The importance of real-world research in product development

🎈 It's a made-up concept. "Product market fit." It was whipped up years ago. By people working in the industry. But lived experience is not peer-reviewed research. There were/are a few concepts similar to PMF, that were created by people who study business development. And put to the test by peers. Lead User Theory SAME AS PMF: getting real user signal DIFFERENCE: solution adoption, not market adoption Strategic Fit SAME AS PMF: product matches market needs DIFFERENCE: this is about wider busines strategy match User Acceptance Models SAME AS PMF: getting signals of user adoption DIFFERENCE: user signals are not market understanding Market Orientation SAME AS PMF: you keep building what people want DIFFERENCE: a company philosophy; not outcome Task–Technology Fit SAME AS PMF: tracks user performance DIFFERENCE: does not gather market adoption signals Can you still use the term PMF? Absolutely. It's not wrong - it's just a narrow lens. That happens in the world of business. Personal lived experience becomes gospel. That's why we have market/buyer research. To push back against biased narratives and convenient truths. To build a successful go-to-market, we need evidence and objective truths.

The 'WHY' factor in every product is a necessity It's not enough to build a product, Why did you build it? Every great product starts with a purpose. The “why” gives direction, meaning, and value. It reminds you who you’re helping and what problem you’re solving. Without a clear reason, even the most beautiful design or complex feature loses its spark. When you understand your why, your work becomes more intentional. Your users can feel it in the way your product speaks to their needs, solves real problems, and makes life a little easier. Building projects for a portfolio is not enough to miss WHY you choose to build that application. Someday you will reference it in a real sense because you've got a reason that triggers the development. For the industry, your “why” is the reason your product exists. It answers questions like: ✨What problem am I solving? ✨Who am I solving it for? ✨Why should people care? So, when your team is deviating or being caught up in a trend, revisit WHY factor that got you started in the first place. Because when you build with your “why” in mind, you’re not just creating something you’re offering a solution. You understand your audience better, make smarter design choices, and communicate your message clearly. Customers can feel that authenticity. They see that your product isn’t just there to exist, but to make a difference. Building something next? take a step back and ask: 👉 Why does this matter? 👉 What change am I trying to create? Good morning creative minds... #whybuilding #productdevelopment #softwaredevelopment #whyfactor #softwareproductmanager #technicalproductmanager

“DAD, I WANT A CAT!” Who else has been there? 😂 Kids come up with brilliant ideas without fully understanding what they mean. Like getting a cat… or a dog… or something even wilder. Ideas are exciting and spontaneous, but their impact and consequences are often far from reality. Sounds familiar? It should—because the same thing happens in business. 💡 A great idea doesn’t mean a great outcome. 💡 Our assumptions about ideas rarely match reality. 💡 That’s why testing ideas before building them is crucial. Because sometimes, what seems like a perfect idea turns into unexpected chaos. 🐈🏡😂 and it leaves a deep hole where you buried much money, time, and effort. _ _ _ 👋 Hi, I’m Florian! 💡 I help innovation teams reduce risks in early-stage product development and turn chaos into clarity. 🌍 Passionate about #CustomerCentricity & #CircularEconomy as drivers for #Innovation. 📌 Want frameworks & tools to make better product decisions? 🗂 Get free access to my Library for Innovation & Circular Economy – full of templates, guides & checklists. 🔗 Find it in my Featured Section. 📬 Let’s connect! I’d love to hear your take. 🖼️ Video: All rights and credits belong to the respective owner(s).

💡 Just finished Chapter 3: “Spark” from Creative Confidence — and this one really showed me where ideas actually begin. Not from staring at a blank page… but from insight. One story really stuck with me — the team trying to design a low-cost infant incubator for rural areas. They were tackling a challenge that put the “extreme” in extreme affordability. At first, they added a temperature indicator that showed when the warming pouch hit 37°C. But then came a surprising insight from the mothers: If the doctor prescribed 1 tablespoon of medicine, many of them would give half — “just to be safe.” That completely flipped the team’s assumptions about how people behave. So they changed the design. No numbers. No complexity. When the warmer reaches the right temperature, the display simply shows “OK.” Simple. Clear. Designed for real humans. This chapter also breaks down how to actually spark creativity: ✨ Choose creativity → redefine the problem, take small risks ✨ Think like a traveler → be curious, use a beginner’s mind ✨ Relax your attention → ideas flow when you’re not forcing them ✨ Empathize deeply → see things through someone else’s eyes ✨ Observe in the field → real insights live in real behavior ✨ Ask “Why?” → it gets you past surface-level thinking ✨ Reframe challenges → flip the question to find new angles ✨ Build a creative circle → ideas grow faster with the right people around. And this line hit me the most: “It’s not what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that ain’t so.” Spark reminded me that insight comes from curiosity, empathy, and paying attention to real life — not from sitting and waiting for an idea to magically appear. #CreativeConfidence #DesignThinking #Empathy #HumanCenteredDesign #UXDesign #Innovation #Curiosity #GrowthMindset

How to Turn Complex Product Problems into Creative Solutions with a Competitive Advantage 2-minute read Every company faces product problems. Design flaws, cost overruns, missed expectations, stagnant growth, and declining profits are common. Many leaders view these challenges as threats. Complex product problems might look like roadblocks at first, but they often hold the best opportunities for innovation. By breaking these challenges down and thinking in new ways, you can turn obstacles into creative solutions that set you apart.  The key is combining research and diagnostics with vertical and lateral thinking. Why Difficult Problems Are Strategic Opportunities.  Complex product problems are rarely surface-level; they often expose hidden weaknesses or unmet customer needs. For example, they reveal market gaps,  force creative exploration, and offer differentiation potential, since solving them usually requires novel approaches that are difficult to replicate.  The Role of Research The most common mistake in product development is rushing to a solution before fully understanding the problem. A thorough diagnostic phase is crucial; rigorous research and diagnostic work provide the foundation for solving the right problem.  Vertical Thinking: Depth and Logic Vertical thinking refers to the disciplined, logical approach to problem-solving. It works step by step, narrowing choices to arrive at clear answers. Vertical thinking is rational, analytical, and sequential. Lateral Thinking: Breadth and Imagination Vertical thinking delves deep, while lateral thinking expands widely. It challenges assumptions, reframes problems, and uncovers unconventional possibilities. Use lateral thinking when vertical thinking stops yielding results or when a breakthrough innovation is necessary. Lateral thinking provides more options, resulting in solutions that are both logical and creative. The best results are achieved by using both. Lateral thinking helps you develop new ideas, while vertical thinking turns those ideas into practical plans. Combining Vertical and Lateral Thinking Don't rely on just one way of thinking. The real advantage comes from combining vertical and lateral thinking. Diagnose with Vertical Thinking to identify the real problem. Explore with Lateral Thinking to generate a wide range of solutions.  From Creative Solutions to Competitive Advantage Not every creative solution leads to long-term success. However, by adopting this approach, you can develop effective and complex solutions that competitors cannot replicate and secure a strong and lasting competitive advantage. Conclusion Complex product problems are not just barriers; they are also hidden opportunities. Combining both types of thinking can create new solutions that make a real impact. More information is available in my blog post. Jim Zitek  I turn complex product problems into creative solutions  with a competitive advantage.

𝐖𝐡𝐲 𝐝𝐨 𝐬𝐨 𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐲 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐭𝐬 𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐥 𝐚𝐟𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐛𝐞𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐨𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐚𝐫𝐤𝐞𝐭? Every year, organizations invest significant resources to launch new products and services. Yet, many struggle to attract and retain users. The main reason? They are designed to address 𝐠𝐚𝐩𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐛𝐥𝐞𝐦𝐬 without truly understanding 𝐡𝐮𝐦𝐚𝐧 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝𝐬. 𝐃𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 challenges this traditional approach. It begins with: 𝐄𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐲 — understanding people, their behaviors, and their real experiences — before creating solutions for them. 𝐃𝐞𝐟𝐢𝐧𝐞: Synthesize those insights into a clear problem statement grounded in human-centred needs. 𝐈𝐝𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐞: Generate a broad spectrum of ideas—without constraints—to uncover novel solutions. 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐭𝐨𝐭𝐲𝐩𝐞: Build tangible, often low-fidelity models of the solution to explore what might work. 𝐓𝐞𝐬𝐭: Validate with real users, gather feedback and iterate—and be ready to loop back if necessary. This human-centered mindset is transforming how successful innovations are born and sustained. Three weeks ago, together with my classmates and our lecturer 𝐃𝐫 Nisha Bamel, we completed the 𝐃𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 syllabus — an insightful journey that reshaped how I view innovation, creativity, and product development. 💡 I’d like to hear from you: 👉 𝐖𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐭𝐬 𝐝𝐨 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐞 𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐝 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐚𝐫𝐤𝐞𝐭 𝐝𝐮𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐚 𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐤 𝐨𝐟 𝐃𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐠𝐧 𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠? 𝐒𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐨𝐰. #DesignThinking #Innovation #HumanCenteredDesign #ProductDevelopment #LearningJourney #EmpathyInAction

Day 3 of product design- Defining product DNA Market is subdivided into segments as per spending capability, age group and aspiration. As per each category new variant of product is considered by collection of function and features. After benchmarking existing products yesterday, today is about shaping what truly makes our product unique — its DNA. All the insights from benchmarking — features, performance, pricing, and user feedback — start to connect here. This is the stage where we decide what our product stands for and what it won’t try to be. We make choices: 1. What’s absolutely essential to deliver? 2. What’s non-essential, but can enhance the experience? 3. How can we create variants or packages that balance both — giving users the freedom to choose based on their needs and budget? This is how product DNA begins to form — through intentional trade-offs and clarity of purpose. Not everything can (or should) be included. Sometimes, it’s what you leave out that defines the product best. In short: DNA = Focus + Intent + Differentiation. Up next: turning this DNA into early concepts and design directions. #ProductDesign #DesignThinking #Innovation

A technically perfect product can still fail if it doesn't meet a genuine market need. What happens when a product doesn't resonate with its audience, lacks visual appeal, or faces supply chain issues? These are business and design challenges, not just engineering hurdles. Ignoring them risks launching a product that customers ignore or that's too expensive to maintain. A functional product isn't necessarily a successful product. Prioritizing product-market fit ensures that the engineering efforts translate into a viable and desirable solution. #productmarketfit #productdevelopment #businessstrategy #designthinking

Recently, a founder showed me their product roadmap. When I asked about market research, they said “That’s coming.” Yikes. This is a common scenario with a predictable outcome. If your roadmap comes before your research, you are just conducting an exercise in confirmation bias. Your research needs to tell you what to build, not tell you if what you’ve built was a huge waste of time and money or not. Effective market research isn't complicated, but it does require focused work. It needs the following: a) Clear research objectives b) Specific user segments c) Focused competitor analysis d) Direct user feedback e) Data-driven validation Skip this work, and you're coding in the dark. Every feature is a guess and every launch is a gamble. This is the most costly mistake we see, and I’d say we see it at least once a month. Successful founders do the research first. They validate assumptions and understand their market before making bets.

Wanna get people fired up to solve real product problems? Here’s a small trick that works every time: When you wrap up a meeting early, don’t give people time back - use those 5 minutes to show something interesting you’re trying to solve. A design challenge, a half-baked prototype, a weird user insight - anything that sparks curiosity. 9 out of 10 times, it turns into an energizing discussion that’s way more valuable than ending early.