The importance sequel demand

 

[Demand] the importance sequel

One, who put forward the demand party is?

• product?
• Operations?
• Promotion?
• technology?
• boss?

In many cases put forward the demand side may not be our own, put forward by others. Record demand for the submitting party who help us to sort out the time of the decision-making process is a failure if the proposed requirements, if not our own.

You should also be thinking: why he did not stop the demand, but the demand is to fail smoothly on the line? If at that time questioned why we did not continue to convince others? If our own proposed should reflect the more, when making a decision at that time was the reason which enables us to produce a miscarriage of justice? This is a miscarriage of justice their own habits of thinking or thinking vulnerability?

These are all worthy of our deep reflection.

All requirements must have a clear demand basis, based on the lack of a clear demand not and will reject.

Second, what is the basis of demand?

• The results of data analysis?
• The results of a user survey?
• Competing products, the results of the analysis?
• Personal experience to judge?

From the above four basis, not difficult to find: according to the data analysis is the most difficult, the need for a detailed breakdown after and inferred needs in order to draw conclusions, and also requires continuous observation of changes in the data on the product line, in order to determine whether the product whether changes in line with expectations .

User research often takes some time and effort required to collect through the analysis to draw some preliminary conclusions after a certain amount of user data. The Competitive Analysis is relatively not very tricky, a lot of people to understand that competitors do spread, we follow suit just fine. The personal experience is the easiest, and most do not fly, depends on personal feelings and judgments, that is purely personal YY.

Most of failure demand there is a feature: there is a strong subjective experience judgment, and lack of rigorous data analysis and user research . Most of the time after what is inside the "decision-making brainstorming" raised serious lack of feedback data basis and users.

Third, what type of demand is (KANO model)?

• basic needs?

• Expected demand?

• Demand excited?

A clear product development stage is very important! Clear himself at this stage what they can and can not do is very important!

We all know that there is a product life cycle, focusing on the different stages of the product is not the same. We also have this experience: doing product when suddenly sudden inspiration, came up with an excellent idea, not excited.

But if this idea in KANO model to think about it, we found that demand for the product is currently in the validation phase, the core task is to verify the authenticity of demand, and they want out of a lot of creativity is often just an excitatory demand - - With better, not too little effect.

The main purpose of analysis by KANO model - allow the team to be more focused: to focus on the core product demand, not too divergent to make some so-called "whimsy", although these wonderful Chin think is really important at some point, but most of the time, we still have to focus on the core task of the current phase of the product, down to earth.

Fourth, the scope of the demand?

• Individual users
• Novice users
• Light Users
• Heavy users
• All users

When we later raised the demand, more cautious, more comprehensive thinking, affect a wider range of time, the way we should be more use of AB testing, or to the vest bag, and other data is stable before making a judgment.

For example: I was directly on-line on the official package a "premium features", the lead registration conversion rate of new users not a small effect, thereby affecting the product ranking in the App Store, these are by my prior undervalued, good I prepared the alternative, in the event of problems the first time for replacement options.

Fifth, the process of assessment is kind of how?

• Whether a full discussion?
• At that time the team as a whole are unanimous do?
• Whether the risks were fully predict?
• At that time the team's decision is correct or wrong?
• Why team will make the wrong decision?

Products do after a long time, I observed a phenomenon out: the team's decision-making often does not necessarily wiser than individual decisions, but the team's decision will increase the probability of failure.

The reason behind about two aspects:

1, when the team decision-making responsibility is decentralized, it will to some extent in order to pursue team harmony and lead to moderation opinions prevail;

2, because a lot of issues that need is not brainstorming, but thinking very deep, because the team diffusion of responsibility, so not necessarily strong on the depth of thinking than a person.

Process evaluation, in fact, is to deepen our knowledge and understanding of the team - the whole team atmosphere is what? Do team members have the opportunity to express their views? Whether the team's views will be about individuals? Team decisions are smarter or more moderate? and many more.

"After the evaluation process," you will find: Every product needs discussion meetings are often swayed by individual personnel decision-making, leading to people in other departments too difficult to have the opportunity to express their views, and this time I will simply direct demand meeting to discuss the split.

Strategic discussions and decision-making meetings, and implementation layer needs assessment meeting - this is very wonderful, very characteristic of the company, but the effect is surprisingly good! Many usually basically do not speak of the development of small brother, after this adjustment also had the opportunity to express their views.

Sixth, whether to follow the principles of MVP?

Products do people know, in the early stages of product development, design and interactive effects of the product itself is very small ratio. From the "user experience elements" level, design and interactive product presentation layer are all things, the impact is limited.

However, because the design and interaction are thousands of thousand faces, everyone can say a few words, it was only those "who do not understand the line" give too much attention. Replay and reflect on whether we follow the principle MVP, it is conducive to the attention of the whole team and focus on core verification requirements, rather than the thousands of people on the design and interaction of a Thousand Faces.

Actually, this is for team members to continue the fight against the practice of dimensionality reduction in the level of knowledge - a lot of people think they understand the special products, with the best ideas. This time we do not quarrel and each other, but with the data and results to demonstrate why the other side is wrong, wrong.

At the same time, we need to continue on the output level of knowledge, enhance product awareness throughout the team - which is why continuous learning, product manager of reasons, to reduce the dimension of the fight against others, we must ensure that their thinking and cognition capable of continuing to lead the team.

Seven, how the actual results?

• Positive effect: product data would be enhanced and enhance the user experience ......
• Negative impact: declining product data, a poor user experience ......
• Neutral impact: Short-term data did not change significantly, but may improve the long-term ......
• other

The results were analyzed help the entire team to be more results-oriented, most start-up companies, we are running the state, day and night mention needs to finish the work, race against time, but hard-working, busy with success inter is not necessarily proportional to, otherwise the business became too simple.

Calm down and analyzed from the perspective of the results will help us to reflect on what they were doing in which there is an important, positive and valuable? What is unnecessary, negative, low value? How will their own time and energy to focus on core, valuable thing on?

So that in future product iterations, make the best decisions possible.

One of our common mistake is this: When the result of mistaken assumptions - think how things should be in line with our vision and expectations. But the results will tell us: you just assume that your assumptions, your idea just your ideas. Track results, feedback and reflection, the team is forced to be more pragmatic.