Keep Product Management Weird
There’s a growing temptation to treat it like a science – or worse, the most boring of religions. 2026 is our chance to keep it messy.
"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro"
(Hunter S. Thompson, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas)
I find it revealing that some of the rising talents in Product Management I met this year are law graduates – just as I happen to have a degree in humanities.
This year, the discipline took clearer shape, even in the periphery of the Empire where I live. What used to be scattered papers, webinars, and books has become structured learning: certifications, standardized frameworks, proper courses where the first wave of product managers is training the second. Early meetups have grown into full-fledged communities. It’s increasingly rare to be mistaken for a project manager.
All good things. But pardon me if I remind myself why I got into this. It wasn’t to apply frameworks as if they were natural laws. It was to reach the point where every framework disappoints – which might be an accidental definition of life.
The mess in this work? It’s not a bug. It’s a feature. And it’s what makes it worth doing.
I see an understandable desire to turn Product Management into a science – a praxis (with patterns at best) into an orthopraxis (with laws you must obey). There’s a growing legion of fractional priests offering PM sermons. But this is the most boring of religions: IF (condition), THEN apply_framework().
If that’s your style, consider embracing Mario Andretti’s racing spirit: “If everything is under control, you’re going too slow.” Product Management is anything but static. It’s a living role – shaped by shifting org structures, evolving tech trends, and ever-changing customer behavior.
[unsolicited career advice: I wouldn’t turn this into an administrative, predictive role in the middle of a market correction. It’s too early to declare we’re past peak Product Management, but job listings tell a story: PM roles appear to be drying up. Why sit on the part of the job that any AI can replace?]
I’m not claiming my way is better. I’m saying quite the opposite: there are countless ways to be a PM. The job demands craftsmanship – because life is messy, and you have to honor its texture.
I may lean toward reading organizations through the lens of strategy and people (humanities, after all). Others may be more operational. That’s fine: different problems require different toolsets.
But please – let’s keep this place weird in 2026.
