{"id":1316,"date":"2023-04-23T11:56:54","date_gmt":"2023-04-23T16:56:54","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/starpointgroup.com\/?p=1316"},"modified":"2023-09-07T12:15:41","modified_gmt":"2023-09-07T17:15:41","slug":"startup-planning","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.starpointgroup.com\/startup-planning\/","title":{"rendered":"Startup Planning"},"content":{"rendered":"
A startup is a human institution designed to create new products or services under conditions of extreme uncertainty.
\n-Eric Ries<\/p><\/blockquote>\nAd Agencies & Startup Factories<\/h2>\n
When I first read Eric Ries\u2019 definition of a startup, I laughed out loud because I thought it was the perfect description of a full-service advertising agency \u2013 or at least the one where I worked for 10 years. \u00a0That\u2019s what we did, every day of the week: create new products and services for big-name clients under conditions of extreme uncertainty.\u00a0 We were a startup factory \u2013 and we were good at it.<\/p>\n
A key difference between a successful ad agency and Eric Ries\u2019 idealized startup is the role of the intended customer in the development process.\u00a0 Reis thinks that little can be learned by talking with end-users and consumers because \u201c(m)ost of the time, customers don\u2019t know what they want in advance.\u201d<\/em> \u00a0(Ries, 2011, p. 49)\u00a0 A successful ad agency knows better: by asking the right questions in the right way \u2013 and by listening with an open-mind \u2013 one can, in fact, find out what customers want (and don\u2019t want) and substantially reduce the uncertainty that surrounds the creative development process.<\/p>\n
Reducing Uncertainty<\/h2>\n
The rational response to conditions of extreme uncertainty is \u2026 to systematically reduce uncertainty. \u00a0Eric Ries\u2019 recommended method is the specification of a \u201cminimum viable product\u201d (MVP) followed by rapid turns through the \u201cBuild-Measure-Learn\u201d loop to generate \u201cvalidated learning\u201d \u2013 results that derive from customer behavior and are based on empirical evidence. (See Figure 1)\u00a0Ries asserts that through this process of repeated cycles of product testing \u2013 feature by feature \u2013 one eventually will develop a product that is viable in the marketplace.\u00a0 (Or one eventually will be forced to admit that it\u2019s not going to fly and then \u201cpivot\u201d to a new approach.)<\/p>\n
<\/a><\/span><\/div>\nWe\u2019re big fans of empiricism, but we hate to see clients running in circles and blindly bumping into walls at the outset of a project. \u00a0Why not get customer feedback on the MVP before<\/em><\/strong> the \u201cbuild\u201d process starts? \u00a0It it\u2019s not going to fly you can pivot a lot sooner, and with fewer resources expended.<\/p>\n
There are two approaches that, taken together, can substantially reduce the uncertainty that surrounds a new product development effort:<\/p>\n
\n
- A qualitative category exploration<\/strong> to learn how potential customers view the category and how they choose to engage with it; what they find enjoyable and what they find frustrating; how they compare the available options; what caught their interest in the first place.<\/li>\n
- A well-designed concept test<\/strong> to identify the potential product features, attributes and benefits that will drive preference in the category, thus providing a blueprint for the product development effort.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
Qualitative Category Exploration<\/h2>\n
A qualitative category exploration is generally the first step in a new product development effort and it can take a variety of forms:<\/p>\n
\n
- Open-ended individual interviews, either in person or online<\/strong><\/em>
\nQualitative category explorations with current category users are intentionally non-directive at the outset. The aim is to allow the user to describe, in their own terms, how they participate in the category, what products they currently use, how they feel about the options available to them, and finally, the benefits (and problems) they have experienced in the category.\u00a0 The lead question is NOT<\/em><\/strong> \u201cTell me what you want\u2026\u201d<\/em>\u00a0 It\u2019s more likely to be \u201cTalk to me about how you use (shop for, feel about, etc.) product category X. That\u2019s interesting: tell me more…\u201d<\/em><\/li>\n- Focus groups with current category users<\/strong><\/em>
\nThe focus group format follows the same outline as the individual interview but allows for interactions between participants.\u00a0 This cross-talk between category users can often lead to serendipitous learning when participants challenge each another\u2019s comments and preferences. Or when someone start building off the comments of other participants to create something entirely new\u2026<\/li>\n- In-home or on-site observations<\/strong><\/em>
\nThe anthropological approach has similar objectives to the qualitative individual interviews: to allow the customer or end-user to demonstrate \u2013 through ordinary language and natural behaviors \u2013 how they participate in the category, how they use the available products or services, what they find appealing, what they find awkward or annoying, work-arounds they may have developed, alternatives they are considering, etc.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\nAvoiding Blind Alleys<\/strong>
\nIn reading Ries\u2019 account of the IMVU development process, it is painfully obvious that his belated interviews with existing IM users ultimately saved his project \u2013 in spite of his repeated assertion that “customers can\u2019t tell you what they want<\/em>.”\u00a0 As the IMVU project approached the point of collapse, the feedback he received from current IM users eventually forced him to acknowledge that virtually all of the assumptions on which he had based the initial development efforts were, in fact, false.\u00a0 (Ries, 2011, p. 44) \u00a0Those misleading assumptions \u2013 and the multiple, costly development dead-ends that followed \u2013 could easily have been side-stepped if he had simply started the IMVU development process by engaging existing IM users in a non-directive, open-ended dialogue: \u201cTalk to me about how you use IM\u2026\u00a0 That\u2019s interesting: tell me more\u2026\u201d<\/em><\/p>\nTo be fair, Ries does introduce the concept of \u201cgenchi gembutsu\u201d (go see for yourself) (Ries, 2011, p. 86) and then goes on to discuss Scott Cook\u2019s random telephone interviews of potential home accounting users\u00a0 that preceded the launch of Intuit (Ries, 2011, p. 88).\u00a0 Cook\u2019s initiative is a perfect example of an open-ended, non-directive new category exploration. \u00a0But strangely, Ries doesn\u2019t pivot that mirror around to reflect on his own initial stumbles with IMVU \u2013 and draw the appropriate conclusions.<\/p>\n
Seeing the Forest and the Trees<\/strong>
\nIf you\u2019re allergic to qualitative research, you can still gain insights by analyzing syndicated panel data, but you won\u2019t get the same level of detail or the emotional insight.\u00a0 Regardless of the approach chosen, the learning and insights come through customer research: \u00a0by reflecting on participants\u2019 responses, by reviewing their behaviors, by noting the choices they have made (and may not have made) and finally through those glorious \u201cAha\u2026!\u201d<\/em> that hopefully arrive when the patterns clarify. This is not a process of deductive reasoning or brute analytics \u2013 though that may be the post-hoc explanation for the conclusions that are developed.\u00a0 This is an attempt to see the whole by allowing the pieces to fall into place.<\/p>\nConcept Tests<\/h2>\n
New product concepts can take many forms and, to his credit, Ries mentions several of them.\u00a0 A favorite example is the video created by Drew Hudson to demo the intended functionality of Dropbox (Ries, 2011, p. 97) \u2013 an approach we have used to great effect.<\/p>\n
\n
- Product Concepts<\/strong>
\nIn its simplest form a product or service concept is a short written statement \u2013 generally accompanied by a visual element \u2013 that describes what the product or service does, lists a small number of differentiating attributes and (hopefully!) communicates the intended end-user benefit. In more elaborate variants on this theme \u2013 which we recommend \u2013 one creates a small suite of concept statements or visuals that are crafted to intentionally vary the highlighted functionality and potential end-user benefits.\u00a0 These concepts are then presented to prospective customers\/end-users for evaluation either singly or in rotation depending on the assessment methodology.<\/li>\n- Presenting the Future<\/strong>
\nWhen presented with these clearly defined alternative versions of a possible new product, target customers can readily tell you which ones (if any) they prefer and why they prefer them. In a very real sense, these alternative concepts statements represent alternative descriptions of a possible future \u2013 a future that includes the envisioned new product, but viewed from differing functional and emotional perspectives.\u00a0 Asking respondents to compare alternatives and indicate a preference is the psychological underpinning of most product development research including conjoint measurement techniques.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\nPreference Testing<\/strong>
\nBy analyzing preference patterns and their underlying drivers one can identify \u201cwhat customers want<\/em>\u201d through inductive logic and inference. \u00a0This is possible even in a new category that is largely unfamiliar to the intended target group.\u00a0 (See q-PFO<\/strong><\/a>). \u00a0Qualitative, quantitative or combination assessment methodologies can be employed. The final choice depends on the available time, the level of finish that the concepts have attained and the decision-maker\u2019s comfort with specific methods.<\/p>\nEnhancing the B-M-L Validated Learning Loop<\/h2>\n
Both of the customer-oriented research steps we advocate would occur at the front-end of the \u201cBuild-Measure-Learn\u201d loop, prior to the initial \u201cBuild\u201d stage.\u00a0 A diagram for the expanded validated learning loop appears in Figure 2.<\/p>\n
[image_frame style=”framed_shadow” align=”center” alt=”Enhanced “B-M-L” Validated Learning Loop” height=”400″ width=”500″]http:\/\/starpointgroup.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/04\/enhanced-bml-validated-learning-loop.png[\/image_frame]<\/p>\n
Why Talk to Prospective Customers?<\/h2>\n
There are three clear and compelling benefits to talking with prospective customers at the earliest stages in the startup development process.<\/p>\n
\n
- To understand the category from the customer\u2019s perspective \u2013 thereby quickly dispensing with invalid assumptions that lead down blind alleys at the outset of a project.<\/li>\n
- To quickly isolate the crucial features and essential functionality that prospective uses demand, and to dispense with those they see as secondary or completely unnecessary \u2013 thereby creating a blueprint for the MVP and the initial build stage.<\/li>\n
- To identify the most compelling customer benefit and supporting product features (\u201creasons to believe\u201d) that will constitute the positioning platform for the product\u2019s roll-out. These are crucial elements for developing a marketing campaign that can effectively generate informed customer awareness and demand.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n
In summary, talking to your prospective customers early in the process can dramatically reduce the uncertainty surrounding the initial stages of any startup activity. \u00a0A\/B testing and rapid turns of the validated learning loop are great for improving existing features, for prioritizing new features and for enhancing the user interface \u2013 once a validated product concept exists.\u00a0 But at the earliest phases, when it\u2019s all just an entrepreneurial \u201cIdea\u201d, a small investment in upfront customer research will do a lot more to reduce \u201cextreme uncertainty\u201d than will coding hunches and running in circles. Learn more about our Startup Planning process<\/a>.<\/p>\n
Works Cited<\/h1>\n
Ries, E. (2011). The Lean Startup: How Today’s Entrepreneurs Use Continuous Innovation to Create Radially Successful Businesses.<\/em> New York: Crown Publishing Group, a division of Random House, Inc.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
When I first read Eric Ries\u2019 definition of a startup, I laughed out loud because I thought it was the perfect description of a full-service advertising agency \u2013 or at least the one where I worked for 10 years. Every day of the week we created new products and services under conditions of extreme uncertainty, and we were good at it. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1319,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"yoast_head":"\n
Startup Planning - Starpoint Consulting Group<\/title>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\n\n\t\n\t\n\t\n