[borgopants]

I'm interested in what you think distinguishes it from marketing and better UX.

From what I can tell, it seems to be a term predominantly used by startups who want someone both technical and interested in the marketing side of things, likely since they don't have the budget to hire more than one person.

I think HN seems to have a negative view of the term, most likely because it seems like such an empty buzzword. And the use of "hacker" seems to play to a childish mentality of software engineering. (EDIT: I'm thinking in terms of use like "rockstar ninja hackers" job postings)

[mattangriffel]

I think growth hacking is something like the activity of setting the right analytics infrastructure in place, identifying bottlenecks in the customer lifecycle and then coming up with and testing minimum viable growth engines.

Marketing is quite narrowly defined as "the process of communicating the value of a product or service to customers."

What differentiates UX from programming and design? It's all about the objective.

[borgopants]

So you would place growth hacking in the same league as SEO?

[conradwa]

SEO won't directly lead to viral growth, but it is integrated into a product and can be a significant source of early and new users.

[conradwa]

Borgo, I’d agree with part of that. Someone who isn’t technical within an early-stage technology company is simply likely to slow down progress.

Not sure folks here would agree with “hacker” being a childish term, given it’s actually the names of the site..

[borgopants]

Haha, I was equating it more to job postings that look for "rockstar ninja solo hackers". Childish was the wrong choice of word, and I failed to explain myself clearer. :)