Should You Have a Public Roadmap? A SaaS Decision Framework

One week into my new role, I walked into a customer advisory board meeting. I was still learning names. I hadn’t even found the coffee machine yet.

The first customer to speak stood up, pointed at me, and shouted—actually shouted—about how much he hated our product. His face was red. The room went silent.

He wasn’t wrong to be angry. The team I’d inherited hadn’t delivered anything customers cared about for four years. FOUR YEARS. They’d shipped features, sure. But not features that solved customer problems. The roadmap had been a black box, and customers had lost all faith that we were listening.

That moment—standing there while a customer vented years of frustration—taught me something about trust. And about public roadmaps.

The Case for Public Roadmaps

A public roadmap shares your product direction with customers, prospects, or the broader market. It can include:

• Features you’re building
• Outcomes you’re pursuing
• Timelines (vague or specific)
• Voting or request mechanisms

Why consider it?

Builds Transparency and Trust

When customers can see what you’re working on, they trust you more. They’re not wondering if you’re listening—they can see evidence that you are.

For B2B SaaS especially, transparency signals partnership. You’re not just a vendor; you’re a company that includes customers in your thinking.

Reduces Sales Friction

“Does your product do X?” is a common sales objection.

With a public roadmap: “Not yet, but it’s on our roadmap for Q3. See for yourself.”

This can close deals that would otherwise stall on missing features.

Creates Feedback Loops

When customers can vote or comment on roadmap items, you get signal about what matters. It’s not the only input, but it’s useful data.

Attracts Aligned Customers

A public roadmap shows where you’re headed. Customers who want that future self-select in. Those who don’t can self-select out before buying.

This alignment reduces churn—you’re getting customers who want what you’re building.

Build roadmaps you’re proud to share—sign up free

The Case Against Public Roadmaps

Public roadmaps aren’t universally right. Here’s when they cause problems:

Creates Commitment Pressure

Once something is on a public roadmap, customers expect it. Changing direction becomes difficult—you have to explain why, manage disappointment, and risk credibility.

This reduces your flexibility. If the market shifts or discovery invalidates an approach, you’re stuck defending a public commitment.

Competitive Intelligence

Your roadmap is strategy made visible. Competitors can see exactly what you’re building and respond.

In fast-moving markets, this can hurt. You’re telegraphing your moves.

False Precision

Customers see a roadmap item slated for “Q3” and expect it in Q3. When it slips to Q4, trust erodes—even if you had good reasons.

The more specific your public roadmap, the more specific customer expectations become.

Feature Request Distortion

If you include voting, popular features rise to the top. But popular isn’t always strategic. You might get votes for things that matter to many customers a little, while ignoring things that matter to fewer customers a lot.

Feature voting can distort your roadmap toward lowest-common-denominator features.

A Framework for Decision

Consider three dimensions:

Dimension 1: Customer Trust Level

High trust: Customers believe you’re listening and building the right things. They don’t need a public roadmap—they trust you.

Low trust: Customers feel ignored or surprised by your direction. A public roadmap can rebuild confidence.

If you’re coming from a trust deficit (as I was after that shouting incident), a public roadmap is a tool for recovery.

Dimension 2: Market Dynamics

Competitive market: Public roadmaps give competitors intelligence. Consider keeping strategic moves private.

Less competitive market: The transparency benefits likely outweigh competitive risk.

Dimension 3: Customer Segment

Enterprise customers: Often expect visibility into roadmap. Public or private roadmaps for enterprise are common.

SMB/self-serve customers: May not need roadmap visibility. Product updates and release notes might suffice.

The Feature Voting Problem

Feature voting sounds democratic. Let customers vote on what you build next. Build what they want.

But it has serious problems:

Problem 1: Majority Rules, Strategy Loses

Voting rewards features that appeal to many customers. But your strategy might require features that appeal to specific segments (enterprise, new markets, power users).

If voting drives your roadmap, you’ll optimise for breadth over depth.

Problem 2: Existing Customers Dominate

Voters are current customers. Their needs reflect their current context—not the context of future customers you’re trying to attract.

Following votes means building for who you have, not who you want.

Problem 3: Vocal Minority

Some customers vote and comment on everything. Others never engage. The voters aren’t representative; they’re just louder.

The Solution: Cap Voted Features

If you use feature voting, cap the resource allocation .

After my shouting incident, we allocated 20% of capacity to customer-voted features. The other 80% remained under product leadership control.

This meant:

• Customers saw their votes matter (some voted features got built)
• Strategic direction wasn’t hostage to votes
• We could explain trade-offs: “We built 3 voted features; here’s what else we prioritised and why”

The cap is critical. Without it, voting becomes the roadmap—and you lose strategic control over your OKRs and objectives .

Control your roadmap while hearing customers—sign up free

How We Rebuilt Trust: The Full Story

Let me tell you the rest of that story.

After the shouting incident, I spent weeks listening. Advisory boards. One-on-ones. Support tickets. NPS comments. The message was consistent: we weren’t building what customers needed, and they had no visibility into what was coming.

The trust deficit was severe. Our NPS was terrible. Renewals were at risk. The team was demoralised—they’d worked hard but customers hated the result.

We needed a signal change. Something that said: “We hear you, and we’re going to prove it.”

So we built a public roadmap. Simple, on our website. It showed:

1. What we were building (high-level themes, not detailed specs)
2. What we were considering (customer ideas awaiting evaluation)
3. What we’d recently shipped (proof we were delivering)

And we added voting. Customers could vote on ideas in the “considering” list.

Here’s what mattered: we capped it. 20% of capacity would go to top-voted items. Period.

The first quarter, we shipped the #1 voted feature. Customers noticed. The second quarter, we shipped #2 and #3. Customers REALLY noticed.

By month 6, the tone had shifted. Customers stopped shouting. They started collaborating. They understood we couldn’t build everything, but they saw we were listening.

By month 18, satisfaction scores had risen from 3/10 to 8/10. Renewals stabilised. The team’s morale recovered.

The public roadmap wasn’t magic. We also improved discovery, fixed quality issues, and communicated better. But the roadmap was the most visible signal that we’d changed.

When to Use a Public Roadmap

Use a public roadmap when:

• Trust is low and you need to rebuild it
• Sales cycles benefit from roadmap visibility
• Enterprise customers expect roadmap access
• You’re confident in directional stability (at least 70% certainty)
• Competition isn’t copying your moves in real-time

Avoid a public roadmap when:

• Trust is high and customers aren’t asking for it
• Strategic flexibility is critical (pivot risk is high)
• Competitive dynamics make visibility dangerous
• Internal alignment is shaky (public commitments will fracture)

What to Share (and What Not To)

If you go public, be strategic about what you share:

Share:

• Themes and directions: “We’re focused on onboarding improvements”
• High-level outcomes : “Making new users productive faster”
• Recently shipped: Proof that you deliver
• Under consideration: Ideas you’re evaluating

Don’t Share:

• Specific dates: Unless you’re highly confident
• Detailed specs: Too much precision creates commitment pressure
• Strategic moves: Competitive intelligence risk
• Uncertain items: Anything that might not happen

Implementation Options

Option 1: Marketing Page

A simple webpage showing themes, recently shipped, and what’s coming. No voting, just visibility.

Low effort. Good for general transparency.

Option 2: Customer Portal

A gated view for customers. More detail than public. Can include voting. Feels more exclusive.

Good for enterprise relationships.

Option 3: Dedicated Tool

Tools like Canny, ProductBoard, or similar. Built for roadmap sharing, voting, and feedback collection.

Higher investment but more sophisticated.

Option 4: Internal Roadmap with Selective Sharing

Keep your operational roadmap private (in RoadmapOne or similar). Share a simplified, curated view externally.

This separates operational planning from customer communication.

Managing Expectations

Whatever you share, manage expectations:

1. Dates are estimates. Say it explicitly. Repeat it often.
2. Priorities can change. Market shifts, customer needs evolve, discoveries happen.
3. Not everything will happen. Some items will be deprioritised. That’s normal.
4. Voting influences, doesn’t decide. Votes are input, not direction.

If customers understand these constraints, disappointment is lower when reality diverges from roadmap.

Conclusion

Should you have a public roadmap? It depends.

If customer trust is low and you need to rebuild, a public roadmap can help. It signals transparency and creates accountability.

If customer trust is high and competition is fierce, a public roadmap may cost more than it’s worth.

And if you add feature voting, cap it. 20% of capacity is enough to prove you’re listening without surrendering strategic control.

I’ll never forget that customer shouting in my face. It was humiliating. But it was also clarifying. Trust had been broken, and we had to rebuild it visibly.

The public roadmap was part of how we did that. 18 months later, that same customer was one of our biggest advocates.

That’s the power of transparency when you actually follow through.