Should Applied Systems prioritize adding new features to Epic or focus on improving the stability and performance of existing functionality?

Introduction

The trade-off between adding new features to Epic and improving the stability and performance of existing functionality is a critical decision for Applied Systems. This scenario involves balancing innovation with product reliability, which directly impacts user satisfaction and business growth. I'll analyze this trade-off by examining the product context, stakeholder impacts, and potential outcomes to provide a strategic recommendation.

Step 1

Clarifying Questions (3 minutes)

• Context: I'm assuming Epic is Applied Systems' core product offering. Could you confirm if this is correct, and if there are any other major products in the portfolio that might be affected by this decision?

Why it matters: Helps understand the broader product ecosystem and potential ripple effects. Expected answer: Yes, Epic is the flagship product. Impact on approach: Would focus analysis primarily on Epic's ecosystem if confirmed.

• Business Context: Based on the industry, I'm thinking revenue might be subscription-based. Can you share how Epic's revenue model works and how it ties to our current strategic priorities?

Why it matters: Aligns solution with business objectives and revenue streams. Expected answer: Subscription-based model with upsell opportunities. Impact on approach: Would prioritize features or stability based on revenue impact.

• User Impact: I'm guessing Epic serves multiple user segments. Could you provide an overview of our primary user groups and their most critical pain points?

Why it matters: Ensures solution addresses key user needs and pain points. Expected answer: Multiple segments with varying needs (e.g., agents, underwriters). Impact on approach: Would tailor recommendation to address most impactful user issues.

• Technical: Considering the stability focus, I'm wondering about our current technical debt. How would you characterize our technical foundation and any major architectural challenges?

Why it matters: Assesses feasibility and long-term implications of either approach. Expected answer: Some technical debt with ongoing modernization efforts. Impact on approach: Might lean towards stability if significant technical challenges exist.

• Resource: Given the two options, I'm curious about our team structure. How are our engineering and product teams currently allocated between new feature development and maintenance?

Why it matters: Determines feasibility of executing either option effectively. Expected answer: Balanced allocation with some flexibility. Impact on approach: Would consider team reorganization as part of the recommendation.