I have seen countless “roadmaps” in my career that were not much more than glorified wishlists. Pretty documents filled with ambitious ideas, but lacking the fundamental ingredients that transform hope into execution. After years of watching teams struggle with this distinction, I have come to realize there are three critical differences that separate real roadmaps from elaborate fantasies.
The Problem with Most “Roadmaps”
Most organizations create what they call roadmaps, but what they actually produce are wishlists dressed up in fancy formatting. These documents capture desires and aspirations – features that would be nice to have, improvements that sound exciting, goals that feel inspiring. But they lack the rigor that makes roadmaps useful as strategic tools.
I have sat in too many meetings where someone presents a beautiful timeline filled with exciting initiatives, only to watch it crumble under basic questions: “Who’s actually going to build this?” “Have we confirmed this is technically feasible?” – or also: “what is the expected market size for it” or “do we know how to reach the customer base that this product is intended for”?
The uncomfortable silence that follows these questions reveals the fundamental flaw: these aren’t roadmaps at all.
What Makes a Real Roadmap
A proper roadmap has three essential characteristics that distinguish it from wishful thinking in my book:
Clear Ownership and Feasibility
For every item on a real roadmap, there is a team that has looked into it and said “this is mine to build” – and crucially, they have also confirmed it’s actually possible. This isn’t just assignment of responsibility; it’s informed commitment. The team has assessed the technical complexity, understood the resource requirements – and agreed they can deliver.
This transforms abstract ideas into concrete commitments. When someone owns a roadmap item and has validated its feasibility, it moves from the realm of “wouldn’t it be nice if…” to “we will deliver this because we know how.”
Stakeholder Alignment and Input
A real roadmap has been seen by all stakeholders – and more importantly, they have had the opportunity to provide input. This isn’t just about sharing the document; it’s about incorporating feedback from engineering, marketing, sales, operations, customer support and senior leadership into the planning process.
This socialization serves multiple purposes. It ensures no critical perspectives are missed, prevents surprises down the line, and creates organizational buy-in. When stakeholders have contributed to the roadmaps creation, they become invested in its success rather than critics of its shortcomings. And let’s not forget: it also allows those departments to prepare to do their part for a roadmap items success.
Transparent Prioritization
Perhaps most importantly, a real roadmap clearly distinguishes between different levels of commitment. Not everything can be treated equally, and effective roadmaps make these distinctions explicit:
- Committed: Items with allocated resources, confirmed ownership and firm delivery expectations. If you want to make sure your engineering teams don’t spend a lot of time estimating things (I have written about this previously here)- probably good to stick to a maximum period of 3 months in the future for this category of items!
- Planned: Likely initiatives that depend on capacity and changing priorities
- Ideas: Possibilities being considered but without any form of commitment or established feasibility
This transparency manages expectations both internally and externally. Team members understand what they can count on, engineers understand what needs to be looked at thoroughly and external stakeholders know which commitments are firm versus aspirational.
Why This Distinction Matters
The wishlist-to-roadmap transformation might appear like it is not critical, that it can wait until a later stage. However, wishlists create false confidence and unrealistic expectations. They give the illusion of planning without the substance of commitment.
Real roadmaps, by contrast, become communication tools that align organizations around shared realities. They help teams say no to competing demands because priorities are clear. They enable realistic planning because commitments are validated. They build trust because expectations are properly set.
Making the Shift
Converting wishlists into roadmaps requires uncomfortable conversations. It means asking teams to commit rather than just brainstorm. It means involving stakeholders in messy planning discussions rather than presenting polished outcomes. It means accepting that some exciting ideas aren’t feasible right now.
But organizations that make this shift discover something powerful: roadmaps that actually guide decisions and drive execution. Instead of beautiful documents that gather digital dust, they have living strategic tools that help them navigate from current state to desired outcomes.
The difference between a wishlist and a roadmap isn’t in the formatting – it’s in the rigor. And that rigor, while demanding, is what transforms strategy into results. Trust me – making the effort will pay back and your teams will thank you for it.
