Rapid Testing for a New Venture Concept
The Context: I worked on this project during my time as a Senior Design Researcher and Strategist for a venture studio. The venture concept was for a construction materials marketplace specializing in sustainable materials procurement.
The Problem: The concept was developed primarily by a business strategy team and no work had been done to validate the desirability of the concept with users. In order to continue development, the concept needed desirability validation.
The Objective: As Research Lead, I was tasked with validating user desirability for the concept.
Constraints: Given the early stage of the concept, I usually prefer to test desirability at scale. However, due to time and budget constraints, I was limited to conduct research on a smaller scale.
The Outcomes: Through my research, I was unable to confirm that the concept was desirable or technically feasible as a product. I recommended further research to explore its desirability within a more sustainability-focused market.
However, even after conducting this additional research, we still couldn’t validate the product's desirability.
As a result, the development of the venture was halted, allowing $1M in funding to be reallocated to other, more promising ventures in the product portfolio.
Project Type
B2B Ecommerce
Company
NAX
Research Characteristics
Qualitative Generative/Evaluative Attitudinal/Behavioral
Methods
Concept Testing
One-on-One Interviews
Deliverables
Comprehensive Research Report
Role
Lead Researcher
Timeline
5 weeks; March-April 2024
Timeline
The project was conducted over the course of 5 weeks.
Aligning with the Team and Study Design: 1 week
Identifying Needed Resources and Setting Budget: 1 week
Recruiting: 1 week
Conducting and Synthesis: 1 week
Analysis and Share out: 1 week
Research Team
I was the sole researcher on this project.
My Responsibilities:
Development of research plan
Setting of timeline and budget
Study design and execution
Analysis and share out of study insights
Recommendation of next steps based on business goals
Aligning with the Team
While the team's concept appeared promising from a business perspective, it lacked validation regarding both desirability and technical feasibility from both buyers and sellers of materials.
I met with the business team to gain a deeper understanding of how they arrived at the concept for a marketplace for sustainable construction materials. My goal was to grasp the full rationale behind the idea and identify any underlying assumptions.
From these discussions, I learned that the justification for the marketplace was twofold:
The client's desire to develop a product in the sustainability sector.
The business team's creation of compelling financial models and market size projections, which, while data-informed, were fundamentally based on assumptions.
In summary, the concept posed too much risk to justify further investment. My task was to de-risk the concept to ensure that any development had a viable chance of success.
Together with the team, we prioritized de-risking from the buyer side first.
Developing The Research Plan
I decided to use a combination of inductive and deductive approaches to assess how well the challenges buyers face align with the proposed product offering.
In my experience (and based on common product ethos), the best way to de-risk the success trajectory of a product is to make sure it's rooted in a real problem. The team had no existing personas or idea of problem-solution fit so I decided to prioritize seeing if I could build out a cohesive narrative around problem-solution fit.
Since we already had a product concept, I decided to take a two-pronged approach:
Inductive, generative research to objectively understand the challenges buyers face in procuring construction materials (sustainable and non-sustainable). This included assessing their willingness to adopt new supply techniques.
Deductive, generative research to test the desirability of the current value propositions and feature offerings of the concept.
Method Selection
For the inductive approach, I selected one-on-one interviews, while for the deductive approach, I chose low-fidelity concept testing.
Methods Used and Rationale:
One-on-one interviews
Sample Questions
"What specific challenges do you encounter when procuring construction materials? Sustainable materials?"
"What hesitancies would you have about engaging with a new supplier?"
Concept Testing: I worked in Miro and Figma to quickly bring the concept to life in order to show it to buyers and ellicit high-fidelity feedback using a low-fidelity method
Wireframe for concept testing prototype
Final concept testing prototype
Screening and Recruitment
I collaborated with the business team to establish screening criteria that addressed all relevant business constraints. I then employed three distinct channels for rapid and cost-effective recruitment.
Total Participant Recruited: 10
Screening Questions:
"Do you have experience working as a procurement manager or similar for a construction or architectural firm tasked with sourcing various construction materials including (but not limited to) flooring, tiling, insulation, HVAC and prefabricated materials?"
"Are you based in the United States?"
Incentives: $100-200 per session via digital Visa giftcard
Recruitment Method:
I recruited through three separate channels.
UserInterviews.com
LinkedIn Sales Navigator: used for targeted, intentional outreach via direct message
Apollo.io: used for targeted, mass outreach via email
Recruiting via LinkedIn Sales Navigator
Recruiting via Apollo.io targeted email campaign
Conducting Research
I conducted the 1 on 1 interviews and concept testing in one session lasting 60 minutes.
Sessions Conducted: (10) 60 minute sessions.
Platform Used to Conduct and Record Sessions: Google Meet and Fireflies.ai. Using Fireflies for note-taking and recording was especially beneficial, as it compensated for the absence of a research assistant to handle note-taking and synthesis.
Conducting a 1 on 1 interview
Conducting concept testing using the low-fidelity prototype
Synthesis and Analysis
Synthesis and analysis was done entirely in Dovetail.
To keep everything streamlined, I transcribed all interviews in Dovetail and was able to analyze the data using an approach of tagging and theme-ing.
In the process of analyzing the data in Dovetail
Outputs and Deliverables
The insights generated were encapsulated in a research report shared with the business team.
In summary, the problem-solution fit could not be validated, and proceeding with product development for the current feature sets and value propositions remained too risky.
Insights:
Most Important Takeaways
There was limited interest in a sustainable materials marketplace even in more sustainability-driven markets (such as CA)
There was more interest in a marketplace for all types of materials but buyers have a hesitancy to engage with new suppliers
The frictions identified by buyers did not align with the value propositions or feature offerings of the marketplace, indicating a lack of problem-solution fit and making further product development risky.
Recommendations:
I acknowledged the limitations of drawing market insights from a small sample size and recommended a large-scale willingness-to-adopt/willingness-to-pay survey to thoroughly test the problem-solution fit of the concept.
To further explore the potential for a sustainable marketplace, I suggested engaging with buyers from sustainability-focused, geographically relevant markets through targeted touchpoints.
If additional research was not feasible, I advised pivoting the product to address one of the common frictions identified in the research.
Major callout of the research report: crucial next steps to determine desirability of the product.
Insight report for the one on one interviews
Insight report for the concept testing
Outcomes
The team ultimately abandoned the business concept for several reasons, preventing $1M from being invested in a highly risky venture.
Due to the client’s desire to focus on sustainability in the construction industry, the lack of validated problem-solution fit, and tight timelines, the development of the concept was deprioritized.
As a result of my work, approximately $1M in funding was reallocated towards less risky ventures being developed within the client's portfolio of ventures.