Demand research
The primary objective of current research is to validate the demand identify the unmet needs of our primary market segments, and see how well Harmonica’s features can match to their problems, which should help us reach PMF faster. We aim to understand their decision-making process, the tools they currently use, and the potential for our product to meet their needs more effectively.
Business decisions
- What market segment should we focus on with the initial version of Harmonica?
- Is there enough pain to inspire purchase?
- What benefits are we selling to this audience?
- What unique product features does their use case demand?
- Security / privacy (do they trust us and/or OpenAI?)
- Pricing Sensitivity: What is their willingness to pay for a new sensemaking tool? How does this compare to their current spending on similar tools?
- Should we try for investment in Harmonica based on this market need?
Social outreach templates
Screener
Interview Guide
Interview guide (Old)
Interviews (Harmonica)
Segments:
Value propositions:
Research questions
- What is sensemaking / deliberation for them: What does “making a decision” mean for this segment (e.g. changing something in their governance or spending money)? How often do they have to make them?
- What are the steps or stages that customers go through when making decisions? What are the key events that propel them along this timeline? How long does it usually take to …
- Are decisions made collaboratively? When and when aren’t they?
- If decisions are made collaboratively, how is this process managed?
- How long does it usually take to get to a decision? Is it too long?
- When are customers most likely to be triggered to need a solution like Harmonica? [Events that increase their desire for change, or increase the pressure of a constraint]
- Is there a specific process or methodology they use on a regular basis that helps them control the quality of their decisions / sensemaking / deliberation?
- Do they ever hire human facilitators?
- Are they happy with the quality of the discussions / outputs / artifacts created?
- What tools do they use to facilitate communication and consensus? How satisfied are they with these tools? How do they learn about them? Who makes the decision to hire a particular tool?
- How do customers compare sensemaking solutions? What’s important for them?
- How do they turn outputs generated while using these tools into action items / features in backlog? How painful is this process?
- Sensemaking:
- How do they identify the tensions in their org? Is anyone responsible for this?
- Do they ever have arguments / conflicts? How do they resolve them?
- Writing proposals:
- Why do they usually write proposals? How does it work? Is it a collaborative process?
- Engaging members in deliberation:
- How do they get the right people involved? Who are those people?
- Are they happy with their current level of engagement?
- …
Methodology
The research will be conducted using a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods, including:
- In-depth Interviews: Conduct 1:1 interviews with angel investors and members of venture clubs to gain a deep understanding of their decision-making process, pain points, and needs.
- Surveys: Distribute a Google Form to a larger sample of investors to validate findings from the interviews and gather quantitative data on tool usage, satisfaction, and pricing sensitivity.
- Product Testing: Offer a beta version of our decision-making tool to a select group of investors for testing. Gather feedback on usability, features, and overall satisfaction.
- As a community manager, I'm trying to submit a proposal that would get sufficient support, but (1) drafting a proposal is hard and (2) I'm not getting enough feedback / ideas, because there's lots of friction (Discord is overwhelming, docs are daunting) and people are conflict-averse, which makes me feel apathy / legitimate inaction