A few weeks back I was talking to a startup founder and we were discussing product-market fit … This is actually a really good question in the context of Agriculture: a very slow, cyclical, highly commoditized and culturally entrenched industry – almost backwards by high-tech industry standards. And as such, I’ve been ideating on trying to find a good definition of a starting point for product-market fit in Ag and how, as an early stage startup and as a product manager, we should tackle the answer. More generally, product managers will always find it hard to figure out what features and product initiatives to prioritize amongst so many competing priorities and stakeholder demands (I have talked about this here!) Made popular by Marc Andreesen in the 2000s, product market fit at the time was the “only thing that matters” or the exact moment when a startup successfully finds itself in “a good market with a product that can satisfy that market”. In the B2C world, this is iPod and the fitness crowd in 2003 or Netflix and DVDs in the early 2000s. But how does this pan out in the B2B world of AgTech? Since there is a lot of product/market fit literature all over the internet, here’s a sampler of what I gathered with a quick google search and that I find the most relevant:
A. Product/market fit is when you build something that people want I will have a more detailed note about this particular definition very soon – it’s a great update from the initial Marc Andreesen definition by Paul Graham (Y-Combinator). Essentially, it stems from the accurate observation that most founders build things nobody wants. And the reason is that they think about startup ideas, not products but sound plausible enough to fool them into working on them. Graham goes on that when launching a startup business, there should already be some people who urgently need the product, and not just the idea of a potential benefit of using it. So the only question that matters is “who wants this right now?” – And as such as an entrepreneur as well as product manager, instead of (most often than not without evil) forcing your views on users, always ask yourself who wants what you’re building so much that they’ll use it even if it’s a crappy buggy first iteration MVP? B. Product/Market fit is when you have the right solution to a problem that’s worth solving The lean startup literature refines the two previous suggestions further by breaking up this startup lifecycle into three stages:
C. Product/market fit is when users love your product so much they tell other people to use it This is my favorite because this is Porter early definition of Product/Market fit in the 1990s, way before “software was eating the world”: “When people understand and use your product enough to recognize it’s value that’s a huge win. But when they begin to share their positive experience with others, when you can replicate the experience with every new user who your existing users tell, then you have product-market fit on your hands. And when this occurs something magical happens. All of a sudden your customers become your salespeople.” Simply put, product market fit is having enough users that love your product so much they spontaneously tell other people to use it … in other words, as a product manager you build a strong viral base of advocates for your product. As an example, chances are that the first time you used Slack somebody in your friends circle invited you to use it – you didn’t click on an ad online, right? By doing so you will also avoid the trappings of targeting a growth goal first and probably fool yourself until someone (like me) digs into your user retention numbers! (See my note on growth product management pitfalls here.) In conclusion, for product managers as well as startup entrepreneurs, and also in the context of Ag Tech startup this does apply super well, which is the reason why I thought about writing this in the first place, it’s important to separate product/market fit from problem/solution fit and more specifically, in order to estimate your true potential customer base, you will need to make sure you measure the true desire for your product, not just for a solution. If not you’ll most likely end up with a product/market fit false positive. Further, always thrive to find a high or extreme degree of product/market fit or set yourself up for a giant, and often times, super costly, world of painful disappointment. Let me know what you think here.
My name's phil mora and I blog about the things I love: fitness, hacking work, tech and anything holistic. Head of Product thinker, doer, designer, coder, leader
0 Comments
The pandemic of 2020 has leapfrogged the restaurant industry 10 years in the future in less than a year. With this extreme reshaping restaurateurs need to probably completely change how they run their businesses and adapt to rapidly changing consumer demand and behavior. One of the good questions to have is how to meet the rise in delivery demand. Everything from internal POS systems, marketing strategies, and common business practices are all very rapidly evolving. For example, estimates are that up to 60% of U.S. consumers are ordering delivery or takeout at least once a week. The result is that on top of potentially shifting to ghost kitchens, restaurateurs need to reevaluate how they approach their delivery game. It’s a new world out there is upon us and now is the time for an entirely new restaurant experience. My high-level thoughts about food trends that the pandemic accelerated 1. Industry-Wide Shift to Delivery-Only Restaurants are definitely shifting to delivery as demand continues to rise. A few ideas come to mind, such as the need to implement new systems and processes to make room for fulfilling online orders; or the need for ample restaurant kitchen space for preparing and fulfilling online order; ensuring a seamless experience for drivers and customers. But the most important: planning for more online orders helps classic restaurants prepare for the shift to delivery-only: re-evaluating the menu, for example, are there items that don’t travel well or package well, in other words making room for the menu items that make the most sense for a delivery-focused world. 2. Technology-First Online differentiation is a must when most orders are made from an app. We’re really post yelp here. So restaurants need to know tech real well, understand all delivery trends, be able to position their brand online and on delivery marketplaces well – leverage Doordash, Uber Eats and GrubHub, to maximize your reach and convert them into new and repeat clients. 3. Off-Premise World It’s really clear to me that off-premise food businesses will continue to thrive. Consumers are relying more and more on online food delivery and it’s becoming a new normal to have a wide variety of options available on delivery apps. Although some customers may begin to return to dine-in once protective measures have been lifted, the convenience of online delivery will remain a staple in customers’ lives. Delivery will be treated as a separate business given that people all over have realized just how convenient and safe delivery really is. 4. Less Restaurant Space With the shift to an off-premise world comes less of a need for a large restaurant space for dine-in customers. For example, quick service restaurants and fast-casual chains have even started designing new restaurant layouts that are leaner and more focused on pick-up and curbside-to-go options versus traditional on-premise dining. With less real estate space needed to meet delivery demand, I think ghost kitchens will be rising in popularity as they come with the perfect turnkey solution for online delivery. 5. Ghost Kitchens Ghost kitchens allow restaurateurs to expand their reach through each food delivery app. They’re strategically located where the most online food orders are taking place. And since they’re not focused on high foot traffic, that means the real estate is less expensive too. With the rise in delivery demand, the shift to a delivery-first model might become vital to stay ahead, and very soon, restauranteurs will be using ghost kitchens to create seamless delivery systems that leave customers at home happy and realy loving the food. 6. More Digital Marketing, Less Traditional In a pre-covid world, restaurants have to heavily rely on foot and as a result focused more on traditional marketing to reach your customers (think yelp?) but as of now, digital marketing is in, restaurants need a strong digital presence and soon, without a physical storefront, entirely shift focus to digital storefronts. But here’s the really good news: shifting to a digital marketing focus helps reach customers where they already are, and it’s way more easy to leverage key insights into customer behavior and data, meanwhile with more online customers, the demand for off-premise dining will continue to expand in the year to come. Let me know what you think!
DM me @philippemora on IG and Twitter My name's phil mora and I blog about the things I love fitness, hacking work, tech and anything holistic. We all know that industry insiders are usually so myopic that they don’t see the obvious. Uber vs. Taxis. Blockbuster vs. Netflix. Nokia vs. Apple. So who’s the Amazon that is going to disrupt Ag? I am thinking that at least we have an innovative path looking at vertical farming as a small part of the solution especially because of higher yields and a lower environmental impact. What are vertical farms? Basically those are farms that grow crop in vertically stacked layers indoors, optimize plant growth and often incorporate soil-less farming techniques. With climate change and weather out of the equation, and with using state of the art LED lighting tech, vertical farms can produce consistent, high quality yields year-round with minimal waste and lower CO2 emissions compared to traditional farming methods. The aim of indoor vertical farming is to produce more crops while using less space thanks to a controlled environment. Benefits
Drawbacks
Vertical Farming Companies Because of their growing popularity, more and more vertical farms are starting to appear, here a 2 of the biggest in the world. AeroFarms: AeroFarms is one of the most successful vertical farming companies, recording more than $130m in investments since its launch in 2004. The farmer uses its own patented aeroponic technology, which provides higher levels of precision and productivity, with little environmental impact and minor risk. Based in New Jersey, AeroFarms claims its methods use 95% less water than standard arable farming. Bowery Farming: Launched in 2015, Bowery is one of the fastest-growing start-ups in the sector, funded at $140m. Headquartered in New York City, supplies several restaurants, uses zero pesticides and non-genetically modified seeds in its operations. Bowery Farming claims its methods use 95% less water than traditional agriculture and are 100 times more productive on the same amount of land. Let me know what you think!
DM me @philippemora on IG and Twitter My name's phil mora and I blog about the things I love fitness, hacking work, tech and anything holistic. I have been in product management for half my career and today, product management is a function that is found in almost all companies. Product team members are today involved in all aspects in the product lifecycle and are considered, (and rightly so) as the CEOs (and COOs) of the product. But it wasn’t always like that. Product Management is actually a very young function compared to more traditional roles. So where did the field come from? Let’s explore how product management was born. Product 1.0: “Brand Men” Since the industrial revolution, it’s arguable that product management has existed for as long as there have been products to manage. But it was never a formal role until the 1930s when Neil McElroy at Procter and Gamble wrote a 800-word memo in which he described a new role he called “Brand Men”. As outlined in the memo, the “Brand Men” would hold responsibility for the brand. They’d oversee the management of the product, including its marketing and sales. If the product’s branding was weak, it was the duty of Brand Men to research why and devise a strategy for improvement. This is historically the first example of a brand-vertical organizational structure: every branded product from a company could have a dedicated budget and team behind it, and so a fair shot at market success. That year, McElroy hired the first two product managers in history. Product 2.0: Hewlett Packard Following his memo and his success, McElroy went on to do some advisory work at Stanford University and this is where he met and inspired Bill Hewlett and David Packard – who would go on to further the evolution of product management. Indeed, Hewlett and Packard interpreted the evolution of “Brand Men” as putting decision-making power as close to the hands of customers as possible. The customer-centric approach was born and it became known as “The Hewlett-Packard Way”: Brand Men, aka Product Managers, would act as the vessel for the voice of the customer. They would inform the development of the product based on customers’ needs and desires. Toyota Everyone knows Toyota invented Kanban, which is today adapted to agile software development methodologies and super popular in high tech. But do you know how this went by? At the end of World War II, companies in Japan were suffering from drastic cash flow issues. These issues pushed a few innovator companies to develop “Just In Time” production and manufacturing. One of those companies, Toyota, formalized this lean manufacturing trend and invented the “Toyota Production System” – a system combining waste reduction in production processes with two essential values:
Both kaizen and genchi genbutsu are now major components of Kanban product management. And back home in the U.S., Hewlett Packard heard of these Japanese lean manufacturing practices and in turn incorporated them into their product management system. Product 3.0: the tech industry Until the advent of the tech industry in the 60s and 70s in Silicon Valley, product management remained predominantly a marketing capacity focusing on brand and a customer-centric approach. But with lean manufacturing and the emergence of the semiconductor industry in the 70s in California, product management spread past marketing and into development. As the industry matured and shifted away from semiconductors into software in particular, a separation between development and marketing efforts proved problematic and product management expanded to fill the gap. It combined the understanding of the market, brand and customer with the development of the product. As a result, product managers could ensure that the values of a product aligned with the values of the customer. Today Ultimately, it’s been the advent of product management as a role in the tech industry and especially software over the past 12 years that made the field what it is today – the management of a product from its inception until the end of its life. Today, product managers follow the values of kaizen and gentsuba, using data to optimize the product to achieve business goals. The must understand and know the voice of the customer inside out as much as the limitations and abilities of their developers. Product Managers are the ones that look after the product from start to finish. They understand that developers need time to code. They make decisions about what features should and shouldn’t make it into the product — from a place of understanding the customer needs. And they collaborate with marketing, sales and customer service, and shape the overall user experience of the product. Ultimately, it was this uptake of product management as a role in the tech industry that made the field what it is today. That is, a field that involves governing a product from its inception until the end of its life. Today’s product managers follow the values of kaizen and genchi gentsuba. Their goal is to optimise a product to achieve business goals. They must understand the voice of the customer, as much as the restrictions and abilities of their developers. In other words, the product manager is the one that looks after the product from start to finish. They understand that developers need time to code. They make decisions about what features should and shouldn’t make it into the product — from a place of understanding the customer needs. And they collaborate with marketing, sales and customer service, and shape the overall user experience of that one product. Let me know what you think!
DM me @philippemora on IG and Twitter My name's phil mora and I blog about the things I love: fitness, hacking work, tech and anything holistic. Head of Digital Product thinker, doer, designer, coder, leader |
head of product in colorado. travel 🚀 work 🌵 food 🍔 rocky mountains, tech and dogs 🐾Categories
All
|