In Defense of the HiPPO: When Corporate Decision Making Needs a Boss
And why the Z.E.B.R.A. is the real creature you should fear
By Tristan Kromer · The Hippo is a much maligned creature. Forever scorned by data scientists and UX professionals. 
Hi.P.P.O stands for the Highest Paid Person’s Opinion. It’s a time honored way of making decisions which goes back centuries. If a decision has to be made, the boss’ opinion wins. After all, there must be some reason they get paid more! If we’re deciding between a red button and a blue button for our Call-To-Action, don’t test, just ask Hi.P.P.O! There’s even a SaaS web site dedicated to asking Hi.P.P.Os. Personally, I don’t mind the Hi.P.P.O. Sometimes I have to bow before the Hi.P.P.O. Sometimes am the Hi.P.P.O. What I truly fear is the Z.E.B.R.A (More on that below.) While the Hi.P.P.O is often rightly derided as a terrible decision making process, there are some situations where it’s actually a good strategy. So here are three reasons why we might want to listen to the Hi.P.P.O.
1) Testing is Expensive
Sometimes, it’s just not worth it. For Google, it makes a huge amount of sense to test 41 shades of blue. A fraction of a fraction of a 1% increase in conversions can means millions of dollars to Google. For the typical startup? Not so much. Google also has millions of page views and can detect statistical significance out of such small changes. Most companies don’t have the luxury of large sample sizes and a decent test might take weeks or months to gather sufficient data. If the cost to run an A/B or usability test is equal to or larger than the expected value of a successful test, then it’s certainly not worth it. Just do what the Hippo says and call it a day.
Quick Answer: The HiPPO (Highest Paid Person’s Opinion) isn’t always the enemy of good corporate decision making. As product managers, we should recognize three scenarios where deferring to the boss actually makes sense: when testing costs exceed expected value, when picking battles preserves political capital for fights that matter, and when authority efficiently ends wasteful debate. The real threat is the Z.E.B.R.A. (Zero Evidence But Really Arrogant) — someone whose claimed expertise overrides data entirely and can’t be swayed by facts.
2) Choose Your Battles Wisely
Also, remember that there is a personal cost to endlessly challenge everyone’s suggestions and testing every little thing: People might hate us and we might lose the will to fight. While we should never senselessly bow to authority, sometimes it’s worth it to just add that stupid link to the footer of the CEO’s pet project. Will it impact the site performance? Probably not. Will it make the CEO happy? Yes. Would insisting on testing it just irritate the hell out of the CEO, the engineer who has to implement the A/B test, and the data analyst who has to do the custom SQL query to crunch the data? Yes. Is all the increased aggravation and declining team morale going to make it harder to get buy in for running the next test? You betcha. It takes courage to stand up, challenge authority, and insist on what is right. But…
3) Authority Ends Debate
There is a third cost (Sensing the theme?) to running tests. The cost of debate. Debating does not produce knowledge. It is a wasteful activity. Analyzing results is not debating. That’s a useful activity. But debating opinions? Pure waste. This is where the Z.E.B.R.A comes in.
Fear the Z.E.B.R.A
Where the Hi.P.P.O takes charge via authoritarian structure, the Z.E.B.R.A has the most fearsome weapon of all, pure arrogance. (Credit for this brilliant acronym goes to Emily Chiu.) The Zebra is often someone with “expertise” who “really knows the customer” but doesn’t have any facts to back them up. Sometimes this is the PM or the CEO, but more often it’s the UX person. (Sorry UX folks!) Based on years of design experience, we just know that the button should be red, the image should be smaller, and the shading on the button should be 4 px, (god forbid, not 3 px). This is far more dangerous than the Hi.P.P.O because while the Hi.P.P.O can be swayed by facts, the Z.E.B.R.A. says, “The customer is wrong.” The Hi.P.P.O is a default decision. In the absence of facts, do what the boss says. The Z.E.B.R.A rules through the tyranny of expertise. For all the Hi.P.P.Os out there: Try to live by this mantra, “I’ve made a decision. If you’d like to change the decision, bring me facts. Define an experiment that will prove me wrong, and I’ll back it, but the debate is over.” For the Z.E.B.R.As: Repeat after me, “All opinions are equal in the absence of data.”
Lessons Learned:
Frequently Asked Questions
What does HiPPO mean in corporate decision making?
HiPPO stands for the Highest Paid Person’s Opinion. It’s a corporate decision making approach where the most senior (highest-paid) person in the room makes the call when a decision is needed. While often criticized, it can serve as a practical default when testing is too expensive, the stakes are low, or endless debate is slowing the team down.
When is it actually okay to skip A/B testing and go with the boss’s opinion?
When the cost to run an A/B or usability test equals or exceeds the expected value of a successful test, it’s not worth testing. Most companies don’t have Google-scale traffic, so detecting statistical significance on small changes can take weeks or months. In those cases, we’re better off going with the HiPPO’s call and moving on.
What is a ZEBRA in product management and why is it worse than a HiPPO?
Z.E.B.R.A stands for Zero Evidence But Really Arrogant. Unlike the HiPPO, who can be swayed by facts, the ZEBRA relies on claimed expertise to override data and dismiss customer input entirely. As product managers, we should fear the ZEBRA more because they rule through the tyranny of expertise and may even say “the customer is wrong” without evidence to support their position.
How should leaders balance authority with data-driven decision making?
The best approach is to use authority as a default, not a permanent stance. Leaders should adopt the mantra: “I’ve made a decision. If you’d like to change it, bring me facts. Define an experiment that will prove me wrong, and I’ll back it — but the debate is over.” This ends wasteful opinion-based debate while keeping the door open for evidence.
Why can constantly pushing back on leadership decisions backfire?
There’s a real personal and team cost to challenging every suggestion and insisting on testing every small thing. It can irritate stakeholders, drain engineering and analytics resources, and erode team morale. Worse, the accumulated friction can make it harder to get buy-in when we actually need to run a test that truly matters.
Comments
Loading comments…
Leave a comment