Category: Generative AI

10 AI Business Models You Need Now: Proven Playbooks Turning Algorithms into Revenue

I’ve spent the past few product cycles re-architecting roadmaps around one simple reality: AI is no longer just a feature—it’s a business model. The companies winning market share are those that treat models, data, and workflows as monetizable assets with defensible moats, not science projects.

AI business models are rewriting value creation. Learn how smart teams turn algorithms into profit engines, reshaping entire industries.

From my seat in product leadership, I evaluate AI bets through three lenses: durable value (moat and differentiation), measurable outcomes (clear ROI), and unit economics (gross margins under real-world load). With that frame, here are ten AI business models I see performing now—and how I decide when to invest.

1) API-first Model-as-a-Service. I monetize foundation or specialized models via an API, priced by tokens, requests, or time-in-context. Success hinges on latency, accuracy, and “context window management” that balances quality with cost. This is where “consumption SaaS pricing” shines and where disciplined rate-limiting, observability, and SLAs build trust.

2) Vertical AI copilots. I package domain-specific expertise (legal, healthcare, finance, field service) into workflow-native assistants that surface next-best actions. Because these copilots live where work happens, I price on outcomes—time saved, revenue recovered, or risk reduced—aligning value with customer metrics and accelerating product adoption.

3) Agentic AI automation. When autonomous agents handle multi-step tasks across tools, I lean toward per-outcome or per-job pricing. Reliability is the moat, so I invest early in eval-driven development, robust guardrails, and human-in-the-loop QA. This model compounds fast once agents can execute end-to-end workflows with transparent audit trails.

4) Copilot add-ons inside existing SaaS. I’ve seen “AI Assist” tiers deliver immediate ARPU lift and retention gains. The playbook: start with high-frequency, high-friction jobs (drafts, summaries, enrichment), then expand to proactive suggestions. This aligns tightly with product strategy and lets me stage value without overhauling the core experience.

5) Insights-as-a-Service via data network effects. I transform exhaust data into benchmarking, predictions, and prescriptive recommendations—while honoring privacy-by-design and data governance. The more customers I onboard, the stronger the patterns, and the higher the switching costs. Pricing ties to seats plus an outcomes or value metric.

6) Retrieval-first pipeline for enterprise knowledge. I land with high-accuracy answers over customer data (search, summarize, cite), then expand into workflow automations. This “retrieval-first pipeline” reduces hallucinations, boosts trust, and creates defensibility through connectors, semantic indexing, and continuous relevance tuning—an ideal fit for LLMs for product managers prioritizing reliability.

7) Open source monetization. When I bet on openness, I monetize hosting, support, enterprise controls, and compliance features. The advantage is developer love and rapid iteration; the moat is operational excellence at scale, plus integrations customers rely on. This model converts community momentum into predictable revenue.

8) Marketplaces for prompts, skills, and agents. I create a platform for third-party extensions and charge a take rate on usage. The flywheel spins when developers see distribution, customers see breadth, and I enforce strong quality bars. The roadmap focuses on governance, discovery, and safe execution policies.

9) Solutions with forward deployed engineers. For complex rollouts, I pair product with specialized implementation to guarantee outcomes. Revenue blends software plus services, accelerating time-to-value and informing the roadmap with real-world constraints. Over time, learnings fold back into scalable, self-serve capabilities.

10) AI risk, security, and compliance tooling. As AI scales, so does the need for policy enforcement, monitoring, and auditability. I monetize via platform subscriptions that address model provenance, data leakage prevention, red teaming, and reporting. Strong “AI risk management” is now a purchasing requirement, not a nice-to-have.

How do I choose among these models? I start with the customer’s biggest workflow pain, map it to the fastest path to measurable outcomes, and align pricing with value creation. Then I build defensibility through data advantage, distribution, and governance. If a model deepens trust, improves margins, and compounds learning, it earns a place on the roadmap.

Inspired by this post on Product School.

December 24, 2025
Monetizing AI with Confidence: Proven Models, Smart Pricing, and ROI You Can Defend

I’ve learned the hard way that shipping an impressive AI demo is not the same as creating a durable revenue engine. In my role leading product strategy, I focus on one goal: connect AI capabilities to measurable customer outcomes, then price and package them so both value and margins are visible and defensible.

Monetizing AI features into profit isn’t trivial. Here are some clear strategies for capturing and pricing AI products and how to monetize with returns.

First, I clarify the business model. Add-on AI packs work when the value is concentrated in a specific workflow (for example, automated summarization or AI copilot assistance). Tiered packaging helps when AI elevates the overall experience across many features. Usage-based or consumption SaaS pricing is ideal when value scales with volume—tokens, documents processed, calls handled, or agents invoked—because it aligns price to realized outcomes.

Next, I align pricing mechanics with the customer’s value story. I anchor price against the baseline they know: hours saved, conversions gained, cases deflected, or risk reduced. Then I set floors based on unit economics—model inference, vector storage, and orchestration costs—so gross margins remain healthy as usage grows. Clear guardrails (quotas, rate limits, and context window management) prevent surprise bills and keep cost-to-serve predictable.

Packaging is where monetization becomes intuitive. I gate high-cadence, high-compute features behind premium tiers, and I expose quick wins (like smart suggestions) in core tiers to accelerate activation. For enterprise, I bundle governance, audit logs, data controls, and “privacy-by-design” features to justify step-up pricing and reduce procurement friction.

To sustain ROI, I run an eval-driven development loop. I define quality metrics (accuracy, helpfulness, latency, safety) and instrument the retrieval-first pipeline so I can isolate where value is created or lost. This lets me right-size models, tune prompts, and swap components without compromising outcomes or margins—critical for LLMs for product managers who must balance experience and cost.

Measurement is non-negotiable. I track activation, time-to-first-value, weekly engaged AI users, and feature-level retention. For revenue impact, I attribute uplift through A/B testing and minimum detectable effect thresholds, measuring conversion lift, ticket deflection, and cycle-time reductions. When customers see these numbers in their own dashboards, procurement turns into partnership.

Risk and compliance are part of the product, not an afterthought. I build in AI risk management, data governance, and red-teaming from day one. Clear data boundaries, human-in-the-loop controls, and transparent disclosures protect end users and make enterprise legal teams our allies rather than blockers.

Go-to-market matters as much as the model. I use product-led growth tactics—free AI credits, transparent meters, and in-app guides—to let users feel the value before the paywall. Sales enablement centers on the value proposition: faster outcomes, higher quality, and lower total cost of ownership, not just “gen ai” for its own sake. Pricing pages should showcase tiers, usage bands, and outcomes, eliminating guesswork.

Here’s the simple playbook I follow: validate the problem with continuous discovery, instrument the workflow, pilot with generous caps, and collect willingness-to-pay signals early. Then iterate the price meter, refine units of value (documents, messages, or actions), and align SKUs to buyer personas. Over time, I introduce agentic AI capabilities as premium modules when they demonstrably reduce steps or automate entire objectives.

When AI monetization works, it feels effortless to customers because the price mirrors the outcome. When it doesn’t, it’s usually because packaging hides value, pricing ignores unit economics, or ROI isn’t visible. By grounding strategy in value metrics, consumption-aware pricing, and rigorous evaluation, I’ve found we can scale AI revenue with confidence—and keep both customers and margins happy.

Inspired by this post on Product School.

December 22, 2025
Master Burger Prompting: Build a High-Impact AI Resume Coach with Proven LLM Structures

I turned the playful idea of “burger prompting” into a rigorous framework for building an AI resume coach that delivers consistent, high‑quality guidance. In product management, repeatability matters: I want dependable LLM behavior, tight control of outputs, and measurable outcomes. This approach gives me exactly that—clear roles, crisp constraints, and an evaluation loop that raises the quality bar with each iteration.

Here’s the metaphor in practice. The top bun sets the role and goal; the middle layers stack context, examples, constraints, and tools; the patty is the core algorithm and output schema; and the bottom bun locks in the quality bar and follow-up behavior. When I apply this structure to an AI resume coach, I get results that feel expert, empathetic, and actionable—without rewriting the prompt every time.

Top bun: I define the system role and success criteria. I’ll say, “Act as an experienced hiring manager and resume coach for SaaS product roles” and specify the north star: improve clarity, impact, and ATS alignment without fabricating experience. I also name the audience (mid-career PMs, early-career candidates, or executives) so tone and calibration stay consistent across sessions.

First layer: I load precise context. That includes the candidate’s resume, the target job description, and any constraints (for example: keep bullets under 22 words, lead with impact, quantify outcomes). I also clarify non-goals (no inflated titles, no unverifiable claims). This is where I set the voice: confident, concise, and supportive, not generic or robotic.

Second layer: I attach the tools and references that anchor outputs. A skill taxonomy for product roles, a style guide for resume bullets, and a scoring rubric (impact, clarity, relevance, keyword coverage) help the model prioritize. To protect quality, I call out context window management rules—what to include or trim—and how to summarize long inputs without losing signal.

Third layer: I add exemplars. Few-shot examples of excellent resume bullets (“before” and “after”) teach the model what “great” looks like. I also include a counterexample or two to prevent bad habits (for instance, over-indexing on buzzwords). Exemplars act like taste buds; they steer nuance without overfitting.

Patty: I define the core algorithm and the output schema. The algorithm moves in stages: diagnose the resume against the job, identify 3–5 high-leverage improvements, rewrite bullets with quantified outcomes, and propose a summary that highlights relevant wins. I then specify the output sections: a brief diagnosis, rewritten bullets mapped to the job’s requirements, an ATS keyword coverage table, and a confidence score with rationale. A tight schema produces consistent, scannable outputs that are easy to evaluate—and easy to ship.

Bottom bun: I lock in the quality bar and the follow-up behavior. If inputs are incomplete, the coach must ask clarifying questions before rewriting. If claims lack evidence, it should suggest proof points (metrics, scope, stakeholders) rather than embellish. Finally, I require a self-check pass where the coach verifies that each bullet demonstrates impact, relevance, and clarity before presenting the final result.

Implementation blueprint: I create a reusable prompt template with clear system and user sections, then parameterize it for different roles (PM, design, data). If I have a library of style guides or skill matrices, I wire it into a retrieval layer so the model references the right material for each job. This setup makes the coach portable across tools and easy to maintain as the taxonomy evolves.

Evaluation and iteration: I practice eval-driven development. I assemble a small, representative test set of resumes and job descriptions, define acceptance criteria (readability score, keyword coverage, human rater alignment), and A/B test prompt variants. I track drift and tighten the schema whenever outputs start to meander. The goal isn’t just impressive demos—it’s reliable performance at scale.

Governance guardrails: A trustworthy resume coach respects privacy-by-design. I strip PII where possible, avoid storing raw resumes beyond what’s necessary, and document bias checks so advice doesn’t disadvantage non-traditional candidates. Clear data governance and risk management keep the product shippable and compliant as it grows.

When I apply burger prompting end to end, the AI resume coach becomes a repeatable system: fast, accurate, and measurably helpful. The structure teaches the model how to behave; the evals keep it honest; and the schema makes the result easy to review, refine, and ship. If you want dependable LLM outcomes, start with a great bun—and don’t skimp on the patty.

Inspired by this post on Pendo – Best Practices.

December 19, 2025
What It Takes to Build AI-Powered Products: A Senior Engineer’s Playbook and Mindset

I spend my days partnering with technical leaders who bridge invention and impact. The role of a Senior Software Engineer at Amplitude working on AI-powered products epitomizes how engineering and product fuse to ship customer value with speed, safety, and conviction. In my world, that fusion isn’t accidental—it’s designed, measured, and relentlessly improved.

When I form product trios—engineering, product, and design—we clarify the problem, the target users, and the measurable outcomes before a single line of code ships. This is how empowered product teams operate: we trade feature wish-lists for hypotheses, align on success metrics, and commit to learning loops that turn ambiguity into progress.

On the technical front, modern AI systems demand a retrieval-first pipeline, robust data contracts, and a thoughtful orchestration layer for LLMs. I expect eval-driven development to be first-class: offline unit-style evals for prompts and policies, and online evals that track behavior changes and quality at scale. This rigor gives us confidence to ship, learn, and iterate without burning cycles on guesswork.

Velocity matters, and so does reliability. I look for CI/CD that makes small, safe, frequent releases the default, and for DORA metrics to shine a light on delivery health. Pair that with platform scalability, clear SLOs, and pragmatic SRE practices, and teams earn the right to move fast without breaking trust.

Responsible AI is non-negotiable. We operationalize AI risk management with guardrails, input/output filters, red-teaming, and human-in-the-loop review where stakes are high. Data governance and privacy-by-design ensure that our creativity never outruns our compliance—because durable products are built on durable trust.

Impact comes from evidence. I advocate for disciplined A/B testing, careful minimum detectable effect (MDE) planning, and retention analysis that ties feature work to real business outcomes. Clear analytics pipelines and transparent dashboards keep stakeholders aligned and make good decisions repeatable.

Ultimately, the Senior Software Engineer I want to collaborate with is a builder who balances systems thinking with customer empathy: someone who can design reliable architectures, instrument the work with meaningful evals, and co-lead discovery to de-risk the roadmap. When we combine that mindset with crisp execution, AI-powered products stop being demos—and start becoming indispensable.

Inspired by this post on Amplitude – Perspectives.

December 18, 2025
Beyond the Support Iceberg: Gradient Labs’ Multi‑Agent Breakthrough That Actually Gets Work Done

When a customer reports a stolen credit card, the frontline play seems straightforward—freeze it. But that’s just the visible tip of a much larger customer support iceberg. Underneath sits the real work: dispute filings, fraud investigations, merchant communications, proactive outreach, and follow-ups that unfold over days across multiple systems. Most AI support tools only touch the surface; they don’t coordinate or close the loop. That gap is exactly where my product instincts kick in—and why this story matters.

I recently listened to a conversation with Jack Taylor (Product Engineer) and Ibrahim Faruqi (AI Engineer) from Gradient Labs, an AI-native startup building agents that automate the full scope of customer support in fintech. Their approach resonated with the challenges I see every day in customer support automation: fragmented workflows, regulatory complexity, and the need for human-in-the-loop moments. Gradient Labs has architected a platform with three coordinating agents—"inbound, back office, and outbound"—all built on a shared foundation of "natural language procedures, modular skills, and configurable guardrails."

What impressed me most was how they "Let non-technical subject matter experts define agent behavior through natural language procedures—no coding required." That’s a powerful way to remove engineering bottlenecks, accelerate iteration, and keep the domain experts—those closest to fraud, disputes, and compliance—directly in control. In my experience, this design choice alone can compress lead times from weeks to hours and aligns perfectly with continuous discovery and eval-driven development.

At the heart of their platform is orchestration. They "Architected a state machine orchestrator that manages turns, triggers, and skill selection across long-running conversations." That "turn" architecture is built for the messy reality of async, multi-day support. They treat "Skills as modular agent capabilities—and how they're scoped deterministically per turn," ensuring the system stays predictable and auditable. They also confront a nuanced challenge most teams dodge: "Defining "done" for outbound agents when the customer isn't the one ending the conversation." That’s where deterministic criteria, timers, and clearly scoped outcomes matter as much as the model beneath.

Compliance is not an afterthought—it’s baked into the core. Gradient Labs "Built guardrails as binary classifiers with eval pipelines, tuning for high recall on critical regulatory checks." In regulated domains, optimizing for recall on high-stakes checks is the right call; you can tolerate a few extra reviews, but you can’t miss a potential fraud signal. More broadly, they frame "Guardrails as classification problems: balancing recall and precision for regulatory compliance." That mindset is exactly how I like to merge AI risk management with product velocity.

Crucially, they avoid the trap of fully autonomous optimism. "Ask a Human: a tool call that brings humans into the loop for approvals or missing APIs" gives the system a safety valve for novel or high-risk cases. I also appreciated the explicit "Ask A Human Tool" pattern, which cleanly integrates approvals, policy exceptions, or data gaps without derailing the workflow.

Quality doesn’t happen by accident. They "Designed an auto-eval system that samples conversations for human review to catch edge cases and build labeled datasets" and built "Auto-eval pipelines that flag conversations for manual review and feed labeled datasets." That closed-loop evaluation flow is the backbone of sustainable performance in agentic AI. Combine this with targeted instrumentation—think CSAT, first contact resolution, deflection rate, time to resolution, and escalation rate—and you get a real Agent Analytics discipline, not just logs and dashboards.

The "iceberg" metaphor is more than a catchy visual. It’s a blueprint for scoping multi-agent platforms that work across the entire customer journey. With "inbound, back office, and outbound" agents coordinating on complex tasks like fraud disputes, the system can transition cleanly from intake to investigation to resolution—without dropping context or asking customers to repeat themselves. This is what genuine customer support automation looks like when it’s grounded in real operations.

Under the hood, the team leans into robust design choices that matter at scale: the "Complexities of Natural Language Input" are managed with explicit state and skill scoping, "Deterministic Skill Execution" reduces flakiness, and "Customer-Specific Guardrails" ensure compliance remains aligned to each client’s policies. Add their focus on "APIs and Customer Tools Integration" and the result is a platform that can actually take action—not just answer questions.

If you’re building in this space, here’s how I’d apply these lessons. Start by mapping the iceberg: enumerate back-office steps, approvals, and SLAs that follow the initial customer touchpoint. Capture those steps as "natural language procedures" owned by SMEs. Implement a "state machine orchestrator" to manage "turns, triggers, and skill selection" across multi-day workflows. Treat "guardrails as classification problems" and tune for high recall on high-stakes checks. Introduce "Ask a Human" early to handle missing APIs or policy exceptions. Finally, operationalize learning with "auto-eval pipelines" and tight, eval-driven development loops. That’s how multi-agent platforms deliver measurable outcomes in fintech support.

If you want to hear the full conversation, you can listen on Spotify or Apple Podcasts. You’ll also hear a nod to the "Incident.io episode – Referenced in the conversation," and a thoughtful take on the "Future of Multi-Agent Systems."

In short: this is a shift from simple Q&A bots to agents that can coordinate, comply, and complete. It’s the kind of multi-agent platform work that moves the needle for customer support in fintech—and a compelling template for any product leader scaling agentic AI and AI workflows beyond the tip of the iceberg.

Inspired by this post on Product Talk.

December 18, 2025
Master AI as a Product Manager in 12 Months: My 2026 Roadmap to Ship Smarter, Faster

AI isn’t a side quest for product managers anymore—it’s the skill stack that will define how we discover problems, prototype solutions, and ship value in 2026. Over the last few cycles, I’ve watched teams that embrace AI Strategy outperform on speed, signal, and stakeholder confidence. This roadmap is the approach I use to build capability in a structured, outcome-driven way—so we ship smarter, faster, and more impact-driven products.

"AI for PMs in 2026: why it matters, what to learn, and a 12-month AI roadmap to master product skills and ship smarter, faster, impact-driven products."

Here’s how I frame what to learn and why: focus on enduring capabilities first (problem discovery, experimentation, ethics), then layer the AI product toolbox (LLMs for product managers, retrieval-first pipeline patterns, AI workflows), and finally operationalize with outcomes vs output OKRs. The goal isn’t to sprinkle gen ai on everything—it’s to make better decisions, reduce cycle time, and unlock product-led growth in measurable ways.

Months 1–3: Foundations. I build literacy around model behavior and constraints, context window management, and prompting patterns. I pair this with data governance and privacy-by-design basics so we avoid rework later. Practically, I assemble an AI product toolbox (evaluation checklists, prompt libraries, retrieval-first pipeline templates) and apply them to product discovery—summarizing research, clustering feedback, and sharpening value propositions without losing critical nuance.

Months 4–6: Prototyping and evaluation. This is where ideas become testable artifacts. I use gen ai for product prototyping to create UX mocks, PRDs, and in-app guides rapidly, then validate with eval-driven development. I run lean experiments (A/B testing with a clear minimum detectable effect), wire up analytics to Amplitude, and track activation and retention signals. The mantra: instrument early, measure causally, and iterate based on evidence.

Months 7–9: Shipping AI-enabled workflows. I partner with product trios to integrate AI into real user journeys—customer support ai strategy, CRM integration, and guided onboarding are common wins. We explore agentic AI for complex multi-step tasks, add safeguards for AI risk management, and pressure-test systems with threat detection and response playbooks. As features reach production, we monitor deployment frequency and tighten feedback loops to protect quality while accelerating learning.

Months 10–12: Scale and governance. I operationalize what works with product roadmapping and sprint planning aligned to outcomes vs output OKRs. We codify playbooks for continuous discovery, define eval gates for new AI features, and unify analytics so teams can compare lift apples-to-apples. Stakeholder management matures into clear narratives: what shipped, what moved, what’s next—so leadership sees compounding value, not just activity.

Throughout the year, I keep the focus on real users and real metrics: fewer hops from insight to iteration, tighter loops between problem and prototype, and crisper communication around trade-offs. The result is a team that can translate AI capabilities into differentiated product experiences—reliably and responsibly. If you follow this path, you’ll enter 2026 with the confidence to lead, the systems to scale, and the evidence to prove it.

Inspired by this post on Product School.

December 17, 2025
Stop Tuning Prompts: How Context Engineering 10x’d Accuracy and Adoption in Our AI Platform

"The best AI products improve more through context engineering than prompt tinkering." I’ve seen this play out repeatedly in high-stakes, enterprise use cases: substantive gains come from how we curate, structure, and deliver context to models—not from wordsmithing. When we started treating context as a product surface, performance climbed, hallucinations dropped, and teams shipped with more confidence.

Here are four key decisions we made to improve our AI context.

First, we moved to a retrieval-first pipeline. We unified trusted sources—CRM records, support knowledge bases, product telemetry, and governance-approved docs—behind hybrid retrieval (semantic + keyword) with strong metadata ranking. This let us constrain generations to verifiable facts, apply privacy-by-design rules at the edge, and practice disciplined context window management so every token carried its weight. Freshness policies, source-level confidence scores, and lightweight schemas kept the system precise and auditable.

Second, we made eval-driven development non-negotiable. Every change to context assembly goes through offline evals and online A/B testing with clear acceptance thresholds (e.g., task success, groundedness, time-to-first-answer, and deflection rate). We sized tests with minimum detectable effect (MDE) and tied them to outcomes vs output OKRs so we weren’t just shipping more prompts—we were shipping measurable improvements that mattered to customers.

Third, we personalized context based on intent and role. We built AI workflows that detect user intent, segment by persona, and dynamically assemble context: recent account activity for customer success, policy-safe excerpts for finance, and fine-grained reasoning chains for product teams. For conversational and voice AI agent experiences, we combined short-term conversation memory with scoped, long-term account memory to preserve relevance without bloating the prompt. This agentic AI pattern ensured faster, safer, and more helpful responses.

Fourth, we operationalized context as a first-class platform capability. We invested in data governance (ownership, lineage, and redaction), instrumentation (Amplitude analytics for usage, retrieval hit rates, and failure modes), and CI/CD guardrails for context updates. Product trios partnered with SRE to monitor drift, while side-by-side comparisons and human-in-the-loop reviews turned frontline feedback into structured improvements. The result: a durable system that improves continuously instead of relying on one-off prompt tweaks.

Context engineering isn’t glamorous, but it compounds. By prioritizing retrieval-first design, rigorous evaluation, intent-aware assembly, and operational excellence, we transformed our AI features into dependable, enterprise-ready capabilities. If you’re serious about LLMs for product managers and sustainable AI Strategy, shift your energy from clever prompts to robust context—and watch adoption and trust follow.

Inspired by this post on Amplitude – Perspectives.

December 16, 2025
Inside a Staff AI Engineer’s Impact: How Cross-Functional AI Initiatives Drive Product Wins

When I think about the roles that truly move the needle on AI Strategy and product outcomes, the Staff AI Engineer stands out. This is the person who can translate research into repeatable AI workflows, partner with product to solve real user problems, and operationalize models in a way that scales. It’s where innovation meets accountability—and where product management leadership meets hands-on engineering craft.

Ram Soma is a Staff AI Engineer at Amplitude, leading various AI initiatives across the company. He has a background in data science and machine learning engineering.

What does that look like in practice from my seat? It starts with precise problem framing and measurable success criteria. I align with a Staff AI Engineer on eval-driven development and instrumentation so we can track impact from prototype to production. With Amplitude analytics operating as a unified analytics platform, we can quantify user activation, retention analysis, and feature adoption, then iterate through continuous discovery with tight feedback loops.

Execution quality hinges on robust experimentation. Together, we design A/B testing plans with minimum detectable effect (MDE) targets, isolate confounding variables, and build evaluation harnesses that reflect real-world UX constraints. We also agree on rollout strategies—staged deployments, guardrails, and observability—so we can learn safely while preserving customer trust and performance SLAs.

On the technical approach, I look for pragmatic architectures that balance speed and reliability: a retrieval-first pipeline for grounding, judicious use of LLMs for product managers to instrument prompts and policies, and agentic AI patterns only when task decomposition truly reduces complexity. Just as important are privacy-by-design and data governance practices from day one, because responsible innovation beats retrofitting controls after the fact.

Finally, the magic happens in empowered product teams and product trios. When product, design, and Staff AI Engineering operate with shared context and clear constraints, we compress decision cycles and ship value faster. That’s how AI initiatives evolve from demos to durable capabilities—and how we enable product-led growth with measurable results that customers feel, not just features they see.

Inspired by this post on Amplitude – Perspectives.

December 16, 2025
Teach AI to Think Like an Analyst: My Amplitude-Inspired Playbook for Faster Decisions

I’ve spent years trying to bottle the judgment of a great product analyst and pour it into our AI workflows. The hardest part isn’t access to data; it’s encoding the nuance of analytical reasoning. That’s why Amplitude’s approach resonated with me—turning expert analysis into a repeatable, stepwise process AI can run with discipline and speed.

Learn how Amplitude turned its data analysis expertise into a structured, iterative process that AI can execute in moments.

In practical terms, I translate that one line into an operating model: define the decision, formalize the metrics, map the data, decompose the questions, iterate on evidence, and converge on a recommendation with clear trade-offs. This is the backbone of agentic AI for product managers—giving an LLM not just data, but a procedure that mirrors how our best analysts think.

Here’s the analyst-to-AI loop I use. First, frame the business question in decision language (what will we do differently?). Second, anchor on success metrics and guardrails, including statistical sensitivity and minimum detectable effect (MDE). Third, locate trusted sources—your unified analytics platform, experiment logs, and product instrumentation—so the AI never guesses. Fourth, generate hypotheses and segment the data (cohorts, channels, plans, geos), prioritizing signal over noise. Finally, synthesize findings into options with expected impact, risks, and next steps.

To operationalize this, I build a retrieval-first pipeline that binds Amplitude analytics to structured prompts and function calls. The AI receives exact metric definitions, event taxonomies, and governance rules, then returns a predictable schema—headlines, evidence, segments, caveats, and recommended actions. That combination of clear constraints and consistent output makes eval-driven development possible: I can test prompts and tooling against a gold set of analyses and steadily improve quality.

Consider retention analysis on a new onboarding flow. I’ll ask the system to pull activation rate, time-to-value, and day-7 retention from Amplitude, then compare cohorts by channel and plan. The AI proposes hypotheses (e.g., tooltip engagement correlates with activation), runs segmentation to validate them, and lays out product-led growth levers—like simplifying the first-run checklist or moving guidance in-app. What used to take hours of manual slicing now becomes an iterative loop that lets me spend more time on prioritization and less on tab wrangling.

Of course, speed without rigor is a trap. I guard against metric drift and hallucinations with strong definitions, lineage checks, and human-in-the-loop approvals for consequential decisions. I also log analysis steps and outcomes so we can audit reasoning, catch regressions, and keep AI grounded in our true north metrics—not just what’s easy to compute.

The big unlock isn’t a clever prompt; it’s codifying the analyst’s craft. When we treat analysis as a structured, iterative process, AI can execute it with consistency, and product teams can move faster with more confidence. If you’re building AI workflows for product insight, start by formalizing your analyst loop, connect it to your Amplitude analytics, and evaluate continuously. The result is smarter, faster decisions—and a repeatable path from raw data to action.

Inspired by this post on Amplitude – Best Practices.

December 16, 2025
2026 Support Capacity Playbook: Bold AI Automation, Smarter Staffing, Zero‑Surprise SLAs

Capacity planning has always been a high-stakes exercise in customer service, and when you miss, the signal shows up fast in backlogs and SLAs. I’ve lived that pressure across multiple cycles, and 2026 will reward teams that plan differently. AI fundamentally changes capacity planning because it changes the work. It resolves the bulk of your volume, speeds up execution, and elevates the complexity and value of what humans handle. The consequence is simple: planning models must evolve. This is the final installment in my 2026 customer service planning series, and I’m focusing on the tension every leader feels right now—be ambitious about automation, but avoid the trap of understaffing if your assumptions don’t hold. My goal is to share how AI changes the logic of capacity planning, what I’ve learned implementing these practices with my team and with customers, and the common traps to avoid. Traditional planning rests on relatively stable assumptions: volume grows predictably, work types stay consistent, handle times don’t swing dramatically, and productivity improves slowly with better tools and training. In an AI-first model, none of that is guaranteed, and the fundamentals flip. The mix of work changes as AI absorbs a growing share of simpler conversations, leaving humans with deeper, more time-consuming issues that demand human-to-human connection. Demand can actually increase when you remove friction, so AI can both resolve more and attract more volume. Human time splits differently as teammates solve customer problems and also review AI behavior, give feedback, improve content, and support system-level work. Performance becomes dynamic, not fixed—automation rate isn’t a one-time number; it can rise with care and fall with neglect. If you plan for 2026 using a pre-AI model—assuming similar productivity, similar work mix, and a linear relationship between volume and headcount—you will underestimate what it now takes to run a high-performing support organization. There are many metrics you can track, but the one to put at the center is automation rate (AI Agent involvement rate × AI Agent resolution rate). This single construct tells me what share of total volume AI actually resolves, how much work remains for humans, how much additional demand humans can absorb, and how ambitious I can be with headcount. Early in the journey, I prioritize raising involvement—getting the AI involved in more conversations. Once involvement is high, I shift to resolution on the hardest remaining work, where each additional 1% of automation can represent several people’s worth of capacity. In my 2026 plans, automation rate sits alongside projected inbound volume, average “output” per person for the more complex work that remains, and occupancy—how much time is allocated to customer-facing interactions versus operational and strategic work. Together, those inputs give a realistic picture of how many people you need and where they should spend their time. First, plan boldly on automation, but match it with investment. I do not cap automation assumptions at 40–50% “because AI is new.” Many teams are already modeling 60%, 70%, even 80%+ for 2026—when they invest in AI ownership and content. The investment is non-negotiable: named ownership for AI performance (AI ops, knowledge management, conversation design), clear automation targets by work type (e.g., informational vs. personalized vs. actions vs. deep troubleshooting), realistic expectations for what’s easy to automate and what’s not, and a concrete plan to raise automation over time in monthly or quarterly steps rather than a single jump. To decide where to invest first, I dig into the data. I start with the biggest volume drivers, separate content-led issues from those dependent on data or complex procedures, assume higher resolution potential for content-led topics once the knowledge base is in shape, and set more modest initial resolution expectations for system-dependent flows. Then I stair-step improvements as the systems, data contracts, and workflows mature. In short, bold automation goals only work when paired with the team structure, content, and systems required to reach them—and the discipline to iterate. Second, expect human “output” per person to go down. That’s a mindset shift. Historically, we assumed individual productivity would stay flat or tick up as tools improved. In an AI-first model, humans handle fewer conversations but more complex, cross-functional issues—and create more value despite lower case counts. I model a lower “cases closed per person” than prior-year baselines, explicitly assume the remaining work is more complex and time-consuming, and redefine productivity to include system-level work like AI Agent improvements, content updates, and policy or workflow change management. I also report “capacity created” from automation alongside human outputs, so leadership sees the full picture. Third, rethink occupancy: more time off the queues, on higher-value work. Traditional occupancy splits time between inbox and training, meetings, and breaks. Now there’s an expanding “out-of-inbox” portfolio that directly affects AI performance and overall capacity: reviewing AI-handled conversations, improving AI Agent triaging and handovers, contributing to content and procedures, feeding insights to product and engineering, and supporting system changes that reduce future volume. I set lower inbox occupancy targets than before and make the rationale explicit. People aren’t working less—they’re working differently. In planning, I assume more time spent on improvement and system work, make it visible (for example, X% in inbox and Y% on AI and system improvement), and treat this as critical, not a “nice to have.” If you don’t proactively allocate it, it won’t happen—and your automation and performance targets will suffer. Fourth, work with the finance team early, and treat your plan as a set of assumptions. Capacity planning with AI is a set of bets across automation rate, human output, demand growth, occupancy, and where surplus capacity (if any) goes. I bring finance in early, show that the plan is dynamic and directly tied to AI performance, and label every lever as an assumption with ranges. I commit to a quarterly review cadence with finance to compare assumptions versus reality and adjust headcount, targets, and investment as needed. The risks are real: if automation grows slower than expected and you stop backfilling too early, you’ll be understaffed for months. Hiring and onboarding take time, so course-correcting late creates strain. If you do produce surplus capacity, have a clear strategy to reallocate those teammates to higher-value work—improving systems, feeding insights back to product, supporting new channels, and driving proactive CX—rather than defaulting to reductions. I also set explicit guardrails—if automation rate misses by five points for two consecutive months, we pause planned reductions and revisit hiring gates. If it over-performs, we shift people into backlog eradication, content upgrades, or proactive outreach, so we bank compounding value. To set your team up for success in 2026, anchor your plan on automation rate, be honest that humans will handle fewer but harder conversations, and protect time for system improvements. Partner early and often with finance, avoid shrinking too fast, and design a plan for surplus capacity so you’re never caught flat-footed. If AI is going to handle the majority of your customer conversations, your plan has to be designed to help it do that well and to keep your team set up for meaningful, sustainable work. A 2026 plan built on adaptable assumptions—not fixed predictions—will hold up as your work, your systems, and your customers’ expectations continue to change. If you’d like future editions like this, subscribe and stay close—I’ll keep sharing what’s working, what isn’t, and how to tune your customer support AI strategy in real time.

Inspired by this post on The Intercom Blog.

December 16, 2025
AI in Product Design: My Proven Playbook, Real Use Cases, and the Tools That Win Faster

In product design, AI has shifted from novelty to non-negotiable. I’ve watched teams accelerate discovery, compress prototyping cycles, and turn ambiguous ideas into validated experiences faster than ever—without sacrificing quality or customer trust.

AI in product design has quickly moved from new to necessary. Here are the AI product design tools and approaches you need to stay relevant in this decade.

From my vantage point leading product teams, “necessary” means AI is woven throughout the product lifecycle—discovery, prioritization, prototyping, validation, and iteration—not bolted on. The goal isn’t to chase hype; it’s to build durable advantage with clear AI Strategy, disciplined execution, and measurable outcomes.

First, anchor the work in strategy. Tie every AI initiative to a specific customer problem and value proposition, then express that linkage with outcomes vs output OKRs. This keeps teams focused on real impact and avoids feature-chasing. It also sharpens product positioning and clarifies where AI can deliver competitive differentiation versus simple points of parity.

Second, upgrade discovery. I rely on AI workflows to synthesize interviews, cluster themes, and surface insights at scale. A retrieval-first pipeline—grounding models in our own data—improves factuality and reduces hallucinations. Combine this with strong data governance and privacy-by-design so insights are trustworthy and compliant from day one.

Third, make quality measurable. Adopt eval-driven development: define evaluation sets and acceptance thresholds that reflect real user tasks before you ship. Pair that with A/B testing and minimum detectable effect (MDE) discipline, so you learn quickly and confidently. Add safety guardrails (red-teaming prompts, content filters, and bias checks) to manage AI risk without slowing the pace.

Fourth, enable empowered product teams. Product trios (PM, design, engineering) should co-create prompts, prototypes, and evaluation criteria. Give designers and PMs practical tools—LLMs for product managers, structured prompt templates, and reusable components—so AI-augmented work becomes the default, not a special project.

Where does AI shine in product design today? Concept exploration and market scans, turning fuzzy opportunity spaces into crisp problem statements. Rapid wireframes and interaction ideas, using gen ai for product prototyping to explore multiple design directions in minutes. UX writing that adapts tone and reduces friction across onboarding, tooltip design, and microcopy.

It also excels at guided experiences. I’ve seen strong lifts in user activation when we pair in-app guides and product tours with context-aware suggestions. For support and education use cases, a retrieval-grounded assistant can deflect tickets, shorten time-to-value, and reinforce the product’s value proposition at the exact moment a user needs help.

Voice is another frontier. A well-scoped voice AI agent can accelerate complex workflows (think data entry or multi-step configurations) when hands-free is faster or more intuitive. Just be intentional about when agentic AI adds net value versus when a simple UI tweak would do.

On the tooling side, my AI product toolbox is pragmatic and modular. For analytics and learning loops, Amplitude analytics and Pendo help quantify behavior changes and retention analysis. For in-product engagement and feedback routing, Intercom and HubSpot integrate cleanly with LLM-driven tagging and summarization. For ideation and automation, I use a ChatGPT connector and Claude Code for quick scripts, data wrangling, and prompt experiments. The constant: a retrieval-first pipeline that grounds models in approved knowledge and maintains context window management at scale.

Risk management is built in, not bolted on. Set clear AI risk management policies, catalog model and data dependencies, and document decisions. Align with regulatory compliance requirements early, and keep an audit trail of prompts, datasets, and eval results. That’s how you move fast without breaking trust.

If you’re getting started, begin small: pick one high-friction workflow, add a retrieval-grounded copilot, and measure the lift. Use the results to inform product roadmapping and sprint planning, then scale to adjacent use cases. With disciplined discovery, sharp evaluation, and the right tooling, AI becomes a force multiplier for product teams and a clear win for customers.

Inspired by this post on Product School.

December 15, 2025
From Concierge to AI Marketing Engine: Inside Mowie’s Document Hierarchy Playbook

I’m constantly asked by SMB owners: What if your small business could have a full marketing team—automated content calendars, customer segmentation, and channel-specific posts—without the headcount? That question is no longer hypothetical; it’s precisely the promise behind Mowie, and the way they got there is a masterclass in practical AI product development.

I recently listened to Chris O'Connor (CEO) and Jessica Valenzuela (Co-Founder) of Mowie, an AI marketing platform built for small and medium-sized businesses in restaurants, retail, and e-commerce. Their story starts with a concierge marketing service—doing the work by hand for overwhelmed owners—and evolves into a fully automated AI product.

They walk through their "document hierarchy" approach: how Mowie crawls the web to build a "dossier" about each business, infers customer segments and marketing pillars, and generates quarterly content calendars with channel-specific posts. As a product leader, this is the kind of retrieval-first pipeline that consistently outperforms naive prompt chaining because it builds durable context before generation.

They also unpack the technical challenges of structuring unstructured data and the evolution from rigid schemas to loosely structured markdown. In my experience with LLMs for product managers, markdown becomes a flexible intermediate representation that’s easy to diff, trace, and feed back into models without brittle parsing.

Equally important, they use customer feedback—from calendar approvals to regeneration requests—as their primary evaluation signal. That’s eval-driven development in practice: close the loop with lightweight evals that reflect genuine user intent, not proxy metrics.

The planning model is elegant: the three mini-calendars—public events, business-specific events, and recommended campaigns—roll up into a coherent plan that eliminates the blank-page problem and enables steady, predictable execution.

Crucially, they’re building traceability so customers can see which context documents influenced their content. This kind of transparency increases trust, accelerates edits, and supports governance in regulated categories where auditability matters.

Onboarding and data collection stay pragmatic: let the system crawl first, ask humans only for deltas, and progressively profile over time. It’s a pattern I advocate in continuous discovery and AI workflows—keep humans in the loop without overwhelming them, and make the right action the easy action.

Early on, they used Simon Sinek's Golden Circle framework to validate demand and sharpen messaging. Framing the "why" before the "what" helps teams maintain a crisp value proposition and tighten their go-to-market strategy.

Performance measurement goes beyond vanity metrics by connecting marketing performance back to point-of-sale data for attribution. The ability to tie campaigns to revenue events is the bridge from clever content to accountable outcomes.

What’s next is equally compelling: deeper attribution, omnichannel expansion, and digital out-of-home displays. For SMBs, that points to a unified analytics platform spanning email, social, and in-store touchpoints—exactly where modern marketing is headed.

My takeaways for builders: invest in a retrieval-first pipeline with a resilient document hierarchy; prefer loosely structured markdown over rigid JSON when dealing with messy inputs; design human-in-the-loop controls that double as evals; and always connect activity to business outcomes. That’s how you turn an idea into a repeatable system that scales.

If you want to explore further, start here: Mowie AI — AI marketing platform for SMBs. For early validation and storytelling, revisit Simon Sinek's Golden Circle.

Inspired by this post on Product Talk.

December 11, 2025