Understanding product management: on the value of visual mock-ups

July 6th, 2010 by Yali

In the first of our blog posts in the understanding product management series, we outlined the key role that product managers face turning commercial and customer needs into a compelling product.  In this blog post, we’ll look at one of the most important – and underrated – tools in a product manager’s arsenal:  the visual mock-up, and examine how this can be used most effectively to meet many of the typical challenges which product managers face.

What is a mock-up?

A mock-up, simply put, is a sketch of how individual screens on the digital product (be it an desktop application, mobile application, web app etc.) might look.  It is a rough sketch:  the point is not to indicate how the site will look graphically, but how it will work functionally.  It should contain all the buttons, menus, inputs and other functionality that each screen will have.

Here is an example mockup, one of a series created for a B2B client of ours:

A single mock-up is not especially useful, but a collection of the different screens that make up an application are enormously valuable.  That’s because collectively, they can be used to see how a user would step through the different workflows that make up an application.  (Indeed some mock-up tools let users connect individual mock-up screens to create interactive prototypes of finished products.)
Read the rest of this entry »

Understanding product management: pitfalls to avoid when working with a digital agency

June 17th, 2010 by Yali

House of Cards

In the previous post on product management, we took a high level look at the role that product managers play and the value that they provide. In this post, we go into a bit more detail, but from the point of view of companies that outsource the building of digital products (including websites, iPhone apps etc.) to digital agencies. In many (although not all) of these cases, there is no designated product manager (at either the client or the agency) and as a result, the effectiveness, popularity and commercial success of the digital product will suffer. By looking into the kind these issues in more detail, we hope to explain in more detail what it is that makes product management so critical, and also to provide an approach for companies engaging with digital agencies to avoid these pitfalls.

A typical scenario

A company that makes the vast majority of its money offline wants to do something online.  Maybe they’re a retailer looking to start selling online, or a magazine publisher wanting to make their content available online.  The client, unfamiliar with online, approaches a digital agency to help them.  Because the client is unfamiliar with online technology, they look for a digital agency that has done similar websites for similar clients.  The digital agency sits down with the client and run a series of requirements gathering workshops to understand what the client wants.  They put together long requirements specification and work with the client on a graphic treatment for the site.  On the basis of the images of these visuals, and the requirements specification, the agency builds the client its website.
Read the rest of this entry »

Monetising your community site through value chain mapping

February 2nd, 2010 by Alex

Community

Here at Keplar some of our recent advisory work has been for online community sites, helping them to improve their customer proposition while also growing their revenues. In the course of these projects we have started to develop a new technique for guiding the development of these sites which we call “value chain mapping” – a technique that works to improve the way community sites serve their community whilst simultaneously growing their revenue. This blog post aims to explain this technique – articulating the theory but also providing practical advice for owners of social networks. (None of the companies mentioned in this post are current or past clients of Keplar.)

Vertical social networks: a primer

For this post we focus on “vertical” social networks – these are simply community-oriented websites which focus on one content area, interest group or demographic. We use the word vertical to distinguish these community sites from general-purpose social networks such as Facebook and Bebo. For this post we use Mumsnet, the UK website “by parents for parents”, as our main example.

So, what does a vertical social network look like? Typically these sites provide their user community with a set of “soft tools” such as forums, profiles and articles, all designed to support the site’s users in socialising, sharing knowledge and fulfilling specific needs. On Mumsnet, those user needs would include childminding, keeping their child healthy, and finding a kindergarten.

On the monetisation side, vertical social networks generate most of their revenues through advertising – showing users targeted or general banner ads but also directing users towards relevant businesses for a fee (see for example the Mumsnet Mall). It’s a delicate balancing act for the site owners as communities respond badly to advertising which they deem excessive, irrelevant or dishonest.

So, what’s wrong with this model?

Read the rest of this entry »

An open letter to Spotify: you have an amazing opportunity, don’t blow it!

December 9th, 2009 by Yali

spotifylogo

Dear Spotify,

We know that you are one of the most exciting companies of the moment.  Everyone, from the Guardian, to Techcrunch and e-consultancy is singing your praises.  In spite of all the hype, we actually believe that Spotify remains under-hyped.

It’s about more than your business model

Mainstream media interest in Spotify has focussed on your business model.  The music industry has of course been badly hit by the growth of the internet, the rise in piracy and the shift in consumer spend to video games.  As a result, almost all of the coverage has narrowly focused on this question of whether you can make the music industry profitable, and whether you can be profitable yourself.  People have, shockingly, compared Spotify to We7, shocking because We7’s sole purpose is to deliver ad supported music to consumers for free, and the Spotify proposition offers a whole lot more.

It’s about a whole new way of consuming music

It is tempting, given Spotify’s iTunes-like interface, to think of it as just another music delivery mechanism, one that’s preferable to downloads because it is easier to protect against piracy.  But that misses the point.  Streaming music allows you to potentially offer your users two new types of listening experiences, without parallel in competitor services.  One of these has already been launched, and I hope that we don’t have to wait long for the second:

1.  Transform my mobile phone into the ultimate MP3 player

Spotify’s premium service for iPhone, Android and Symbian is incredible.  I have access to (almost) any song, at any time, immediately.  It doesn’t matter that my iPhone has only 8Gb.  I have instant access to an enormous music catalogue, unparalleled by even the biggest private collections.

2. Social consumption of music

Spotify has barely scratched the surface of the social features they could build around their product.  Sharing playlists is just the beginning.  I want to be able to discuss tracks with other music enthusiasts as I listen to them (and we listen to them together, in real-time), lookup forthcoming gigs, browse other people’s libraries for new music, send tracks to friends, even potentially talk to the artist while we’re both online.

How does Spotify seize these opportunities?

Given the potential, it’s a little disappointing how quickly you are progressing with your music revolution. Some recommendations:

1. Start properly marketing / advertising the services you already offer

Your mobile phone app is nothing short of incredible.  It has serious mainstream appeal.  You should be all over mainstream media telling people: “we can turn your phone into the ultimate MP3 player”  Don’t get stuck, as Skype did, trying to monetise your cost conscious, tech-savvy early adopters, but rather start advertising directly to the thousands of people who would kill to have a limitless library of music in their pockets.

2. Develop social features – quick!

A flippant thing remark, perhaps, but it needs saying.  Those social features aren’t “nice to haves” – they’re key in differentiating the Spotify proposition from everything that’s gone before it.  And that’s important because music piracy means by and large people are much less willing to pay for just the vanilla experience of listening to individual tracks.  However they may well, for example, be willing to browse and listen to their favourite artist’s music collection – be that Rev Run or Paul McCartney.  Especially if they can do so with their friends, compare notes, and rate it.  And imagine if they could do it with the artist him/herself?

There are several challenges to developing the social features quickly.  One option you might want to consider is opening up your platform.  Your core audio streaming system is brilliant – why not follow the path of Facebook or Twitter and nurture an imaginative developer community to build a wealth of different apps to take advantage of that core technology?

And if it all sounds like a bit much?  Hire Keplar LLP ;-)

When guests cook their own food: understanding open source

December 1st, 2009 by Yali

jamie oliver eating

Open source is not a business model

Inspired by the ongoing battle between the European Union and Oracle over the future of MySQL, yesterday’s New York Times notes that “open source as a model for business is elusive”.  Sadly (and uncharacteristically), the New York Times is wrong.  Open source is not a model for business at all.

To start with what open source is: it is an approach to development that prioritises development speed and flexibility over intellectual property rights.  By giving developers around the world the ability to contribute and extend open source products, open source projects can cater to many more users and scenarios than might be possible.

Part of what makes a project open source involves giving the product away for free:  this encourages developers to take and extend products, safe in the knowledge that they do so legally.  That doesn’t make open source a business model, although it means that being open source has implications for your business model.

If you have to give the software away for free, then how do you make money from it? This is a question that many open source projects have not managed to answer satisfactorily.  The classic answer has generally been around providing value-added services, but sadly, service businesses don’t scale as well as typical (closed source) software businesses.  As a result, some of the most successful open source projects have found alternative revenue streams altogether:  Mozilla’s Firefox has benefited from funding by Google (by driving search engine revenue using the box in the top right half of the browser).  OpenX generates revenue by offering the publishers who use its free ad servers value added services such as a real-time ad exchange.

A more interesting question than whether or not open source is a viable business model is where does open source work best?

Open source-code is rarely the most interesting thing about an open source project
Read the rest of this entry »