Gustav Söderström

And then at the end of that process, you may move some people around globally to make sure that you don't have something really important and there are two people missing. That's not optimal for the companies. You may move some people around, but largely we try to let people keep the resourcing. So lots of those problems that you run into.

And then at the end of that process, you may move some people around globally to make sure that you don't have something really important and there are two people missing. That's not optimal for the companies. You may move some people around, but largely we try to let people keep the resourcing. So lots of those problems that you run into.

But I would say the biggest risk with this model, it sounds nice if you're perfectly synchronized, The drawback of that model is that the planning is very expensive. So you have to be really good at planning And we've had to build our own tooling. We tried some external tooling for planning. That wasn't good enough.

But I would say the biggest risk with this model, it sounds nice if you're perfectly synchronized, The drawback of that model is that the planning is very expensive. So you have to be really good at planning And we've had to build our own tooling. We tried some external tooling for planning. That wasn't good enough.

And if the planning doesn't work, the overhead just grows very quickly versus execution. We execute for six months in order for the overhead to not get too big. But we can't go to a year. Then you can't react. A quarter is too short. It's too much planning overhead versus execution. So the planning is the thing that you have to get really good at. And I'm not going to say we're really good.

And if the planning doesn't work, the overhead just grows very quickly versus execution. We execute for six months in order for the overhead to not get too big. But we can't go to a year. Then you can't react. A quarter is too short. It's too much planning overhead versus execution. So the planning is the thing that you have to get really good at. And I'm not going to say we're really good.

But we're getting better all the time. It's the thing that I care the most about, making sure that the planning is reasonably big. If you can do it, for us, it's critical because the whole of Spotify's product strategy is that we have large distribution closing in on 700 million MAUs for a single application.

But we're getting better all the time. It's the thing that I care the most about, making sure that the planning is reasonably big. If you can do it, for us, it's critical because the whole of Spotify's product strategy is that we have large distribution closing in on 700 million MAUs for a single application.

And our entire strategy is basically, we decided this many years ago before it was popular, but you saw the Chinese starting to build super apps, whereas the Western world built one app per use case. We've adopted the Chinese super app idea and said, The hardest thing is going to be to get installs. You can see the average number of installs from the App Store dropping below one on average.

And our entire strategy is basically, we decided this many years ago before it was popular, but you saw the Chinese starting to build super apps, whereas the Western world built one app per use case. We've adopted the Chinese super app idea and said, The hardest thing is going to be to get installs. You can see the average number of installs from the App Store dropping below one on average.

So distribution became the most important thing. And then we chose when we did podcasts and later books and videos, we're going to build it in the same application because then we can leverage our own distribution. But that has drawbacks. You have to have an organization because then everything is dependent on each other. You're going to ship one app to the app store and everyone is a stakeholder.

So distribution became the most important thing. And then we chose when we did podcasts and later books and videos, we're going to build it in the same application because then we can leverage our own distribution. But that has drawbacks. You have to have an organization because then everything is dependent on each other. You're going to ship one app to the app store and everyone is a stakeholder.

So you cannot divide and conquer. You cannot say, well, the book team, you can run ahead or the music team, you do this. No, everyone has to wait for everyone. So because of our consumer strategy, the company needed to be synchronized. And because it needed to be synchronized, we needed a really strong planning process. So it's an outcome of our consumer strategy.

So you cannot divide and conquer. You cannot say, well, the book team, you can run ahead or the music team, you do this. No, everyone has to wait for everyone. So because of our consumer strategy, the company needed to be synchronized. And because it needed to be synchronized, we needed a really strong planning process. So it's an outcome of our consumer strategy.

And what I would say is it's not the right one. It's the right one for us. We're good at doing global changes, like changing the entire UI because we're synchronized. But we're probably much slower than other companies at trying something because it needs to go through a lot of planning. I don't think you can win in planning.

And what I would say is it's not the right one. It's the right one for us. We're good at doing global changes, like changing the entire UI because we're synchronized. But we're probably much slower than other companies at trying something because it needs to go through a lot of planning. I don't think you can win in planning.

The best you can hope for is to be quite good at the important things and not so good at the less important things.

The best you can hope for is to be quite good at the important things and not so good at the less important things.

I want to come back to something very interesting you said around the adoption of some of the tooling that's at the most cutting edge. So let's take Cursor as an example of a company that now everyone's familiar with. $10 billion valuation. It seems like every software engineer is using Cursor to make themselves better.

I want to come back to something very interesting you said around the adoption of some of the tooling that's at the most cutting edge. So let's take Cursor as an example of a company that now everyone's familiar with. $10 billion valuation. It seems like every software engineer is using Cursor to make themselves better.