"Product led" describes one way an organization can be structured and governed — not a universal target every company should aim for. The actual goal of a product organization, and of an individual PM's job, is product success and business success. Product-ledness is sometimes the path to that outcome, and sometimes it isn't.
Highly successful companies are not product led, and these aren't rare exceptions — Oracle and Salesforce are commonly cited examples. See Google's Engineering-Led, User-Focused Era (Historical Case Study) for a detailed historical counterexample: a company that stayed deeply user-focused while being engineering led, not PM led, for roughly 15 years.
This reframing matters because "we need to be more product led" functions as an Always-True Statements (Vacuous Consensus Claims) — it's always locally true and gets nodding agreement in any room, but truth alone doesn't imply priority, since it competes against dozens of other true-and-important things a company could do instead. See Only Senior Leaders Can Make an Org Product Led — ICs Don't Have the Capital to Spend for who is actually positioned to act on the claim even when it's correct.
Distinct from Misconception: PM Owns the 'What', Engineering Just Executes the 'How' and Product Model (vs. Roadmap Model) — those describe how day-to-day product decisions get made inside an org; this concept is about whether PM-primacy needs to be the org's overall operating philosophy at all.
For the senior leader who does decide the risk is worth taking, Doshi points to Marty Cagan's Transform as the resource for the actual tactics of moving a company from not-product-led to product-led — the book, not general advocacy, is where the how-to lives. See Only Senior Leaders Can Make an Org Product Led — ICs Don't Have the Capital to Spend for why that leader has to be senior enough to spend real career capital convincing the CEO, executive team, and board, and for the two things an IC can do instead of pushing for org-wide change.