Your iteration rate is the key to finding product-market fit for your app

For any entrepreneur launching an app finding product-market fit is a lot like finding the Golden Ticket; it’s rare, but when it happens it’s life-changing.

Unlike an enterprise business, when you build a consumer app your end-user can’t easily tell you what they want (vs. enterprise apps that are focused on solving a known problem or a pain point for clients). Think about it this way: Before the iPhone launched, no consumer research would point out the need for a touchscreen, keyboardless device. Before Snapchat, no consumer would say they wanted the ability to send ephemeral messages.

Consumers aren’t able to tell you what they want; this makes consumer products a shot in the dark. There is no guarantee if or when product-market fit can be found. It’s usually a long journey of continuous iteration.

And ongoing iteration is what gets you to product-market fit. Each iteration gives you one extra at-bat. Hitting a home run is easy if you can strike out 10o times instead of 3. Y Combinator’s Sam Altman said it best in this tweet:

Screen Shot 2019-04-01 at 4.14.45 PM

Finding product-market fit is hard. Look at how many consumer products Facebook and Google shut down even with their massive resources (remember FB Paper, FB Groups app, Google+ app?) Massive resources can help, but it’s not the most critical.

In the early days of Wattpad, despite only having a handful of employees, every day the product looked a bit different. We implemented new concepts in the morning, checked in the afternoon, measured overnight and killed it the next morning if it didn’t work out. That’s how we found product-market fit in many things. And that’s how we left our competitors in the dust.

Although finding product-market fit is freaking hard, it is also very fun and rewarding once you have figured it out.

Keep on iterating!

Embrace tension to move even faster

As a startup scales, it’s natural for tension to creep up among different teams who are working on disparate objectives. Either of these conversations sound familiar?

Showing users more ads can help generate more revenue, but it could also hurt engagement. Do we optimize for revenue or engagement?

We have a limited budget. If we spend it on A, B, and C we won’t be able to pay for X, Y, Z. What should we choose?

The best way entrepreneurs can embrace and then ease tension among their teams is to establish a set of principles. Principles can help teams avoid indecision and move fast.

In the example above about serving ads at the expense of user engagement for instance, if the team has previously established that ad experiments can’t impact engagement by more than X%, it becomes easier for them to test different combinations of ads to drive the most revenue without negatively impacting engagement.

Establishing principles streamlines decision making, eliminates unnecessary meetings and propels the company forward. Everyone knows what to do and understands how much (or how little) leeway the team has.

Of course, there will be times when you may not have a principle to fall back on. That’s when the teams representing the conflicting priorities need to escalate the matter further and involve an arbitrator. Most times decisions are reversible and having an arbitrator can resolve issues quickly. In the world of startups, a quick decision always trumps a slow decision (or worse, no decision at all).  

Tension is natural and a sign your company is growing. But as your business grows and becomes more complex, decisions aren’t as straightforward as they used to. Creating a set of ground rules that inform your team’s priorities and outcomes can help avoid unnecessary confusion and conflict.

5 tips for better meetings people will actually want to attend

Over the years I’ve attended thousands of meetings. The best ones respected my time and input. They kept me engaged – and often excited – throughout the meeting.  And the worst ones … well, I’m pretty sure we’ve all attended at least a few terrible meetings and know what that’s like.

Having seen the good and the bad, I wanted to share some simple tips that anyone, at any level, can implement for more effective meetings.

Go beyond the agenda
Yes, circulating a clear agenda prior to the meeting is important, but also consider explicitly spelling out the objective and the outcome of the meeting. It gives participants the right context to prepare for and be fully engaged during the meeting (or decline the meeting if they can’t help meet the objectives/outcomes).

Nominate a facilitator
This person makes sure the agenda is followed and desired outcomes are met. They empower all participants to contribute and get the group back on track if the conversation goes awry. Facilitating meetings is a special skill and not everyone is good at it but if you find the right person, you are practically guaranteed a great meeting. Keep in mind that the meeting organizer doesn’t have to be the facilitator.

Limit participants
Keep meetings participants to 4-7 people maximum. In my experience this really is the sweet spot. Beyond 8 participants, the introverts in the group tend to shy away from voicing their opinions (a good facilitator, though, can help draw out their perspectives and ensure introverts have a voice).

Forget the update
Don’t use a meeting to provide or ask for updates. Save it for email, or better still a collaborative Google Doc. Share these updates in advance of the meeting as pre-reading material so you can focus the discussion on healthy debates and decision making.

Save 10
Use the last 10 minutes of the meeting to recap the discussion. This is crucial. You’ve just spent the last hour having a productive discussion, it would be a shame for it to fall apart in the follow-up. Make note of the essence of the discussion, key decisions made and actions to take. Be sure to share these notes with all attendees and other stakeholders who couldn’t join.

Slight tweaks to the way organize your meetings can have a profound impact. Know of any other hacks to make meetings more effective?  Let me know in the comments.

This simple hack makes email introductions more effective

At some point in your career, someone you know will a) ask for an introduction to someone else in your network, or b) offer to make an introduction to someone they feel you should know.

Email introductions can be a double-edged sword. On one hand, they can be incredibly useful in connecting directly with an elusive executive. On the other hand, they can suck up a lot of time (and lead to bruised egos) if not done with tact.

The very worst email introductions automatically assume that the connection being made is appropriate and beneficial for involved parties. But the truth is unless you’ve explicitly asked in advance, this is just an assumption.

Here’s an example of an email I recently received:

Hey Allen,

I would like to introduce you to Cindy Lou (cc’ed). Cindy Lou is an expert in X, which you will find useful. I’m sure you would enjoy the meeting. I’ll let you two find the best time to meet next week!

Cheers,
Horton

The problem is, while Cindy Lou might be an expert in X, I don’t really care about X, it’s just not my thing. Naturally, I don’t want to spend even more time feigning interest in X. And I definitely don’t want to waste Cindy Lou’s time either. The other problem: Despite what Horton thinks, I’m mostly out of the office next month so can’t find a time to meet without a lot of calendar shuffling.

I used to accept blind introductions (and subsequent meetings) like these in the past out of politeness. It was an ineffective use of my time – and theirs. Even when I dared to say no, I had to spend time crafting a firm, yet polite email to decline the opportunity. Drafting the email didn’t take up nearly as much time as a meeting would, but it still took time out of my day that could be better spent on strategy or operational challenges. Eventually, it became too much.

Nowadays, when it comes to email introductions, I try to model the behavior I want to see. When people ask me to connect them with someone in my network, I make sure I have a double opt-in. This means I’ve asked for (and received) the permission of both parties before I send a note. Here’s what it looks like:

Pavel would like me to connect him with Uhura.

I’ll ask Pavel to send me a new, well-written email with the request (Pavel should NOT include our previous conversation i.e. the original request). It could look something like this.

Hey Allen,

As discussed, it will be great if you can introduce me to Uhura. Here is a summary of my ask: <insert awesome summary here>

Thanks in advance for your help.

Live long and prosper,
Pavel

Then, I would add a sentence or two before forwarding the note to Uhura (without including Pavel). My addition would provide further context and could be something along the lines of: “I don’t know Uhura well and I haven’t tried her products, but the elevator pitch sounds relevant to you” or “Uhura is brilliant and working on a super interesting project you might be interested in.” This context setting is important, but should only take 30 seconds of your time.

If Uhura agrees to the introduction, then I add Pavel to the thread. If she says no, I’ll let Pavel know that as well.

Double opt-in email introductions work well for a number of reasons.

  1. The onus is on the person requesting the introduction to write an awesome email detailing why the connection is valuable. It’s not the facilitator’s responsibility to make the case
  2. It avoids putting people in an awkward position of accepting a connection or meeting when there is zero interest in the product/service/pitch
  3. It encourages frank dialogue. If a person wants to decline an introduction, chances are he/she is more likely to provide a candid reason in a private one-on-one email with a trusted connection. It allows the facilitator to filter the information appropriately while still providing a truthful explanation to the requester
  4. It allows for brevity, without sounding cold. Since the facilitator has established relationships with both parties, a to-the-point email doesn’t come off as arrogant or rude

I make lots of introductions, and I am more than happy to do so. It’s great for community building. I hope the double opt-in method helps make introductions faster and a better experience for everyone!