When I started Siam Computing at the age of 22, using technology as an enabler for solving problems for businesses was my guiding anchor. As an entrepreneur, I knew we had to tread cautiously while guiding aspiring Founders on their problem-to-product journey.
I understood that even minor strategic errors in the initial stages could have irrevocable consequences on product outcomes and prevent it from reaching its full potential to solve the user’s problem. At Siam Computing, nothing or nobody comes before the user.
This is ingrained in the very essence of our organization, and it is one of our guiding principles. Having said that, I have observed that the user-first or problem-first mentality is something that’s not really followed in all product companies, and this leads to product failure.
Over the years, I have discovered common mistakes that founders and product teams make that result in product failure. Here are a few.
1. FOCUSSING ON OUTPUT vs OUTCOME
More often than not, engineering teams focus only on churning out features (output) without solving an actual problem for the user (outcome). By focusing only on building outputs, they hope to arrive at the best Solution eventually. This approach would ultimately fail as it does not add any value to the users.
The better way to address user needs is to fall in love with the problem and understand “why” or “how” the problem arises and affects the user before you start looking for a solution. To help you better understand the output vs outcome approach, let me share my experience from one of our projects.
Siam Computing was tasked to build an e-learning solution for children studying in government schools in rural Tamil Nadu. The schools faced low student engagement and high dropouts. The easier choice would have been to replicate features in other learning management solutions (LMS) and launch the product. Had we done this, we would have delivered on the output but failed at the outcome – operation success, patient dead.
A typical e-learning solution would not work for these users because the problems of rural schools with students in low-income families are different from students in urban schools. For most students in rural government schools, our LMS solution would be their first point of interaction with technology. Also, rural regions face frequent power cuts and internet connectivity issues.
So, we made the e-learning app a simple-to-use solution that does not come in the way of learning for someone interacting with technology for the first time. Also, we built it to operate even on low-cost devices such as a $100 Raspberry Pi. Since we took the time to get to the root of the problems and needs of our target users, we were able to design an LMS solution that addressed their requirements to deliver outcomes.
As a result of focusing on outcomes vs output, our LMS solution managed to get an increase of 85% in week-on-week engagement, up by 40%. We also saw a 62% improvement in learning outcomes, stronger community participation and a significant drop in school abandonment rates.
2. IVORY TOWER SOLUTIONS
I believe curiosity kills the cat and illogical product assumptions. Building features without knowledge of who will use the product leads to a dead end without any scope for course correction.
We’ve seen several cases of founders ending up with digital products that cannot sustain their businesses in the face of fierce market competition. This is mostly because of their inability to ship products that take each user’s unique journey into account and deliver value by solving those problems.
In most cases, products are built for tech-savvy people rather than users with limited exposure to digital technology, owing to their age or day-to-day requirements. In such a scenario, the aim to appeal to tech savviness converts to irrelevance for target audiences, only adding to their disarray.
3. TWISTS AND TURNS
Developing a product is one thing, but making it click with the users is another. Product teams often fail to define their product vision. In the absence of this vision, they fail to understand who their users are and their particular needs and miss out on narrowing what’s best for them. There is also a misalignment between business goals and user goals. This lack of overall direction leads them to chase shiny new goals without a clear direction.
Take Twitter, for example. With their recent twists and turns, Twitter gives no indication of heading towards a particular direction in users’ interest. Sure, new adjustments have to be made to the product, but only to make it better for the users, not otherwise.
4. ABSENCE OF A CLEAR PRODUCT STRATEGY
Having an idea is great, but where most founders miss the mark in transforming it into a viable business is laser-sharp execution. This is where an efficient product strategy comes into the picture. It helps you narrow down achievable goals vis-a-vis your grand vision for the business.
From my experience, I’ve seen most founders start on an audacious note but miss the important step of breaking it down to achievable goals after acknowledging their constraints and analyzing the capacity of available resources. Without this plan, the entire product development process goes haphazard, and founders miss out on magnified focus to act with precision.
Talking about priorities, the business idea is wrongly perceived as the most important thing. What really matters is the on-point execution of the idea for it to come to life.
5. INABILITY TO UNLEARN AND RELEARN
What worked for you at one stage of your product journey might not work at a later stage. The users’ needs evolve with time, and this change needs to be mapped in your roadmap to ensure relevance. Inability to go back to their drawing boards and delve deeper into what users need leads even the most successful companies towards ultimate failure.
This is mostly because they fail to pivot according to the expanding base of users and their unique needs. Take Facebook and MySpace, for example. As the first social media platform for many, MySpace successfully figured out its value prop and positioning. Back in 2003, it had carved a space of its own by offering multiple emotional touchpoints to the youth – music, community, personal identity and more.
Facebook users, however, had no access to customized or relevant information on the mega platform, and this search for relevance is ongoing even today as users sift through the pile of everything it has to offer.
6. TIMING
This is the most important parameter of user readiness for innovation brought about by any business. Several products in history have joined the list of easily forgotten ones because of their imperfect timing.
Take Apple’s 1992 Newton MessagePad, for example. It came at a time when the world was yet to think about pocket-sized computers within its grip and far from associating them with the convenience that is a given even with the most basic products today.
On the other hand, products like YouTube, Uber, and Swiggy had the combination of early identification of inefficiencies, laser-sharp execution to fill in those gaps and perfect timing when the world was tilting towards digital transformation, and users were accepting tech penetration into their lives in the realm of convenience.
7. OVERENGINEERING FOR UNKNOWN SCENARIOS
Building features that lead nowhere delays shipping and eventually kill the product. What I’ve seen most founders do is prioritize the number of features they build rather than ensure the viability of each feature for their users.
This wrong sense of priorities also keeps them from learning from the previous feature built. Building features just for the sake of it distances you from the core problem you should be solving for your user, and without a core sense of purpose, products are destined to fail.
You’d have heard about Nasa spending millions to make a pen that works in space vs Russians using a pencil. With the emergence of AI, most businesses today have taken it upon themselves to incorporate AI into their functioning without even realizing what they expect it to do and what the outcome of such drastic innovations could look like.
Still, at a nascent stage, the usage of AI, like any other technological advancement, has to be monitored to ensure informed usage.
How Should You Define Success?
In order to know we are successful, we need to have clear, measurable goals. Too many teams end up chasing poor goals (chasing DAUs instead of user success) and over-index on solving for them without ever being clear on how we are defining and measuring success.
All said and done, we are on the brink of the hyper-personalisation era where every user gets the version of the product most relevant to them. My product utopia is where I expect algorithms to develop from common personas they are built on to specific ones for each user.
In today’s quest for relevance, startups have the biggest opportunity to drive their impacts through user focussed solutions and, in doing so, carve a distinct identity of their own. It is here that Siam Computing becomes your guide in this revolutionary journey to take on the world by storm.
The post Seven Mistakes Product Teams Make appeared first on Siamcomputing.
This post first appeared on Software Product Development Company, please read the originial post: here
