iTechGuides is reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Learn more
A feature request can sound small and sensible and still be the wrong product decision. Before adding it to a roadmap, find out what the user was trying to accomplish, check whether the same problem recurs, and weigh the proposed fix against the product’s purpose and complexity.
Why reasonable requests can lead to the wrong change
Requests such as “Could you add one more filter?”, “Can we have another user role?” or “It would be useful if this sent a notification” can seem easy to accommodate. But a request usually includes a proposed solution, not just a description of the problem. The requested feature may be appropriate—or it may solve the wrong part of the user’s workflow.
Small additions also accumulate. Each can introduce another state users must understand, another decision to make, another behavior to test, and another possible point of failure. The concern is not that every addition is harmful; it is that each request can look harmless in isolation while the product becomes harder to use and maintain over time.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
Ask what the user was trying to do
A useful follow-up is: “What were you trying to do when you realized you needed this?” It shifts the conversation from a feature label to the task and circumstances behind it.
#1 Best Overall
- “Export to Excel” may mean the user needs to send a report to a manager every Friday. The underlying need may be a recurring reporting workflow.
- More notification settings may be a response to missing one important event. The issue may be signal and visibility, not a lack of options.
- Another dashboard may be a way of asking for a faster answer to whether things are going well.
Those answers do not prove that the requested feature is wrong. They give the team enough context to consider whether the feature, an automation, or a workflow change would address the problem better.
Look for recurring problems, not just repeated feature names
One confident request is not evidence that a feature matters broadly. Nor does frequency alone establish importance. Compare feedback by the problem users describe: different feature requests may point to the same workflow friction, while identical requests may arise for different reasons.
Rank #2
- Physical Condition: No Defects
- Great one for reading
- It's a great choice for a book person
The essay does not set a numeric threshold for deciding when a pattern is meaningful. Use judgment rather than treating a count—or the confidence of one requester—as a decision rule. Consider how often the problem appears, whom it affects, and how closely a proposed solution fits the product’s core use case.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Account for the ongoing cost, even when AI makes building easier
AI can lower the effort involved in implementing a capability, which may make it tempting to build more requests. But easier implementation does not remove the continuing costs of product complexity: users have to understand the new behavior, teams have to test it, and the feature can require maintenance or fail later.
Rank #3
The article also suggests that AI might help group feedback by underlying problem, distinguish one-off preferences from recurring workflow friction, flag requests that conflict with a product’s core use case, or suggest a solution that adds no feature. These are proposed uses, not demonstrated capabilities or measured results. AI can assist interpretation; it cannot turn a request into proof that a feature will help.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.Use a deliberate path from request to roadmap
Instead of moving straight from request to implementation, use this sequence:
Rank #4
- Request: Record what the user asked for without treating the proposed feature as the established need.
- Context: Ask what they were trying to do and what made the current workflow insufficient.
- Pattern: Compare the underlying problem with other feedback, including requests phrased differently.
- Decision: Assess the problem’s importance, fit with the product’s core purpose, and the ongoing complexity of possible fixes.
- Build: Implement a solution only after deciding that it addresses a sufficiently important problem.
This is the difference between “request → build” and “request → context → pattern → decision → build.” As Altuntas Gokcer puts it, “A feature request is not the same thing as a product decision.” Read the original essay on DEV Community.
Recommended Free Tools
Quick Recap
Best Value
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
