Boxes and Arrows wont’ let me post (I get stuck in a duplicate post error message loop) Here’s the article:http://boxesandarrows.com/we-dont-research-we-build. Really good to read and I would like to contribute to the conversation, so my response is below 🙂
I’ve written a few blogs on this topic also, so won’t reiterate those same ideas here:
http://hilarycinis.wordpress.com/2013/10/10/171/
http://hilarycinis.wordpress.com/2013/10/30/ux-activities-in-australian-startups-tech23/
I have many strong feelings on this topic, and the startups themselves are only a part of the machine.
VC’s aren’t asking for ux evidence (in Australia, anyway) and so are making assumptions it’s included in the business and marketing plans.
The startups are often very confused about how to talk to customers and don’t understand they will have a range of needs from multiple user types. Blank and Ries are great reads but I also feel they have repackaged user experience work where it could sound like we are nagging about stuff the start ups feel they are already doing. I often go to great lengths to unpack the segments in the BCM where UX fits, and how these activities are extensive in order to get a clear picture.
I have quite strong feelings about marketing strategies having too large an influence in this conversation. Marketing comes later when the business knows it’s product or service and how it fits in with people’s lives. It’s totally arse-about.
I also suggest that business school educators start to look at user/customer experience seriously as part of the curriculum. I find it very difficult to get traction in conversations with business mentors about how early ux activities can assist in selecting a direction with more confidence, rather than setting up a business around a feature or a product and hoping for the best. The jargon used obscures the pain that startups can experience – pivoting and the culture of failure are nice terms for very difficult periods of time.
I see many similarities between StartUps VC activities and the entertainment industry funding machine.
We know that ux isn’t a magic wand to ensure success but when added to domain expertise and customer/user feedback it can add structure and assist with decision making when there are too many unknowns.
Maybe incubators need a ux on staff full time to assist across the teams. I work with Incubate doing this in Sydney, although not full time but I do run a workshop and follow up each round they do and I have found it really educational and I get some good feedback. I guess the proof is in the success of each business.
Thanks for this, Hillary, and for the links to your previous blogs, too. What do you think of middle-of-the-road solutions for resistant start-ups? (i.e. outsourced, ala carte solutions like userlytics.com, a company I do some work for?) That sort of approach can speed up the testing process and results for skeptical CEOs and might(?) convince them to take on in-house UX work later, or even just continue to prioritize user feedback through this sort of venue. I’d love to hear your thoughts on this kind of middle ground solution. Thanks.
Hi Jen, thanks 🙂
I’m a supporter of just doing anything that gets the job done – and if theres a technique or an approach that assists in the mindfulness of end users then that is better than none at all.
I’d not heard of userlytics (thanks for the tip!) but at a glance it looks like a great way to capture tests in a way that is easy and painless. Are you finding success with it? Can you fill me/us in?!
Maybe its not popular but I whole heartedly advocate testing prototypes early with end user groups *especially* if there is no interest in doing any research up front. At least that way there is a point of reference for all discussions and some benchmarking can be done.
I expect this next comment with incur wrath and rotten eggs tossed at me when next in public – I usually recommend startups hire a full time FED with good basic design and interaction skills rather than a research led UXer but on also that they outsource UX work periodically.
In my work at NICTA I’ve seen a pattern of high UX involvement at the start (2 – 6 months part time) which tails off over the next 6 months but punctuated every couple of months with another short burst. And always always collaboratively with the team and a customer/client.
Back to build/research first… if the build is going ahead in the absence of research we just have to work with it. MVP definitions (everyone agreeing on when its an MVP) can help with the first offering to test and I believe testing with prototypes as close to a real thing is really important with the understanding that the build is disposable. UX obviously helps frame the testing and provide a container to asses the feedback gathered.
What have you seen or experienced about “middle of the road”? I’d love to hear more about your (and anyone else reading) thoughts.
oh I meant to add – if you ever get to see Erika Hall present, do. She has a some really easy approaches to research that can help take the fear start ups can feel out of customer conversations. iPass it onto any startup you meet http://muledesign.com/blog/