People with strategic background are generally good at logic and are strong in the framework design of project schemes, but they still need to improve the control of details of HVA guidance logic. Another big problem for them is their lack of project implementation experience, which can easily lead to two problems: (1) they think they have thought clearly in the logical deduction, and it is easy to make hasty judgments on some things without practical experience or in-depth research; (2) In the process of pushing the project to the ground and getting the test results, it is easy to fall into some low state and get out of it. In other words, it is easy for them to design a solution with confidence and eagerness to push forward, but they are not as resilient when they encounter difficulties and setbacks.

People from other backgrounds will also have a big challenge at some point in their transition to user growth. Past success makes us competitive in the workplace, but just like discontinuity in growth: if we continue to work in the same area (along the same curve), that experience is the key to success; If you're not working in the same area, such as moving from other jobs to user growth, you can only partially learn from the past. However, most of the time, people have a tendency to be path dependent, after all, past success is the most persuasive experience, but the past success may also become the reason for the present failure. Therefore, as the person in charge of a growth team, when building the team, I should see the influence of everyone's previous background on the subsequent work, and help team members make up for their weaknesses while letting them try their best to give full play to their strengths. Now that we're bringing people from different backgrounds together, it's a team leader's job to have some understanding of how they've worked before and some of the challenges they might face later. In this way, when you are working on a growth project, you can pay different levels of attention to the project according to the background characteristics of different members of the team. In particular, focus on monitoring and guiding them where they may encounter challenges. Sometimes, this guidance may not be at the project level, but at the spiritual level.

Since different managers have different leadership styles, different teams may develop unique cultures with different manager imprinted on them. But no matter what culture, as long as the team together, let everyone move firmly in the same direction, is a good culture. However, in a user growth team, the positive elements of the culture must be strong, because user growth trades test redundancy for growth certainty, and most tests will fail, so the team members' mental attitude in the face of failure is particularly important. While team members know that most tests will fail, those outside the team may not. I see a lot of people in other positions who think that user growth is akin to advertising creativity. They think that user growth is about coming up with a great idea or a great feature that will lead to a huge jump in user growth, but they don't really understand the underlying logic of user growth. After failing the growth test (which is the norm), they may also make negative comments, such as feeling that the people on the growth team are incompetent or unprofessional, which affects the morale of the growth team.

People with strategic background are generally good at logic and are strong in the framework design of project schemes, but they still need to improve the control of details of HVA guidance logic. Another big problem for them is their lack of project implementation experience, which can easily lead to two problems: (1) they think they have thought clearly in the logical deduction, and it is easy to make hasty judgments on some things without practical experience or in-depth research; (2) In the process of pushing the project to the ground and getting the test results, it is easy to fall into some low state and get out of it. In other words, it is easy for them to design a solution with confidence and eagerness to push forward, but they are not as resilient when they encounter difficulties and setbacks.

People from other backgrounds will also have a big challenge at some point in their transition to user growth. Past success makes us competitive in the workplace, but just like discontinuity in growth: if we continue to work in the same area (along the same curve), that experience is the key to success; If you're not working in the same area, such as moving from other jobs to user growth, you can only partially learn from the past. However, most of the time, people have a tendency to be path dependent, after all, past success is the most persuasive experience, but the past success may also become the reason for the present failure. Therefore, as the person in charge of a growth team, when building the team, I should see the influence of everyone's previous background on the subsequent work, and help team members make up for their weaknesses while letting them try their best to give full play to their strengths. Now that we're bringing people from different backgrounds together, it's a team leader's job to have some understanding of how they've worked before and some of the challenges they might face later. In this way, when you are working on a growth project, you can pay different levels of attention to the project according to the background characteristics of different members of the team. In particular, focus on monitoring and guiding them where they may encounter challenges. Sometimes, this guidance may not be at the project level, but at the spiritual level.

Since different managers have different leadership styles, different teams may develop unique cultures with different manager imprinted on them. But no matter what culture, as long as the team together, let everyone move firmly in the same direction, is a good culture. However, in a user growth team, the positive elements of the culture must be strong, because user growth trades test redundancy for growth certainty, and most tests will fail, so the team members' mental attitude in the face of failure is particularly important. While team members know that most tests will fail, those outside the team may not. I see a lot of people in other positions who think that user growth is akin to advertising creativity. They think that user growth is about coming up with a great idea or a great feature that will lead to a huge jump in user growth, but they don't really understand the underlying logic of user growth. After failing the growth test (which is the norm), they may also make negative comments, such as feeling that the people on the growth team are incompetent or unprofessional, which affects the morale of the growth team.