In his insightful article, Why Behavior Change Apps Don’t Work, Nir Eyal brings up a crucial point about the habits we form (or fail to form) around the products we use.
“Unfortunately, too many well-intentioned products fail because they feel like “haftas,” things people are obligated to do, as opposed to things they “wanna” do. Schell points to neuroscience research showing “there are different channels in the brain for seeking positive consequences and avoiding negative consequences.”
When faced with “haftas,” our brains register them as punishments so we take shortcuts, cheat, skip-out, or in the case of many apps or websites, uninstall them or click away in order to escape the discomfort of feeling controlled.
I think this explains a lot about products in general, and specifically why app categories like todo list apps mostly go unused…they inevitably end up feeling like “haftas”. I distinctly remember that feeling the first time I used a todo list (Remember the Milk) that carried over undone todo items from one day to the next. At first it seems like a thoughtful touch…to automatically bring items from one day to the next. But after a day or two it becomes a burden…your list grows and grows because other tasks inevitably crop up during the day. It quickly became a management situation…I had to manage my todos rather than just keeping light track of them. It turned my todo list from a wanna to a hafta.
Note that any product person would love their product to become a “hafta”. That’s the lock-in you want…that your product is so valuable that it becomes something that people feel like they have to use to be successful. That’s why this is counter-intuitive and important. You want the product to be a “hafta” but feel like a “wanna”…to have your product be essential to their daily use while following the important design principle: keeping people in control.
Nir sums this up nicely:
“When our autonomy is threatened, we feel constrained by our lack of choices and often rebel against doing the new behavior. Psychologists call this “reactance.””
So people don’t resist a new behavior just because it’s hard to do (in fact new behaviors are often easy to do) It may be more about autonomy…by forcing a new behavior on people we suggest to them that they have less control over the situation than they had previously, creating a “hafta” situation where there was none previously.
Read the whole thing: Why Behavior Change Apps Don’t Work
Jack London, the author of The Call of the Wild, was talking about writing when he said “You can’t wait for inspiration. You have to go after it with a club.”
The product design equivalent is:
You can’t wait for feedback. You have to go after it with a club.
If you’re waiting for feedback, you’re only going to get 5% of it…as only a tiny proportion of people reach out unsolicited. It’s the hard conversations you need to have…like with your friends who don’t want to tell you the truth, that you need to hear.
Example: recently I was talking with a friend about how they use What to Wear and it occurred to me that her use had actually fallen off and so I asked why. Her response was interesting…something I could immediately fix (and subsequently did fix). I asked why she didn’t tell me and she said “I didn’t want to make you mad”.
Wow…I was floored. I couldn’t believe my friend had suppressed the most important feedback I needed to hear just so she wouldn’t hurt my feelings. I told her that I was actually more upset she didn’t tell me and that I want more than anything real, honest feedback about what’s working and what isn’t working. I can fix anything that’s wrong with the product…but I need to know about it! So that was an extremely important lesson for me to learn…I’ve got to go after feedback with a club.
An interesting article by Vinicius Vacanti, founder/CEO of Yipit: The Secrets Behind Many Successful Startups. In 2010 Yipit knew a secret about what was happening in the daily deals marketplace (that daily deals were exploding) and they were able to take advantage of it by creating a daily deals aggregator.
What struck me about the post, however, was that the other “secrets” weren’t really secrets at all. They were simply observations about customer behavior that signaled what people were interested in. The observation that people like sharing photos was the turning point for Burbn (now Instagram). The observation that people liked seeing what they were up to years ago was a turning point for Timehop. In the case of BlueApron, the team found out that there was already a solution people were using successfully:
“They started thinking about the food space and an interesting product idea that would deliver to people three great recipes and all the ingredients needed to cook the meals. Upon doing research, the secret they learned is that there was a company in Sweden that had been doing something similar since 2007 and had been extremely successful. That certainly gave them and investors confidence to pursue the idea here in the US which they called BlueApron.”
These observations (about both product and market) are what anybody doing any amount of product design should be able to find out. And pretty easily. I think the lesson here is that as a product designer you need to be observing and talking to your users enough to notice these things…and familiar enough with the market to know what’s going on there. Sure it may be a secret because other people don’t know…but from the standpoint of product research anybody in those spaces should be able to find them out with plain ol’ research.
We need to demystify user research. It’s not black magic…it’s really just talking to people.
Found this great quote by Steve Jobs:
“Look at the design of a lot of consumer products — they’re really complicated surfaces. We tried to make something much more holistic and simple. When you first start off trying to solve a problem, the first solutions you come up with are very complex, and most people stop there. But if you keep going, and live with the problem and peel more layers of the onion off, you can often times arrive at some very elegant and simple solutions. Most people just don’t put in the time or energy to get there. We believe that customers are smart, and want objects which are well thought through.”
I’ve also heard this idea described as “living with the problem”. The key to it is that it takes time and sustained focus on a problem to really understand it…to see it from different angles and to grok it fully. For me this becomes easier when you prototype and test often…when you watch people use your product over and over again enough so that you see the usage patterns that aren’t obvious. This can be done most readily by talking with and observing your users use your product every single day…but of course that’s easier said than done.
I think we need a word for this…this sustained exposure to a problem when you live with it long enough that you get through the obvious assumptions…the first pass solutions that most people would come up with. You then get to the more subtle solutions, the elegant ones that aren’t visible at first.
In order to align a company around delivering great experiences, Peter Merholz says, “there are (at least) six components that need to be aligned throughout the organization”:
They are: value, vision, goals, incentives, processes and capabilities. My experience agrees with this…you need both vision at the top end and incentives at the bottom end to set the right goals and drive the right processes (and hire for the right capabilities).
A great little list by Cindy Alvarez: » 10 Things I’ve Learned About Customer Development (2014).
The overriding lesson in this list (and in customer research in general) is that you can’t simply trust what people say during an interview…because people being interviewed are biased to please you (or not look stupid). Instead, you must verify with previous behavior…make sure that people are indeed already doing what they say they would do. If someone says they would spend money for your product, for example, you should verify that they are indeed spending money on a competing solution. If they are, it doesn’t mean that they would buy your product, but it does mean that they’re the type of person you should be talking to. If they aren’t then you can basically throw out their answer because they aren’t in your target audience.
In general, future behavior is predicted by past behavior…so tread carefully. People say all sorts of pleasing things in interviews and it’s incredibly easy to take their initial, positive answer as the truth. In most cases digging a little deeper will be much more insightful.
When building something is expensive, like a physical object, prototyping early and often becomes the obvious way to improve the product cheaply. If you’re designing a new chair, for example, it makes sense to prototype, test, and prototype again before sending the final design off to the manufacturer. The workflow of physical products is naturally separated into design and manufacturing. “Sending it off to manufacturing” means that the design is done and can’t be changed. Same with “sending it off to the printer”.
Creating software is entirely different. We can change the product at any time, redeploy, and our users will be using the new software in a very short amount of time. I think this ease-of-change has had many effects…one very important one being that we risk losing the design discipline of physical and printed goods. When sending something off to the printer is a final action it forces the designer to test, verify, and test again before taking the leap. The discipline and attention to detail is necessarily greater because you know you can’t change anything.
The ability to change anything at any time is an amazing luxury. We are spoiled rotten as software creators that we can change the software our customers use within minutes if necessary. But I fear that this ability has eroded an acute attention to detail and a discipline of refinement that exists in other production environments. If we can change things at any time then let’s just launch this as-is and improve it later. It is remarkable how easy it is to justify any release with these simple words: “we’ll improve it later”.
There is no later for your customers. The only thing that matters is what they’re using right now. They don’t give a shit about your roadmap, your brilliant feature pipeline, or your vision of a better future. They’re trying to get work done right now and they only know what you’ve already delivered. So build a discipline around your launches, knowing that your temporary, let’s get this out quickly and iterate later release is the current reality for your customers. Build up your attention to detail and force yourself to treat every launch like it is your final launch. Imagine that you’ll never be able to deploy something after this…have you done your best work?
As software becomes more embedded in our everyday lives customer research becomes more important…we need to really understand the problem we’re solving before we can build a great solution for it. Since design and development processes are getting faster every day it makes sense that research needs to get faster too…but research tends to conjure up images of the opposite: long hours slogging through lots of data.
Michael Margolis of Google Ventures is the fastest/most efficient researcher I’ve ever worked with. We’ve worked with him several times at HubSpot and it’s amazing how quickly he can get the right information to take the next step in the design process. He’s put together a short but sweet list of ways to speed up your research. These points are deceptively simple and valuable.
“One of the values of things I learned absolutely directly from Steve was the whole issue of focus. What are we focusing on: focus on product. I wish I could do a better job in communicating this truth here, which is when you really are focused on the product, that’s not a platitude. When that truly is your reason for coming into the studio, is just to try to make the very best product you can, when that is exclusive of everything else, it’s remarkable how insignificant or unimportant a lot of other stuff becomes.”