如何优雅地砍掉一个产品

    一家公司宣布将砍掉一款流行一时的产品。高管们将问题怪罪于销量下滑和运营重点调整。这样的决定是公司运营的正常组成部分。但它们还需要足够深谋远虑，以避免疏远顾客、违反合约和承担额外开销。

    一个最好的例子就是谷歌（Google）上周宣布即将关闭Reader。谷歌称还有三个月才会关闭这项供人们创建博客和更新文章的服务。这段时间内，用户可以寻找替代性产品，也可以把Reader中的数据导出。

    Reader的粉丝仍然在网上批评谷歌，希望他们收回决定。不过谷歌业务范围广泛，至少给它提供了一些掩护。

    公司在决定产品命运时，通常遵循标准的流程。针对特殊目标对收入、利润、客户互动程度等重要指标进行分析——这些都是常规手段。这项工作被称为“产品寿命周期分析”，或者更直白的说法——“死亡分析”。它的关键在于不带感情地给出如何继续工作的公正建议。

    计算公司在某款产品上的花销是一项复杂的事。任何尝试都需要考虑到销售和客户支持等大量部门的员工薪水。涉及到在线产品，带宽成本可能相当巨大。更新升级、修复漏洞，让产品能够与新技术潮流，比如最新的平板电脑兼容，同样耗费不菲。如果在做决定时感情用事，或是受公司政治左右，将会十分危险。不过这种情况非常普遍。公司创始人可能对某款产品产生依恋，拒绝将其淘汰。产品经理则可能害怕承认失败将影响自己的职业生涯。

    Apartments.com是网络分类巨头Classified Ventures旗下的在线公寓租赁清单服务提供商。公司产品管理副总裁克里斯•布朗说：“毫无疑问，如果决定砍掉的产品出自创始人之手，牵扯到感情的羁绊时，你需要做足功课，解释清楚，为什么要做出这个决定。”

    大多数情况下，“生命周期”检测都显示可以维持某款产品。其他情形下，分析可能会得出结论：公司需要在投资上有所倾斜，开发新产品或改进产品特色。

    实际上，被认为彻底失败的产品相对容易解决。几乎没人会捍卫大量亏损的项目。而处理那些尽管赢得了一些顾客、但发展却陷入停滞或者衰退的产品则要复杂得多。许多高管不愿意牺牲短期收入，尽管这么做对公司的长远发展有利。布朗说：“告诉CEO你要把这桌上的收入拿掉一部分，这太艰难了。”多年来，布朗已经淘汰了大量产品，砍掉了许多产品功能。

    A company announces plans to kill a once-popular product. Executives lay the blame on slumping sales and changing priorities. Such decisions are a routine part of doing business. They also require ample forethought to avoid alienating customers, violating contracts, and racking up extra costs.

    Google's (GOOG) announcement last week that it would shutter Reader, a service for creating a feed of blog posts and news articles, is a prime example. To minimize the impact on users, Google said it would wait more than three months before pulling the plug. During that time, users can find an alternative service. Those who want to export their data from Reader can do so.

    Fans still went online to criticize Google's decision and ask that it be rolled back. But the company's outreach at least gave it some cover.

    In deciding the fate of their products, companies generally follow a standard process. Analyzing important metrics like revenue, profit, and customer engagement against specific goals is routine. "Product life cycle analysis" or, more informally, "kill analysis" are just some of the names for the job. The point is to come up with a dispassionate, unbiased recommendation about how to proceed.

    Calculating how much a product costs a company can be complex. Any attempt must factor in employee salaries across a number of departments like sales and customer support. Bandwidth costs can be sizeable for an online product. So can upgrades, fixing bugs, and making products compatible with new technology such as the latest tablets. Basing decisions on emotions and internal corporate politics is dangerous. But it is all too common. A founder may feel an attachment to a product and resist shutting it down. Product managers may fear that admitting failure will hurt their careers.

    "Without a doubt, when you have products that are the babies of the founder -- that come with an emotional attachment -- those are the ones you really have to come in having done your homework about why you're making the decision," says Chris Brown, vice president of product management for Apartments.com, an online apartment rental listing service that is owned by online classified giant, Classified Ventures.

    In most cases, "life cycle" reviews show that sustaining a product is fine. In others, the analysis may conclude that the company needs to ramp up investment for new or improved features.

    Products deemed outright failures are, in fact, relatively easy to deal with. Big money losers have few defenders. Things get more complicated with products that have gained some customers but are nonetheless stagnant or in decline. Many executives dislike sacrificing short-term revenue, even if it is for the long-term good of the company. "Boy is it tough to tell a CEO that you want to take revenue off of the table," says Brown, who has shut down a number of products and features over the years.