Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Focus on the high-expectation customer

uxdesign.cc

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 57 posts

Re: Focus on the high-expectation customer

#31

Post by josefrichter »

deltron3030 wrote: post #14

>Once you identify your benefiter, you need to understand how your product can help them get where they want to be. How can you identify a benefiter of a product, without knowing the problem that the product is going to solve (help them where they want to be)? >hacks are temporary fixes at best. They (the high expectation customers) need a single solution that meets all their demands. This isn't true, a hack doesn't…

Very true about "hacks". Oftentimes they have longer lifespan that standard solutions - because they "just work", might actually be inherently fragile, the original hacker is not around anymore, etc. => better not touch what ain't broken.

Re: Focus on the high-expectation customer

#32

Post by rogual »

arvidkahl wrote: post #23

It's also important to note that the high-expectation customer is not the high-frequency complainer that you will have in your customer base. Don't confuse the two, they are opposites. In my experience with my own company, there were customers who would reach out very often with ideas, complaints, and questions. I learned at some point that these customers often were just confused did not even really understand their…

Something I noticed about the high-frequency complainers among my customers is that almost all of them got the product for free.

Re: Focus on the high-expectation customer

#33

Post by ako »

nnq wrote: post #7

Hallelujah! Maybe this will put a dent in the current dumbification trend of all apps/UIs etc. that's probably due to 'designing for the lowest common denominator'. Hint: any app/tool/etc. that's "designed for the average user", will only help its user be(come) average and below average! Now try imagining selling a product with the slogan "XYZ - Helping you stay mediocre, and even drop below the average! Use us every…

You shouldn’t market it as mediocre, but data will correctly show most customers are best served by mediocre products: most people need a mediocre car, not one that drives 300kmh, drives well off-road, or can carry 10m3 of stuff. Similarly, mediocre furniture (ikea), electronics or most anything else is good enough.

Re: Focus on the high-expectation customer

#34

Post by PopeDotNinja »

rogual wrote: post #32
arvidkahl wrote: post #23

It's also important to note that the high-expectation customer is not the high-frequency complainer that you will have in your customer base. Don't confuse the two, they are opposites. In my experience with my own company, there were customers who would reach out very often with ideas, complaints, and questions. I learned at some point that these customers often were just confused did not even really understand their…

Something I noticed about the high-frequency complainers among my customers is that almost all of them got the product for free.

You have to gaurd yourself against cheap customers. They will squeeze you for everything they can get. This is not the same as customers that are low paying.

Re: Focus on the high-expectation customer

#35

Post by dspillett »

barking wrote: post #18
gatestone wrote: post #13

I have high expectations for free apps/services: They need to work immediately without a learning curve. See "hallway testing". They need to be competent but only modestly useful, if better alternatives are not available. I have different high expectations for something I pay for. They need to be marketed to me, proving to me that they solve my real life problems competently. They can have a reasonable learning curve…

You could reject some very good free apps then. But I kinda agree with you. It's partly the phenomenon of attaching little value to something one gets for cheap/free. And conversely, people can bend over backwards to be impressed by something they pay a lot of money for.

> could reject some very good free apps then

That is a risk from this attitude. I'd wager that the savings from not ploughing through the dross outweigh the benefit of the few good ones that might be missed.

Especially considering the better ones with issues will hopefully come to our attention eventually by word of mouth (so we don't miss them, we are just a little late to the party), or attract competitors that fix those initial problems (or they themselves resolve those problems, which we then hear about through word of mouth and other sources).

Re: Focus on the high-expectation customer

#36

Post by ben509 »

josefrichter wrote: post #26

This is actually a very narrow way of looking at users. There are plenty of situations that the users aren't aware of their "problem" or "need". In other words, they are not aware, that they could do something more easily, comfortably, etc. Or maybe they are aware, but don't have a solution. These people never fulfil the "hacker" or "expert" condition. I would even argue, that designing primarily for anyone who could…

> These people have significantly different mind and way of using products (especially tech products), than mass market.

I think the point the article is trying to make is the high-expectation customers have or quickly find a way that definitely works for them. Whereas the typical customer will poke at it, say it doesn't work, and move on.

From a design standpoint, you want to start with an overall system that definitely works with some motivation and then solve the problems that block other customers from using it.

And I think it's implicit in their argument that you won't solve these problems for everyone who could potentially use the product, and that's a business tradeoff you have to make.

Re: Focus on the high-expectation customer

#37

Post by phkahler »

playpause wrote: post #25
arvidkahl wrote: post #23

It's also important to note that the high-expectation customer is not the high-frequency complainer that you will have in your customer base. Don't confuse the two, they are opposites. In my experience with my own company, there were customers who would reach out very often with ideas, complaints, and questions. I learned at some point that these customers often were just confused did not even really understand their…

For this reason, I'm not sure "high-expectation customer" is a good term. It also doesn't capture this part well: "someone who will benefit the most from your product, whether they realise this yet or not". If they don't realise it, their expectations are zero. Maybe 'high potential benefit' would be a better term ("HPB customers").

I would say "high performance customer". The one that is going to push your product to its limits, trying to make it do more than you thought it could. Those limits are where you need to add features so people don't have to hack around the limitations.

Re: Focus on the high-expectation customer

#38

Post by jrochkind1 »

Hm. I've always thought that building for the hacker/expert is a mistake, because it means building for someone who is willing to invest more time in figuring out what your software can do for them and figure out your UX (and has more skill at doing so) than many, and you're going to wind up with a UX that less expert non-hackers find confusing and too hard to figure out, and give up on without finding value.

The hacker/expert understands the problem domain better than most (expert), and is willing to invest more time in figuring out how to find value in the software (hacker) than most users. Unless you only want to target hackers/experts (which you can if you think there are enough of them), it seems dangerous to your UX to focus on them.

Am I wrong?

(Focus, at first anyway, on those who will get the most benefit from the product "whether they realise this yet or not" -- seems unproblematic good advice to me).

Re: Focus on the high-expectation customer

#39

Post by phkahler »

gatestone wrote: post #13

I have high expectations for free apps/services: They need to work immediately without a learning curve. See "hallway testing". They need to be competent but only modestly useful, if better alternatives are not available. I have different high expectations for something I pay for. They need to be marketed to me, proving to me that they solve my real life problems competently. They can have a reasonable learning curve…

Is the need for immediate usefulness of a free product a form of proof? I mean there is a lot of free crap out there, so are you trying to make a quick judgement with that? Why not the same demand of a paid product?

I think I see where you're coming from, but not sure.

Re: Focus on the high-expectation customer

#40

Post by deltron3030 »

bluGill wrote: post #30
deltron3030 wrote: post #14

>Once you identify your benefiter, you need to understand how your product can help them get where they want to be. How can you identify a benefiter of a product, without knowing the problem that the product is going to solve (help them where they want to be)? >hacks are temporary fixes at best. They (the high expectation customers) need a single solution that meets all their demands. This isn't true, a hack doesn't…

> How can you identify a benefiter of a product, without knowing the problem that the product is going to solve (help them where they want to be)? The two go hand in hand. You need to have an idea of where you want to be. However once you find the customer willing to spend money (if you are a business make sure they are willing to spend money!), you should chase the and ensure they are satisfied first. Don't make the…

Wouldn't it be smarter to be the customer yourself, basically develop something for your own (business) progress or job to be done, and then sell it optionally to those in a similar situation?

The market first approach (developing a product for demand) only seems to really work with more generic products without high development cost, where the product advantages that result from deeper customer insights can't really play out. Where you don't run the risk of being outcompeted by a company that has those insights and customer trust from "wearing the same shoes" as their customers.

Market first could also work if you anticipate a future demand and it's a completely new market without any players yet, where you'd become the trusted choice over time because you're then seen as the original brand. But without funding it could be impossible to sustain to the point until you have enough customers.

Post reply on HN