that supports the chosen perspective.