Quick Intro
Over the past 4-5 years, I have been a huge advocate of UX design processes that prioritize user feedback at a prototype level, through methods like design sprints, usability testing, and other qualitative UX research methods. I have often been the voice of the user in many teams I have worked with, but these methods have presented some challenges. Here are some of the problems I have encountered over the years:
The Problems
-
- Finding the Right Participants:Finding the right participants is crucial for the success of user testing. However, it can also be one of the biggest challenges. As someone who has been involved in user testing for several years, I know this all too well. While sourcing, recruiting, and scheduling participants is easy for large corporations with ample resources, it is a different story for smaller teams, especially startups. This is because they usually lack the budget to carry out such activities.To address this issue, many teams turn to tools like UsabilityHub to recruit users in a more affordable way. Although this is a viable option, from my experience, it may not always yield the best results. In some cases, it seems like users are merely telling you what you want to hear, instead of providing the validation you need. Therefore, it is important to consider other methods for recruiting participants, such as reaching out to specific user groups or partnering with other companies.By taking a more creative approach to recruiting participants, you can ensure that you get the feedback you need to improve your product. This can lead to better user experiences, increased engagement, and ultimately, a more successful product.
-
- Figuring out if users are telling the truth:I have had experiences where, during usability interviews, the users were not providing me with accurate information. Instead, they appeared to be telling me what they thought I wanted to hear. For example, they would say things like “I like the colors” and “I would use this, it looks cool.” When I encounter these types of responses, it usually raises concerns for me. It indicates that either we have not recruited the right target demographic, or the users are not ready to buy or do not have the problem that we are trying to solve. On the other hand, it is possible that the users are not paying enough attention and are only present for the compensation at the conclusion of the interview.In my experience, determining the veracity of the users’ statements and whether they would actually purchase the product in the real world has always been a challenge in product validation. In most cases, I could only gather that people like the look and feel of the product, and maybe the concept as well. However, it was not clear how the idea would be able to convert customers and gain traction. This is a crucial aspect of validating any idea, and it requires more than just interviewing users. It involves conducting market research, analyzing the competition, and determining how the product fits into the market as a whole. By doing so, we can better understand our target audience and ensure that our product meets their needs and desires.
-
- Initial investment in defining the solution and prototyping: When it comes to saving time and investment in development, there are several design processes that can be utilized to achieve this. One of these processes involves building a prototype and validating it before writing any code. While this approach can take some time to complete, it can save a lot of time and effort in the long run.However, the pricing of most UX practitioners these days can make this approach a significant investment, especially for small startups seeking to validate their ideas. In order to make this approach more feasible for smaller teams, there are several ways to reduce the cost of facilitation and design work. For example, one could consider using low-fidelity prototypes or working with a less experienced UX practitioner.Validating a full idea with a prototype also requires fleshing out the idea and designing the core screens. While this can be accomplished with something like a design sprint in three days, it involves a lot of preparation work, as well as the cost of facilitation and design work. It also requires significant stakeholder time and may be more suitable for larger teams that can afford the time and can invite influential and knowledgeable people into the product definition process.In short, while product definition requires a lot of effort to arrive at a prototype and to agree on validation format, questions, and metrics, there are several ways to make this process more feasible for smaller teams. By utilizing low-fidelity prototypes, working with a less experienced UX practitioner, and being strategic about stakeholder involvement, small startups can still validate their ideas and save time and investment in the development process.
-
- Speed of Idea Validation: Most startup companies do not have the resources to take a long time in validation, although they should. Unfortunately, this has not been the case in my experience. There is a huge appetite to validate an idea in the quickest, most efficient, and economical way possible for the team. This usually means not writing any code, but some companies do actually write code and find ways to improve, which I think is a better approach because it helps with the momentum to go to market. However, if you are in the camp of no-code validation, then prototyping is usually the default. I do not think it is the most efficient or quickest and certainly not the most economical.This process can take weeks or months, depending on the team and the scope, and this has been a pain point in most of the smaller teams I have worked with, including my own startup projects.One way to take a longer time in validation is to conduct a thorough market research, which can take several weeks. This can help the team to understand the market demand and identify potential customers. Another approach is to conduct user testing, which can take even longer but can provide valuable insights into the user experience of the product. Additionally, developing a minimum viable product (MVP) can take longer than prototyping, but it can be a better way to test the product in a real environment and gather feedback from early adopters.Despite the potential drawbacks of taking a longer time in validation, such as delaying the launch of the product, it can ultimately lead to a more successful product. By investing time in validation, startups can identify and address potential issues before they become major problems and ensure that the product meets the needs of the target market. This can result in better user adoption, increased customer satisfaction and ultimately, higher revenue. However, if you prioritize speed and want to keep the initial investment as low as possible just to validate the concept, this may not be the solution for you. There are other methods available.
-
- Measuring Success: Measuring the success of a product before its launch is a crucial step that all product managers and founders wish they could take. However, in many cases, product teams are unsure of what success would look like and only focus on the product’s functionality. At an early stage, a solid business plan and clearly defined objectives are often missing, making it difficult to define success.Obtaining quantitative metrics before launching a product can be challenging as there is no product to gather data from. Many teams believe that the only way to obtain quantitative results is by launching the product, which can be a crippling thought. I have been a victim of this thinking as well. Therefore, obtaining the necessary results and understanding what results are required can be a challenging task in the world of no-code prototype validation.The traditional solution to this problem is to conduct market research and gather data from potential customers through surveys and feedback on prototypes. This information can help in defining success criteria and setting measurable goals for the product. Additionally, working with industry experts and analyzing competitors’ products can provide valuable insights into what works and what does not in the market. But still there is so much investment to time and resources vs the result which is still not clearly defined with this approach, most of it is still guesswork
What are the solutions?
-
- Building a real landing page: One of the best ways to validate an MVP is to create a landing page that describes the product and its features. This can be done quickly and easily, and it can help to gauge real interest in the product. Not only will you have real potential customers not people vetted from a form to interact with you Idea but you can also gauge their willingness to pay for your product by adding the right call to actions.Having a one landing page to deal with will be easy for teams to adjust copy, marketing materials and call to actions to validate different versions of the messaging that helps convert customers. this can be done quickly as there is only one page to design, update and deploy based on your campaign results.By building a landing page, startups can gather email addresses and other contact information from potential users. This can help to create a list of early adopters who can provide valuable feedback and help to refine the product before it is released. Additionally, startups can use this list to market the product, build buzz, and generate interest.
-
- Targeting real customers:It is important to target real customers when validating an MVP. This means not just finding users who fit the target demographic and who can provide valuable feedback, but people who are willing to buy your product in the real world because it solves theire problem and even better if they are willing to wait a bit to pay for it.Startups can use social media to easily target and reach the right customers and I would recommend choosing which platforms suite your user base the most, if in doubt use Facebook and Google ads to reach almost any demographic possible.By targeting real customers, startups can validate if they are solving the problem for these customers, if the messaging, value proposition and marketing creative will work. This way startups can start having a view of theire conversion funnel and start seeing where they need to optimise to get buying users to their platform and also identify who theire real customers are.
-
- Speed and less waste:Startups need to be agile and move quickly when validating an MVP. This means reducing waste wherever possible and focusing on the most important features of the product. I always say the right period to do this is between 3-4 months if not faster, otherwise you will be going in the red and over engineering the MVP, and risking getting in the scope creep death-loop.instead of the traditional route of investing a lot in design and solution definition upfront, startups can save money by investing it in Idea definition without getting into the technical details of how it works, design and coding of a single landing page and waitlisting journey and the rest of the budget in marketing targeting the first 1000 customers for your waiting list.This way teams can learn early on in the process on how to optimise theire funnel and validate product features and most importantly if people will actually commit to. buying the product.Summary Image
Summary.
I have been working with startups and small teams for several years, and I understand the challenges of validating ideas with limited time and budget. To overcome these challenges, I have found that ditching traditional UX methods and employing different approaches can help validate products at speed, using the landing page method if done correctly.
The landing page method involves starting with the end goal in mind and identifying early adopters who can help shape the product before putting the idea out there. By building a landing page that describes the product and its features, startups can gauge real interest in the product and obtain real potential customers, rather than people who are vetted from a form.
One of the biggest benefits of the landing page method is that it allows startups to gauge their target audience’s willingness to pay for the product by adding the right call to actions. By having a single landing page to deal with, teams can make quick adjustments to copy, marketing materials, and call-to-actions to test different versions of messaging that help convert customers.
Building a landing page is also an affordable way to validate an MVP as startups can easily target and reach the right customers using social media. By targeting real customers, startups can validate if they are solving the problem for these customers, if the messaging, value proposition, and marketing creative will work. This way startups can start having a view of their conversion funnel and start seeing where they need to optimize to get buying users to their platform and also identify who their real customers are.
The landing page method can also help startups save money by investing in idea definition without getting into the technical details of how it works, design, and coding of a single landing page and waitlisting journey. The rest of the budget can be used in marketing, targeting the first 1000 customers for the waiting list. By doing this, teams can learn early on in the process on how to optimize their funnel and validate product features, and most importantly if people will actually commit to buying the product.
The whole idea behind idea validation is not only if people like or will use your product but will they also buy the product. Most teams shy away from this aspect, and I have seen a trend with most landing pages hiding the pricing in another page and not having a pricing table on the landing page. In my opinion, this is not a good practice as knowing early on if people will actually buy your product is the best way to validate any idea, especially if you are a startup that wants to be profitable and be able to raise funding to build the full product.
Once the idea has been validated through the landing page concept, teams can then progress to employ more meaningful design approaches and better-directed product building. By investing time in validation, startups can identify and address potential issues before they become major problems and ensure that the product meets the needs of the target market. This can result in better user adoption, increased customer satisfaction, and ultimately, higher revenue.
In conclusion, the landing page method is an affordable and efficient way to validate an MVP for startups and small teams. By targeting real customers and building a landing page, startups can validate their ideas early on in the process and learn how to optimize their funnel and validate product features. This can help to create a list of early adopters who can provide valuable feedback and help to refine the product before it is released. By investing time in validation, startups can ensure that the product meets the needs of the target market, resulting in better user adoption, increased customer satisfaction, and ultimately, higher revenue.