Building Less

Many product teams measure progress by what gets added: new features, new settings, new options. In some cases, this works well. In others, especially over time, it can gradually turn products into systems that are harder to understand, maintain, and evolve.

Strong product teams recognize this risk early. They do not add by default. They regularly pause to question whether something still needs to exist — and whether it continues to serve a clear purpose. Every addition introduces some level of complexity that users have to navigate and teams have to support long-term.

From our work across multiple product teams, one thing is clear: killing features is not a sign of failure. It is a sign of focus. Products that stay sharp do so because teams are willing to simplify, even when it feels uncomfortable.

In this article, we will look at why too many functions weaken products, how teams can remove features without creating friction, and how subtraction helps uncover the problems that are actually worth solving.

What’s wrong with too many functions

Too many functions rarely appear all at once. They accumulate slowly. A feature added for one customer, another added to support a new use case. Over time, the product becomes a collection of decisions that were never revisited.

The first cost is user clarity. When a product offers too many options, users struggle to understand what matters most. Core actions become harder to find, and confidence drops. Even experienced users spend more time navigating instead of doing meaningful work.

The second cost is internal. Every function requires design decisions, testing, documentation, support, and ongoing maintenance. As the surface area grows, teams spend more time managing existing complexity and less time improving what actually drives value.

The third cost is strategic. When everything is supported, nothing is prioritized. Roadmaps turn into lists of obligations instead of tools for direction. Teams become reactive, responding to requests rather than shaping the product.

Too many functions do not make a product more powerful. They make it heavier. And heavy products move slowly.

How to kill features painless

So what happens when the product already has too many functions? In most cases, it is too late to simply ignore them. They are live, some users rely on them, and removing them feels risky. Unfortunately, this is exactly the moment when good product teams need to do the hard work - and start making decisions about what should stay, what should change, and what should go.

The first step is not deletion. It is analysis. Every existing feature should be reviewed with a clear question in mind: what impact does this actually bring? That impact can be measured in usage, business value, strategic importance, or how much it supports core workflows. Many features sound important on paper but contribute very little in practice.

Once the impact is clear, removal often becomes less dramatic than expected. Not every feature needs to be killed outright. Some can be merged with others, simplified, or reduced to a smaller, clearer version. In many cases, multiple features solve similar problems and can be combined into a single, more focused solution.

The next step is to reduce risk. Features do not need to disappear overnight. Teams can hide low-impact functionality, limit access, or remove it from primary flows first. This creates space to observe behavior and validate that the product works better — not worse — without it.

Communication matters just as much as the decision itself. Users are far more accepting of change when they understand why it is happening. Explaining what is being removed or simplified, what problem it solves, and how it improves the product builds trust instead of resistance.

Finally, teams should treat feature removal as a learning loop. Measure what changes after features are merged, minimized, or removed. Watch how users adapt. In many cases, teams discover that less functionality leads to clearer usage and stronger engagement.

How to choose the right problem to solve

Whenever you have already removed unnecessary functions - or you are just starting a new product - you reach the same moment. The product is either simpler, or still empty, but the real question becomes unavoidable: what problem are we actually solving?

This is where product strategy becomes practical. In many teams we have seen, the hardest part is not generating ideas - it is slowing down enough to verify whether the problem is real, relevant, and still worth solving. Without that step, teams often move quickly, deliver on time, and still miss the mark.

Over time, a consistent pattern emerges: teams that choose the wrong problem usually skip a few critical checks. They rely on assumptions, loud feedback, or legacy decisions instead of validating what actually blocks users today. The steps below reflect how strong teams reduce that risk and arrive at problems that are worth long-term investment.

1. Start from behavior, not requests

Users rarely ask for the right solution. Instead, look at what they struggle with, repeat, avoid, or work around. Patterns in behavior are more reliable than lists of requested features.

2. Identify friction across multiple workflows

Strong problems show up in more than one place. If the same issue affects onboarding, daily usage, and support tickets, it is likely a core problem - not a local one.

3. Ask what disappears if the problem is solved

A useful test is subtraction-based: if this problem is solved, which features, steps, or rules become unnecessary? Good problems simplify the product instead of expanding it.

4. Separate urgency from impact

Some problems feel urgent because they are loud or visible. Others are quiet but costly over time. Focus on problems that change outcomes, not just response times.

5. Check for unmet needs, not missing features

An unmet need exists when users adapt their behavior because the product does not fully support them. This shows up as external tools, manual steps, or acceptance of inefficiency.

6. Define the problem in one clear sentence

If the problem cannot be explained simply, it is usually not understood well enough. A clear problem statement should describe who is affected, what is difficult, and why it matters.

Clarity over complexity

Good products are shaped by clear decisions - especially the decision to stop, remove, and refocus.

When teams slow down to question what belongs in the product and which problems are actually worth solving, everything else becomes easier: priorities, collaboration, and progress.

If you are navigating those decisions right now, we are always happy to talk - **https://goodcode.us/**