What 'Milkshakes' and 'Jobs-To-Be-Done' can teach UX (UX New Zealand 2013)
•
23 gefällt mir•4,133 views
This document discusses a legal case involving Christian Lafrance, Justin Sinclair, and Raymond van der Zalm against Responsive Up to date. It compares the key features of Responsive Up to date to Search Easy to use, noting that Responsive Up to date is fast, has headlines, and is adapted from Strategyn.com, while Search Easy to use is responsive, up to date, easy to use, and fast. It also mentions a timeline interview from The ReWired Group and the use of a Value Proposition Canvas from Alex Osterwalder to analyze the situation.
Empfohlen
Weitere ähnliche Inhalte
Was ist angesagt?
Was ist angesagt? (9)
Andere mochten auch
Andere mochten auch (20)
Mehr von Christian Lafrance
Mehr von Christian Lafrance (6)
Kürzlich hochgeladen
Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)
What 'Milkshakes' and 'Jobs-To-Be-Done' can teach UX (UX New Zealand 2013)
- 1. Christian Lafrance Justin Sinclair Raymond van der Zalm
- 14. • •
- 15. vs
- 18. Responsive Up to date Search Easy to use Fast Headlines
- 40. • – • –
- 58. Timeline interview - The ReWired Group
- 61. • • • • • • •
- 62. • – • – –
- 66. Value Proposition Canvas – Alex Osterwalder
- 67. • • •
Hinweis der Redaktion
- Talk about JTBD & Digital Product Development:Elevate UX practice to strategic level
- Really sharp focus Defining what digital products we build in ABC Radio and NewsWe’re finding this
- Marketing Jargon
- First thing in the morningBoring commuteOne handCleanFull until lunch
- Excited. Product Managers and Marketers are doing our stuff.Good buy in at the pointy end.Curious:is it the same but selling it better?Or is there something we can learn
- We have found additional value
- So today, we're not necessarily asking you to add some new buzzwords to your lingo, or add "JTBD" to you linkedinprofile.
- So today, we're not necessarily asking you to add some new buzzwords to your lingo, or add "JTBD" to you linkedin profile. What we're really hoping you'll do after this presentation is:To try some of the techniques we talk about and see how they fit into your practiceTo go out and find more about this
- Go… find out moreTry some of these in your regular practiceHelp us solve the problems
- My experience of cust requirements that I’ve had to deal with have been either:Too system oriented – we all know this doesn’t helpToo fluffy & vague – causing endless debate and argumentToo specific – features the customer ‘asked’ – limiting the chance to really reframe and innovateTo me:Not usefulTended to ignore
- Why don’t these work?Customers don’t value solutionsThey value getting something done – a goal, to solve a problem, avoid a problemThey look for solutions to help them with thisThis is when a product or solution is then HIREDIt makes sense to me – and probably a much much better way to frame customer requirement than the supposedly beneficial: needs, benefits and features that we used to get- As Justin illustrated in the milkshake story it is capturing these goals makes sense
- In our example of the guy waiting for the train:- He doesn’t want a news app or news mobile website – as much as mgt team thinks we doHe wants to:Be entertained while waiting for public transportHave something to talk about with my matesHave ice breakers with clientsWe should capture these as the customer requirements to be inputs into our strategic customer centered product definition processThese things I am alluding are what are called ‘Jobs’ in the JTBD frame work
- In our example of the guy waiting for the train:- He doesn’t want a news app or news mobile website – as much as mgt team thinks we doHe wants to:Be entertained while waiting for public transportHave something to talk about with my matesHave ice breakers with clientsWe should capture these as the customer requirements to be inputs into our strategic customer centered product definition processThese things I am alluding are what are called ‘Jobs’ in the JTBD frame work
- Sounds simple right! Well the answer is that is is ‘deceptively simple’ and the devil is, as always, in the detail.Let me share with you some of our experiences or trying to capture customer requirements as Jobs.Here is an example of something we captured in some contextual inquires, similar to guys like this. For someone like this we got a comment that they used the product or service ‘To make my commute go faster’.This sounds like it could be a good goal, but we soon discovered that there is a formula to a good quality job, and there is good reason for that.So we had a go at rewriting this as a proper ‘Job’ – and that is where our struggles began.
- So when you read the literature about JTBD they talk about key components needing to exist for it to be valuable.Here was our first attempt at rewriting this example as a proper Job statement structure. It needed to include:action verb – to indicate the value that the customer is looking forAn object of the action – as you always take action on something – that something could be yourself in the case of media but it could be something else like ‘drilling a hole in a table’.Contextual detail – which is about defining constraints – sets boundaries to your product definitionBut then we started to get confused because we discovered there were lots of ways to write ‘valid’ jobs…For example
- Here is one with a little more detail and context
- Here is one that is much much more detailed
- Here is another that is in the other direction – much much higher levelSo which one is the right one. What should we be using? Which one is most valuable?
- Here is another that is in the other direction – much much higher levelSo which one is the right one. What should we be using? Which one is most valuable?
- To find out we did a lot more research to find out what to do.Bob Moesta came to the rescue.What he is trying to get at is that we want to bring it up to a level where we start to see the real set of alternative solutions that the customer is considering in that very moment.He said that the way you know at which level your job should be is when:your job implies you are just moving outside of the category you currently see yourself in…. Just.Where you start to feel you learn something from adjacent categoriesWhere your competitors are no longer who you thought they wereCool. This is interesting. So lets look at the examples we were looking at before in this light…
- Our news app is probably still competing with other news apps and news mobile sitesAnd it is self-referencing – could almost be deems as system oriented
- Way too high levelThe competitive set is so wide you are almost solving the universe.Here faster cars or trains compete – not useful
- Ok, now we are starting to get to an interesting levelStart to see what is valuedThere is some information about the context But there is still not enough here to work with.we don’t really know what is valued context leaves open a lot of questions - Do I have my hands free? Do I have to deal with the creepy guy in front of me…
- Now this Job is much much betterMore precise action –this defines what is valuable for the customer – to wind down – celebrity news is probably better than macro economic policy More more context – important as it set constraints – ahhh, hands are probably free, eyes are free so can interact with a device
- Suddenly we see that our competitive in the eyes of the customer are different to who we thought they were. Not just other News apps or News websites.In this specific situation:ABC as a historically factual down the line hard news offering is competing in the minds of users withBuzzfeed, angry bird, 50 shades of grey and MX (a free newspaper thrust into your hands when you arrive on a train some of the metros in Australia)
- Important to note before we move on, that your product likely supports mulitple jobs. Therefore as each job becomes the unit of analysis – each has its own unique competitive set.So if you considering Media consumption across australia, 24/7/365 days a yearWe found ourselves quickly overwhelmed with number of jobs, competitors competitor setsSo Christian is going to talk about how we started to try to manage that.
- Can use for a lot of things – for example.But the immediate use was relooking at some of our own solutionsSo the radio team re-looked at the website of a popular radio station in Australia called ‘Radio National’Radio national is a talk back style station that covers subjects like news, science, culture, arts etc. it caters to people that are looking for some intellectual stimulation, probably in the same vein that say TED talks are covering stimulating subjects.
- Covered off in three areas on the site
- Took up a lot of space on the site
- Last one again – just a very small space o the siteStarts to open up a number of questions:- Are we enabling the right jobs?- Is the priority/propotion right? - Are we facilitating the job through the right features?
- For example: the team started to askIs this split the best way to help people make decisions about what they want to listen too- A player at the top, programs (and on-demand content) off to the sideIs spreading the content across the screen the best way to support the job?This illustrates our silioed thinking – it raises the question in the constext of this job does: Live vs Podcasts – is this actually helping people make decisions about what they want to listen to right now?This can then become the key question leading into an ideation workshop.
- Last one again – just a very small space o the siteStarts to open up a number of questions:- Are we enabling the right jobs?- Is the priority/propotion right? - Are we facilitating the job through the right features?
- ABC historically very factual down the line
- FYI – C. Christensen & others call everything jobs
- Given laser sharp focusDefineing thing going to buildEffective & exciting tool to elevate UX practice to straegic levelShare journey
- Given laser sharp focusDefineing thing going to buildEffective & exciting tool to elevate UX practice to straegic levelShare journey
- Go… find out moreTry some of these in your regular practiceHelp us solve the problems