Fang Jun: product design one or two

Recently want to think more products, the smaller people want to think of the public, in fact, not part of the product, but on the scope of this matter. What has been more painful lately is that when you find that you are discussing and discussing, you often find that you are not talking to the same vocabulary system at the same level. This time we need to interact through the process to jointly build the dialogue public space out.

Categories are harder to define, such as Wittgenstein's definition of "family analogies," game: anything that we call a game does not share any singularity, but nevertheless all games Are interconnected by a complex network of similarities. Fortunately, most of us do not have to talk about them at the philosophical level, and we can agree on a small area and the vocabulary is fine.

Still the same, they may come up out of mind, may be very imperfect, there may already be a perfect system of experts, but this is my own experience, have special value for themselves.

One of the products

Written in the front: Recently for some reason to think about new products, or large companies in the development of new products, some not yet formed but also tried to think of the whole idea, are listed below. The entire industry and product backgrounds have been removed, a bit dry.

>>>> Product decision-making path

- Product Strategy Why develop this product, that is, whether this product is needed?
The company's resources can support the development and operation of this product?
What is the product?

When product decision-making decision-making?
When to complete the development?

Product design product design is not right?
Product design is not good?

How to use resources to use internal resources?
How to use external resources?

- how to operate operational strategies, including the team, pace, tools, etc.?
How to get "profit", set the proceeds through the product?

More generally, this is about how to simplify and develop a product at a large company. There are at least three aspects that should be simplified: the product itself is good and the executor knocks on and how to use it.

More macro, it is the product of macro-technology and social atmosphere, the tide of the flow, a specific company, are only part of the trend, or up to promote the trend.

Specific to the product strategy and decision-making, Steve Jobs is worth keeping in mind the statement that innovation is not about saying yes to everything. Instead, say NO for everything, except the crucial one.

>>>> Product decision makers and the thinking behind the decision

Who make the final decision? - is usually the core of the company who is executive-level decision-making? - How to inspire people responsible for project resources? Why do they support? Why not support?

From a specific leader's point of view, is not deep into the development and operation? This means that is not actually responsible for the failure of the product. From a higher leader's perspective, only the supreme leader (the person who is ultimately responsible) can fully think through one thing from beginning to end.

Large companies in the development of products, two kinds of saying are quite interesting: First, "the grass under the tree is not born," one is "good by the trees good shade." Therefore, in front of us, we need to have nothing to "knock" all the strength of the door, but also to take advantage of the resources of large companies.

The mobilization of relevant resources is of great importance. According to the degree, there are such things as spontaneous support and support, the strong support of demands, the absent-minded support on the surface, the objection of Yang and Yang, the complete opposition and boycott.

The decision-making of new products may not necessarily be understood by everyone. It may be because of the height and breadth of vision, or because of this egotism. To the strategic level, you may have to understand or understand, not change your mind. Seeing Huawei's recent study of IBM's Integrated Product Development (IPD) at the end of the last century, it is important to accept that Huawei is fully compliant. I always think that this is the crucial step in Huawei's history.

To put it anotherway, the new product idea of ​​a big company is actually quite agree with the whole group of viewpoints of Tom Peters many years ago. I read it: the product that is promoted from the bottom to the bottom does not get real kinetic energy before the product itself , Do not fight for big boss support. In fact, both the big companies, or the entire industrial system, creative products are not relying on the endorsement from.

In the end I repeat one sentence, and only the person who is ultimately responsible for it will fully consider one thing from beginning to end. (I look at the product, I like to see the product design itself is not right, this is where the interests and limitations; the second is more focused on who the person to see if this person's role is vague or clear, this is where The system is the main reference for many of the necessary decisions.)

Written in the back: scholars should have more routine analysis, time to look for information to see, but this afternoon I wrote down in the book this thinking and analysis, to my own great value, after all, is based on The actual experience is obtained.

Product two

Then record the product thinking. Any company, in fact, deal with consumers in the end, are a "product", of course, it may be similar to shampoo, television or personal computer users such products, it may be on the generator, aircraft, building energy Systems such equipment, may also be for personal service functions, it may be the so-called business-to-business services. Success or failure, in the final analysis, are tied to the "product."

Simplify, roughly can be divided into four levels of thinking about the product, put different issues at four levels to discuss, rather than staggered with each other, in two different planes have no intersection. Some people discuss the public, some things are very small public.

The first level: super macro level

The discussion here may be industrial thinking, such as the current Internet industry is most concerned about things that the Internet is the mobile Internet opportunities and challenges.

It may be a reflection of the paradigm shift in industry. Taking personal information consumption as an example, the paradigm shift from paradigmatic shift from printing to electronics, PUSH to PULL, intelligentization of information screening mechanisms, and access to information Space-time conversion and more.

May be a discussion of the nature of the product, such as whether a product "directed at the people's heart," directly cut the user's heart needs. For example, on the taste of the product, some products are not related to function but related to taste.

It may be a product architectural thinking. For example, I think all Internet products can be discussed in the "people-item-interaction" architecture and need to be clearly focused on people at this super-macro level , Concern, or focus on interaction.

It is also possible that thinking about product trends, such as the current variety of products, the underlying software or code, becomes more and more important and every company needs software engineers and software product managers. Another example is that nowadays, one of the design trends of various products is the simplification of the functions / interfaces that users face, and a large number of complicated things are packaged or placed on the server side.

The second floor: product macro level

The discussion here is relatively practical and involves the planning of the product itself:

The first is the product of the target user (user), to help users solve the problem (positioning), and solutions (core functions). Usually in the beginning of these three issues can not have a clear answer, but the listing must be the answer. Later, it is possible to follow the user to develop new answers come out.

Followed by the user experience of thinking, which is often considered the devil's details, attention to detail. This is a burgeoning demand in recent years as users, in addition to their core functions, value experience and value.

The third is from the perspective of brand building product thinking, the brand greatly affect the user's choice, the user's feelings, from the product planning stage, we must include brand building issues, including the characteristics of the brand, the company brand line Planning, branding.

Now more appreciated products, often functionally "use the needle to sky" in the core function is very focused; excellent experience, the brand can form a similar effect of brand worship.

The third layer: product design layer

Think here is the specific product design, trial production, the production process.

May be the business logic design of the product may be the preparation of technology may be the product development process may be the supplier's search may be the trial process and so on. In Internet development, in addition to very large projects, the so-called agile development is faster and more effective. That is to say, "design-development-test" can be accomplished by a small core team to reduce project communication costs.

All the questions here are closely related to the product itself, and there is a myriad of tacit knowledge / tacit knowledge about the industry and the product itself. The real expert is very important. The tip here is how to think "like a layman and practice like an expert."

In the outside world, we often see the discussion are in the macro level and product macro level, within the company / organization, we have seen, concerned about, at work, mostly product design layer, usually detailed to only two or three Individuals can fully understand all the details. Sometimes it comes out that people do not understand or want to know.

The fourth floor: product management layer

In fact, into the product operating layer, it is completely different logic. Logically related to the product, it may be such as doing market tests, how to operate rhythmically, how to improve iteratively, how to design a sales link (linking products and users), and how to design customer service links. For the operation of the crowd, such as the operation of the club, may also include a lot of tactics about crowd operation.

Outside the product logic, it is also dominated here, is the business logic, the core is how to profit. Sometimes including how to compete with competitors, but I always think that products are competing with them most of the time.

Off-topic, left as a note: on the Internet products

Twitter in fact a core function plus three sub-functions: 140 words of information, @ (comments), RT (forwarding), direct message (private letter); other face of the user's function may be made of pictures.

Products produced locally in China include watercress (a community built around "things"); paste it (a community built around "interaction").

Source: http://www.mindmeters.com/showlog.asp?log_id=9740