quirky future taskforce: product evaluation

32
TASK FORCE: PRODUCT EVALUATION for the future of social product development

Upload: quirky

Post on 25-Dec-2014

3.227 views

Category:

Business


0 download

DESCRIPTION

project goals/kickoff for product evaluation taskforce @quirkyinc

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

TASK FORCE:

PRODUCT EVALUATION

for the future of social product development

Page 2: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

• Top community voters / vocal community members:

Matt Fleming, Clinton Fleenor, Judi Sigler, Michelle Brewster, Stacy Prince, Steven Kramer & Charles Bailey

• John Lott – COO / CFO

• Brian Kerr – UX

• Jessica Marati – Community

• Mitch Lowe- Strategy

• Gaz Brown – Product Design

• Nancy Chen & Anthony Del Plato – Data Analysis

• Nathan Smith & Mike Lacy – Technology

WHO

Page 3: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

WHAT A SUCCESSFUL PRODUCT EVALUATION PROCESS LOOKS LIKE:

Page 4: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

1. Surfaces the ‘best ideas’ every week.

WHAT A SUCCESSFUL PRODUCT EVALUATION PROCESS DOES:

Page 5: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

2. Curation is a fun and engaging experience for voters and community members.

WHAT A SUCCESSFUL PRODUCT EVALUATION PROCESS DOES:

Page 6: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

3. Data collected is useful in product design, research, and marketing process.

WHAT A SUCCESSFUL PRODUCT EVALUATION PROCESS DOES:

Page 7: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

4. Inventors who do not win walk away educated, with a ton of insight about where they fell short.

WHAT A SUCCESSFUL PRODUCT EVALUATION PROCESS DOES:

Page 8: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

5. Requires a sustainable amount of Quirky staff interaction.

WHAT A SUCCESSFUL PRODUCT EVALUATION PROCESS DOES:

Page 9: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

6. Rewards all who are involved without encouraging gaming.

WHAT A SUCCESSFUL PRODUCT EVALUATION PROCESS DOES:

Page 10: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

7. Ends in winning ideas that both the community and Quirky are excited about.

WHAT A SUCCESSFUL PRODUCT EVALUATION PROCESS DOES:

Page 11: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

8. Winning ideas enter the design process with a ton of research, knowledge, and demand behind them.

WHAT A SUCCESSFUL PRODUCT EVALUATION PROCESS DOES:

Page 12: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

WHAT ARE THE ‘BEST IDEAS’?

Page 13: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

1. The best ideas solve big problems (relating to usability, comfort, and convenience) in a new way.

WHAT ARE THE BEST IDEAS

Page 14: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

2. The best ideas represent the biggest commercial opportunity for our community & brand.

WHAT ARE THE BEST IDEAS

Page 15: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

3. The best ideas are manufacturable.

WHAT ARE THE BEST IDEAS

Page 16: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

4. The best ideas don’t go out of fashion / relevance quickly – they are around for years (ideally 3+ year lifespan).

WHAT ARE THE BEST IDEAS

Page 17: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

5. The best ideas are protectable.

WHAT ARE THE BEST IDEAS

Page 18: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

6. The best ideas are often the ones people ignore or reject.

WHAT ARE THE BEST IDEAS

Page 19: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

KNOWNISSUES:

Page 20: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

1. Number of ideas grows each week, making the curation process more fatiguing for community members.

KNOWN ISSUES

Page 21: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

2. We are, by design, saying ‘get lost’ to all but two of hundreds of inventors every week – how do we turn ‘get lost’ into something constructive and helpful, and how do we inspire losing inventors to stick around so they can learn, grow, and become successful inventors?

KNOWN ISSUES

Page 22: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

3. Evaluating an ‘idea’ this early in the process is risky, because no one (not even the inventor) fully understands ‘it’ – because ‘it’ doesn’t exist yet.

“Don’t worry about people stealing your ideas. If they are any good,

you’ll have to ram them down people’s throats”. - Howard Aiken

KNOWN ISSUES

Page 23: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

4. Due to relatively low number (about 2000) active voters and high weight of votes in defining the top ideas in a given week, the weight of each inventor’s social graph is higher then the actual ‘quality’ of an idea.

KNOWN ISSUES

Page 24: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

5. People are voting for what theybelieve Quirky will like, versus what they actually like and will buy.

KNOWN ISSUES

Page 25: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

6. Seasonality and changes in culture make things that were ‘no’s’ a short time ago, big ‘yes’s’ shortly thereafter... do we lose that opportunity, and how do we make a mineable database of ideas?

KNOWN ISSUES

Page 26: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

QUESTIONS/THOUGHT STARTERS:

Page 27: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

1. How do we create a mineable database of ideas that can somehow come back into relevance as times change / relevance changes / lines need expansion, etc?

KNOWN ISSUES

Page 28: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

2. How do we avoid a culture (both staff and community) that gravitates toward easy wins, but rather encourage a culture that is drawn toward risk?

KNOWN ISSUES

Page 29: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

3. Is a weekly ‘class’ of ideas the best way to approach evaluation?

other thoughts have included:

• rolling list in each category (ideas must hit a certain threshold

in order to get pushed into staff eval)

• volume-per-category-driven (collect 50 ideas in each category, then choose one)

• sudden death / elimination round (slowly kill off ideas

throughout the curation process that way we are all focusing

on going deeper into ideas we like)

KNOWN ISSUES

Page 30: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

4. How can the community do more research earlier in the process to make staff evaluation easier?

KNOWN ISSUES

Page 31: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

THE TASKFORCEPROCESS

Page 32: Quirky Future Taskforce:  Product Evaluation

THE TASK FORCE PROCESS

March 1st- Task Force planning begins

March 4th- Research survey sent to active voters (effort to better understand current climate)

March 10th- Plan complete, Task Force called to arms. Planning deck sent. Basecamp invites sent to all members. Brainstorm-style discussion begins within Basecamp.

March 15th- Kick-off / brainstorm conference call (full Task Force participation, time TBA).

Quirky-led conversation, resulting in three to five clear directions we can go. Jess will take thorough notes and post on Basecamp.

A ‘writeboard’ will be started for each of the directions – ‘bullet point / process style’ – and all Task Force members will work to refine the process, working in a ‘wiki’ environment.

March 24th- A ‘lead’ for each direction is chosen. Lead begins to prepare presentation of how the process could work.

March 28th- Conference call check-in (full Task Force participation, time TBA).

Each lead will discuss progress / challenges that still exist within their concept – things they’re worried about, things they’re excited about.

April 7th- Full afternoon @ QHQ. Each ‘lead’ will present their concept to the entire task force, Ben will join. Final direction will be chosen.

April 8th- UX/UI team briefed on vision / objectives

April 14th- UX / UI team will deliver preliminary wireframes of the new process / post to Basecamp. Conference Call (full Task Force participation, time TBA)

April 21st- UX/UI refinements

April 27th- Town Meeting presentation of new plan

May- Technology / user testing

June- Implementation of new product evaluation process