High Signal Podcasts Evidence ledger
Method
Browse
← Back to evidence

Evidence receipt / evaluation

Published · transcript-backed

Dmitry Zlokazov: evaluation

15 May 2025 Lenny's Podcast How Revolut trains world-class product managers: The “local CEO” model, raw intellect over experience, and a cultural obsession with building wow products | Dmitry Zlokazov (Head of Product)

“There are way more things that are common to each of these three specializations. So what we see sometimes is people just shifting them because I would say that what defines the specialization is probably 5, 10, 15% while 85 to 90% is common to each one of them.”

— Dmitry Zlokazov

Source trail

Everything needed to verify it.

Speaker
Dmitry Zlokazov
Attribution
Verified speaker
Claim type
evaluation
Recorded
15 May 2025
Publisher
Lenny's Podcast

Transcript context

…Three. And the third type becomes increasingly more important. So the first type is UX product owners. Then there are technical product owners, and then there are data science product owners. So UX product owners are the ones who work on consumer facing part of the product. Usually they have a great taste for things and they understand what constitutes UX that will work and which things will not work. So they also have this expertise in the industry. Then tech product owners, they are the ones who delve deepest into details. Usually those are former engineers who grew into making decisions and driving business. And the data science product owners are usually former data scientists who decided to grow into management positions, but they're still very hands-on. And you know what? There are way more things that are common to each of these three specializations. So what we see sometimes is people just shifting them because I would say that what defines the specialization is probably 5, 10, 15% while 85 to 90% is common to each one of them. And those things are, so first of all, being a great problem solver and have a great linear thinking, but also have a creative approach towards nonlinear problems. Then building this context for customer and building empathy towards customer and translating it into the team. Then going down to details very, very deep because in our domain there are no obvious things and you need to get to the root cause of the problem really, really deep to understand what will work and what will not work. And that means that you also need to be quite technical, even if you are an expert, you still need to often go as deep as sitting with engineers and reading code. And then I would also emphasize the importance of business acumen because we tend to measure and quantify product performance a lot. And you need to understand, okay, what things will we build that will drive eventually that business metric and that target? So I love this idea of the product owners having to go really deep. I think a lot of people hearing this, they think they can go deep, go deep, really understand the details of what they're working on. I'm curious if there's an example that's illustrative of just what you actually mean here.…

Stored transcript either side of the excerpt. The highlighted words are the published quote; the surrounding text is unedited source, never generated.

Search evidence