Hi all,
I'm aware that this post might make a few people angry, but: I think you should skip classical user research. Hear me out:
I've been helping companies invent new products for about 8 years now. This has resulted in numerous product launches, multiple patents, and lots of (in)validated concepts.
I'm writing this post after reflecting on some of the learnings I've had throughout my career with the hope to provide some help to those looking to land more sales.
Typically, when I've gone about inventing a new product for a company, I've start by going out and talking to users. The process is usually quite linear. Recruit X number of participants from demographic Y, have a 30-45 min call with them, analyze audio/video recording, then synthesize. I've been trained in ethnographic research so a lot of the synthesis is really trying to read between the lines to understand the real "latent" needs of customers.
Latent needs are needs that a customer doesn't explicitly state. To unearth a latent need, you inherently need to use your gut and take a mini leap of faith. If someone is saying they "want a faster horse", you can use your gut to infer that the true underlying need is "to get to where I'm going faster". You might be wrong, but hey, it's a hypothesis.
This is the typical user research process that big companies and agencies use.
But startups aren't big companies. Neither are indie hackers. You don't have the budget to go out to talk to 100 users and give them gift cards, or incentivize them with cash. You need to start selling and you need data now.
Well, it turns out the selling process is VERY similar to the user research process. In a user interview, we might have a discussion guide which is designed to ask key questions that lead to generative insights. In a sales call, we're effectively doing the same, but there is no intent to incentivize the participant (quite the opposite actually). However, the need to follow your gut and infer latent needs is still critical.
As a result, I say: Fellow Indie Hackers, skip the user research and go straight to the sales call! You're still getting out the room to talk to customers, you're still asking generative questions, and you're still learning a lot! The only difference is:
-You're not incentivizing people to talk to you
-You're pre-validating the distribution channel because if you can't even find anyone to speak to you, you likely won't find those people later
-You get to make mistakes and "get some reps in" before actual high-ticket sales calls
-You're testing the latent need hypothesis with the actual market with limited spend
I've found that a lot of founders take the "big company" / agency approach to user research. I think that definitely has its place, and is very useful. However, these companies have resource that Indie Hackers simply don't. I say skip the formalities and get out the room!
It can get a little overwhelming analyzing all those sales calls. After 3 or 4, our memory starts to get a bit fuzzy and I've often found myself wondering "what did that customer last week say about XYZ feature?" or "how many people actually think Z?". It's also easy to start to build confirmation bias after just a few interviews. You start to think you're seeing a trend, but it's just your brain playing tricks on you and getting you to hear what you want to hear.
There's plenty of manual methods you can use to analyze the sales calls, however, it takes a LOT of time to sift through all the conversations and it's hard to stay unbiased. Our team has built a tool called InsightLab (www.insightlab.ca) that can help you analyze not just user interviews, but also sales calls. Simply upload your audio/video recordings, it'll auto-transcribe the files, and you can unlock insights that can help you drive sales. We've set it at a price point that we think is accessible to the IndieHacker community and we'd love to help you build products that people love.
Much love.
I'm aware that this post might make a few people angry, but: I think you should skip classical user research. Hear me out:
I've been helping companies invent new products for about 8 years now. This has resulted in numerous product launches, multiple patents, and lots of (in)validated concepts.
I'm writing this post after reflecting on some of the learnings I've had throughout my career with the hope to provide some help to those looking to land more sales.
Typically, when I've gone about inventing a new product for a company, I've start by going out and talking to users. The process is usually quite linear. Recruit X number of participants from demographic Y, have a 30-45 min call with them, analyze audio/video recording, then synthesize. I've been trained in ethnographic research so a lot of the synthesis is really trying to read between the lines to understand the real "latent" needs of customers.
Latent needs are needs that a customer doesn't explicitly state. To unearth a latent need, you inherently need to use your gut and take a mini leap of faith. If someone is saying they "want a faster horse", you can use your gut to infer that the true underlying need is "to get to where I'm going faster". You might be wrong, but hey, it's a hypothesis.
This is the typical user research process that big companies and agencies use.
But startups aren't big companies. Neither are indie hackers. You don't have the budget to go out to talk to 100 users and give them gift cards, or incentivize them with cash. You need to start selling and you need data now.
Well, it turns out the selling process is VERY similar to the user research process. In a user interview, we might have a discussion guide which is designed to ask key questions that lead to generative insights. In a sales call, we're effectively doing the same, but there is no intent to incentivize the participant (quite the opposite actually). However, the need to follow your gut and infer latent needs is still critical.
As a result, I say: Fellow Indie Hackers, skip the user research and go straight to the sales call! You're still getting out the room to talk to customers, you're still asking generative questions, and you're still learning a lot! The only difference is:
-You're not incentivizing people to talk to you
-You're pre-validating the distribution channel because if you can't even find anyone to speak to you, you likely won't find those people later
-You get to make mistakes and "get some reps in" before actual high-ticket sales calls
-You're testing the latent need hypothesis with the actual market with limited spend
I've found that a lot of founders take the "big company" / agency approach to user research. I think that definitely has its place, and is very useful. However, these companies have resource that Indie Hackers simply don't. I say skip the formalities and get out the room!
It can get a little overwhelming analyzing all those sales calls. After 3 or 4, our memory starts to get a bit fuzzy and I've often found myself wondering "what did that customer last week say about XYZ feature?" or "how many people actually think Z?". It's also easy to start to build confirmation bias after just a few interviews. You start to think you're seeing a trend, but it's just your brain playing tricks on you and getting you to hear what you want to hear.
There's plenty of manual methods you can use to analyze the sales calls, however, it takes a LOT of time to sift through all the conversations and it's hard to stay unbiased. Our team has built a tool called InsightLab (www.insightlab.ca) that can help you analyze not just user interviews, but also sales calls. Simply upload your audio/video recordings, it'll auto-transcribe the files, and you can unlock insights that can help you drive sales. We've set it at a price point that we think is accessible to the IndieHacker community and we'd love to help you build products that people love.
Much love.