Let's take a look at the relationship between this demand or value hypothesis. This question of the relationship between motivation and usability and then the way that we're looking at the customer journey, that funnel concept. The basic idea here is, can we unpack the relationship between the two of these so that we can just test this in the quickest, easiest, cheapest possible way? Generally what that means for the funnels that we're observing customer behavior in the early parts of this funnel. So pretty classic way to look at this is, how the different channels like Facebook versus Google AdWords versus LinkedIn and different messages perform. Which ones give us the best click-through rates, which one give us the best downstream conversions, for example. Then we're looking at those people, how do we do at moving them to action? Signing up, getting a trial or paying or buying something from our e-commerce site. The different vehicles we can use to test this are called MVPs or Minimum Viable Products. One of the biggest misunderstandings is that it's always a product. Ideally it's actually not a product, it's some kind of a product proxy. For example, three popular patterns are concierge, Wizard of Oz and smoke tests. Concierge is where we hand create the user experience. At Enable Quiz for example, this would mean manually creating quizzes for an HR manager and seeing if he or she actually uses them or not and whether they help. The depth of observation we're going to get on that because we're working with an individual person is pretty high. But the definition of the result, in other words, can we conclude that they will or won't use our product from that is pretty low. So if we want to learn about the process and how the user might experience it, this vehicle is a great fit. But if we want a result about can we definitely sell this thing to these people, we might want to use one of these others. These go however from high to low amount of depth about observation and the nice thing is that analytically if you're struggling to make conclusions about why, for example, some of these more definitive tests don't work it's good to use the ones that have more observation. That's the analytical relationship between these. So for example, Wizard of Oz is in the middle here, we're simulating the experience and observing the results with A track and hurry, for example, we might give a few of the technicians a number to text part orders to or questions about parts availability and pricing and then we can text them back results. The idea is that we're the wizard in the background it's not real software, we're simulating the experience and seeing how the user interacts with it. Generally from that, you're not going to get a result about whether the user wants your product or not. We really are pairing at that point usability and motivation. But if you want to understand the experience better and how you might execute it, this is a really good vehicle. Finally, the smoke test is really great at getting a nice high-definition result about whether you're getting the behaviors you want in your funnel. A classic example again, being like a click-through on different ads and messages and conversion downstream in your funnel. However, if you get a click-through rate that's zero or low, what do you do next? The what of what happened there doesn't have a lot of observational depth. Like you don't really know anything about why the user did or didn't do this and what's going on with them. That's where you have to make good choices about these different MVP archetypes. So as you think about your demand or value hypothesis analytically, those are some things that you might want to consider. As we go forward here we're going to look at how we organize these experiments and actually execute them.
