| I find it strange that these are presented in tension, when they’re complementary. You can create situations where you have a lot of data but can’t reach conclusions, because you lack a narrative and explanatory model which “makes sense” of that data; inversely, you can convincingly argue complete nonsense that’s obviously contrary to facts. Deep understanding requires a model/narrative which fits the collection of data we have, and which allows us to reason about and predict the outcome of new situations. As Jeff Bezos put it: > Good inventors and designers deeply understand their customer. They spend tremendous energy developing that intuition. They study and understand many anecdotes rather than only the averages you’ll find on surveys. They live with the design. > I’m not against beta testing or surveys. But you, the product or service owner, must understand the customer, have a vision, and love the offering. Then, beta testing and research can help you find your blind spots. A remarkable customer experience starts with heart, intuition, curiosity, play, guts, taste. You won’t find any of it in a survey. https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/company-news/2016-letter-to... |
My main idea though is that it is very hard to foresee what the customer will want after you deliver the product. Not what the customers want now, because sometimes they don't understand it until they experience it, and that makes me think that there is a LOT of luck at play here and a good deal of continency in prototype product design. Experience alone could be overrated. Think Kodak, I don't think they didn't have experience in product design, that they didn't understand their customers. I think they only didn't risk their luck and didn't think about what their customers would want in the future. And that is always a gamble.
- Things are more nuanced and complex than I am putting it here, but bottom line is that I am trying to tap into survivors bias.