Product ideation last class was quite efficient at producing a product solution, but definitely not the best solution. I feel like my teammates and I barely had a chance to discuss our ideas we’d brainstormed at the very beginning, nor were we really able to map our storyboards or anything for that matter back to a solid customer profile.
We were working from our own interests, what we each imagined was good — but not from something we could trace the logic from.
Because I am a lover of logic, I crave rigor in my conclusions — and when I say logic, I don’t mean it colloquially, I mean it academically, as in ‘if p then q’. Especially when it comes to serious derivations of products. Anything outside of this makes me skeptical.
However, it was somewhat inspiring to see how quickly we could arrive at a semblance of progress.
I say semblance because it’s easy to write a bunch of things on post-it notes — they don’t necessarily need to say anything insightful. Your storyboards don’t even need to be insightful, just fast.
I wonder if there’s a way to apply more rigor into this process, perhaps by bringing in your original fragmented data from interviews (which might also be flawed in some way), or bringing in the customer profile.
The trouble is, there are so many spots to mess up.
Rigor is difficult. I wish we focused on that more. How do you apply rigor in who you interview? Can we consider the dire importance of appropriate interviewees? What about asking leading questions? Or the wrong questions? Or not asking why?
Are we simply trying to be quick to get an idea closer to testing, or are we just being sloppy? I don’t think speed and rigor are necessarily mutually exclusive.
Team Bluejackets wasn’t prepared for this product ideation session yet. It might have changed the outcome had we rigorously finished our customer profile and value proposition map beforehand. I could also be completely mistaken in its intention — perhaps it was simply a light brainstorming warmup to get diverse ideas on the table.
Overall, it was a fun and sophisticated exercise, and I greatly appreciate the nod to diversity inclusion built-in.