Perhaps you do not have access to the response found here but if you do... please read it and the entire thread.

If you do not have access to the thread, here is Paul's response... and I hope he does not mind I posted it here.

Our problem was the opposite. I came into a 3 y/o startup 14 months
ago who wanted to be All Things To All People (ATTAP). Our platform
had gained enough traction that the problem we had to figure out which
opportunity was the best to pursue.

One of the the first things I did when I arrived was to ask for their
list of priorities. There were 26 #1 priorities, three #2's and a
smattering of #3's...a sure sign of the need for some focus. We
actually had more #1 priorities than we had developers!

After doing some competitive and market analysis, and talking with
some customers (and some non-customer potentials), I worked with the
VP of Engineering to more accurately express Development's capacity to
the Executive team so we could have a realistic discussion of what was
possible. We stripped all of the old priorities off the list and I
had him enter a level of difficulty (1-3) and level of confidence
(1-3) for each. I multiplied the two to create a point value for each
(ranging from 1-9). For discussion's sake, we'll say the total number
of points on the list added up to 200 (those familiar with Joel on
Software will recognize this).

I took the list to the team and gave them 120 points to "spend" on the
menu of potential development. Of course my team also gave them
strong direction on which priorities we saw as the most lucrative or
valued by the market. By constraining everyone's resources it put and
end to ATTAP and "I want it all and I want it now" syndrome.

Today, a little over a year later, I have put in place a Product
Management process that brings Market data into the business and helps
to educate the team. We use stage gates, write full MRDs, and perform
product performance reviews. That all sounds like super-fundamental
stuff. However, at a startup "process," and "documentation" can be
dirty words. I had to work to get the right processes in place
because everyone was worried about being bogged down.

Getting everything in place is itself a process and it is never
perfect. I have to compromise more than I would like sometimes, and
wish I could clone myself some days so my team would have enough time
to listen to the market, write MRDs, track development, work with the
Executives, etc. In reality there are lots of little tactical ankle
biters that take away time from the more important strategic things.
You need to do them to keep the lights on, and in a startup you're the
PM and the janitor.

I don't really think that NetStreams knew 100% what they were getting
into when they brought me on. Product Management is only now becoming
widely understood at a conceptual level, so for most people to
understand it in detail is asking too much. I believe that when
looking at a startup, for them just to realize that they might want
this PM "thing" is a win. From that point it is the responsibility of
the PM to come in a say "I am a PM, this is what I do. I am going to
act as if I am empowered to make any decision I feel is reasonably in
my scope until one of you redirects me otherwise." ...which is
basically what I did. That surprised people at first, because like
many startups we were a top-down culture.

True organizational agility comes from non-execs feeling like they
have the ability to make a decision and going for it. What employees
aren't told is that the decision making power is rarely granted upon
them, they have to seize it. One of the longer-term projects I have
going is to diffuse the decision making ability of the organization so
that a VP doesn't need to be called in every time someone need to make
a call.

Paul Young
Director of Product Management
NetStreams