Is it better for Airtable to expand our third-party integrations or concentrate on developing more native features?

Introduction

The trade-off between expanding third-party integrations or developing more native features for Airtable is a critical decision that will shape our product strategy and user experience. This scenario involves balancing external partnerships with internal development resources, considering both short-term gains and long-term product vision. I'll analyze this trade-off by examining our product ecosystem, user needs, and business objectives to provide a strategic recommendation.

Step 1

Clarifying Questions (3 minutes)

• Context: I'm thinking about Airtable's current market position. Could you share our current market share and how it compares to our main competitors?

Why it matters: Helps understand if we're in a growth or defensive position Expected answer: We're a strong player but facing increased competition Impact on approach: Would influence whether we prioritize user acquisition or retention

• Business Context: Based on our revenue model, I assume integrations drive significant value. What percentage of our revenue is directly attributable to third-party integrations?

Why it matters: Determines the financial impact of expanding integrations Expected answer: 30-40% of revenue is integration-related Impact on approach: High percentage would favor integration expansion

• User Impact: I'm curious about user behavior. What percentage of our active users regularly use third-party integrations versus solely native features?

Why it matters: Indicates user preference and potential impact of each option Expected answer: 60% use integrations, 40% use only native features Impact on approach: High integration usage would support expansion strategy

• Technical: Considering our current architecture, how easily can we scale our integration capabilities compared to developing new native features?

Why it matters: Assesses technical feasibility and resource requirements Expected answer: Integrations are easier to scale but native features offer more control Impact on approach: Would influence resource allocation and development priorities

• Resource: Given our current team structure, do we have more capacity in our integrations team or our native feature development team?

Why it matters: Helps understand internal constraints and capabilities Expected answer: Native feature team has more capacity Impact on approach: Might lean towards native feature development if resources are available