The Myth of Fast Follow

If you’ve spent enough time in tech product discussions, you’ve likely heard the phrase “fast follow.” On the surface, it sounds reassuring—an agile response, a commitment to move quickly after an initial release. But in reality, business stakeholders have learned to interpret it differently. More often than not, “fast follow” is a placeholder for uncertainty, lack of commitment, or deprioritization.

Why Tech Teams Should Retire “Fast Follow”

When a team says, “That will be a “fast follow”,” what they often mean is one of three things:

1. We don’t understand the requirement.
   • The feature request is unclear, lacks definition, or hasn’t been fully scoped. Instead of admitting this upfront, teams defer the hard work of clarification, hoping future prioritization will force a more detailed discussion.
2. We are not committing to this feature/project.
   • “Fast follow” is a way to acknowledge the request without making an actual commitment. It’s a convenient way to avoid outright saying “no” while keeping the door open—though often, that door quietly closes soon after.
3. We don’t believe this is prioritized on the roadmap.
   • When a feature isn’t aligned with strategic goals or isn’t high on the roadmap, “fast follow” becomes a way to push it into an undefined backlog. It creates the illusion of near-term action when, in reality, there is no real plan to deliver it.

The Impact of the “Fast Follow” Myth

For business leaders, hearing “fast follow” can be frustrating. It signals that the technology team isn’t aligned on priorities, isn’t confident in execution, or is hesitant to provide a firm response. This erodes trust and creates unnecessary ambiguity in product planning.

For tech teams, using “fast follow” as a crutch can be equally damaging. It prevents necessary conversations about feasibility, trade-offs, and true prioritization. It can also lead to technical debt if teams release an MVP without a clear plan for follow-up improvements, under the assumption that fixes will come “soon after.”

What to Say Instead

Rather than defaulting to “fast follow,” tech teams should aim for more precise and transparent communication:

• “This feature is not part of our current roadmap. We can revisit it in [specific timeframe].”
• “We need more details to understand the full requirement. Let’s refine this before making a commitment.”
• “This isn’t a priority right now because [reason], but here’s what we are focusing on instead.”

Honest conversations lead to better alignment, stronger execution, and, ultimately, more trust between tech and business teams. Let’s stop leaning on the myth of “fast follow” and start having the real discussions that move products—and companies—forward.