A Tale of Two Green Fields

I've had two product concepts on the back burner that I am planning to moving to the front, soon. They make a good contrast in how I'm approaching user research based on my understanding of the product space. I'm going to skip the specifics, because I'm not ready to talk about either (yet), and the details are not too important for this post.

Greenfield 1: Unknown Territory

This is one of those products that started with an annoyance and a clever name (an all too common seed). A product I use often has a lot of friction when used to access a certain format of content. Same with its competitors. It just happens that this is what I use if for most, and this format has been gaining in popularity across multiple platforms. I can't be the only one feeling this friction. Opportunity! ...or is it?

The fact is that content consumption can be very personal and invoke strongly held opinions. This is a case where my connection to the product domain is not generalizable enough to move forward without external validation. In this case, I'm starting with focused user research. My approach has been to develop a prospective value proposition to guide a structured interview plan. Fortunately, I have access to a community engaged with the subject matter and was able to conduct enough interviews to validate the proposition.

Or, in this case, invalidate it.

This is a successful outcome! The results have shown that portions of the original proposition do have value, but the proposed execution would pose an uphill battle to providing that value. The interviews also show there are opportunities to provide value to both content creators and their audience (critical for this product), but there are challenges associated with the revenue model. The initial concept could find an audience, but is unlikely to be successful in the short term. However, process has already highlighted a pivot that would be both easier to produce and focus more on the best parts of the original value proposition. This light research has already prepared this project for a Lean Startup style experiment.

Greenfield 2: My Backyard

On the flip side, this second product is one that I'm developing because I want it to be in the world. I'll use it even if no one else does. What's surprising is that despite being an entry into a crowded market, that saturation may act to its advantage. The target users for this product are poorly served by current offerings, are using current products anyway via kludges and workarounds, and have a demonstrated willingness to pay.

This calls for a different approach. For this product I'm focusing on competitive research and prototyping. The competitive research is providing baselines for a customer value model, possible revenue models, and a scope for an MVP. My own experience in this domain would qualify me as a subject matter expert, which removes much of the need for initial concept testing, enough to move directly to prototypes. Prototype testing is critical as the product will be reproducing an activity that has a strong tactile component, so the "feel" is as important as the functionality. Without that component, additional user research at this stage could only help so much. This user evaluation with prototypes will hopefully lead to co-design opportunities and community growth.

Closing Thoughts

Externalizing a product and testing with its real audience are critical to a successful product. However, that research can and should be tailored to the experience and resources of the product team (especially a product team of one). Sometimes this means doing less pure research and more building. Just as it is important to learn what you don't know, it can be important to ignore your own relevant experience and knowledge.

product managementuser research