I’ll start. Basic process: Applying solution from one domain to another + luck.
When I was working as a corporate lawyer, I noticed that both our clients and we could be a lot better at capturing institutional memory. The problem wasn’t that we didn’t have systems in place (we had email search, a wiki, an up-to-date website, top-notch on-staff researchers, etc.), but that there were no incentives for those with knowledge to take half an hour out of their day to contribute this knowledge to the systems. With size, the non-processes that work for smaller firms (coffee break, knowing what everyone’s working on, etc.) were failing.
From /. to StackOverflow via HN, Foursquare, etc. there are many examples and templates of how to use karma and game-elements (e.g. badges) to incentivize contributions. Moreover, many of these elements should be compatible with the work environment as they would permit management to identify contributors (high-karma and badges) and domain experts (subject-area of contribution versus job-title). The incentive-element should be very strong: if management is on board, employees are on board (e.g., if karma matters as part of one’s work-review).
The second part in my process was to speak to future clients (management at mid-sized companies), users (lower-level employees who would use the system) and other entrepreneurs to gauge whether the problem was actually a need (i.e., would anyone be willing to pay for it).
Pretty well, but too early to tell. Closed-beta w/ 4 clients is very positive. Hoping to open up to public in ~4-6 weeks.
Some issues:
- 40+ employee companies which would really benefit from information retention / formalizing institutional memory require a real sales effort and can be resistent to switch to our SaaS approach for information which may be sensitive/private
- not as useful for companies < 12 employees or for companies where everyone is colocated (obviously)
- search is tough; it's easy to do ok, but we need it to be very very good; definitely stretching brain
- unsurprisingly, for companies that user yammer / 37signals / web services (2 of 4 clients), it's natural for employees to switch general questions from email to our platform, but for other two clients much tougher; unclear whether this is because of something cultural at the businesses or what
- am not good at sales (yet...)
- current implementation alone may not be enough to warrant use (i.e., might do well to be integrated with existing project management or CRM or other web services already in use)
I tried to stay with a MVP approach, but it's tough for a tinkerer like myself. I always want to add this or that and constantly have to force myself to stay simple. Big learning experience w/ that and with integrating user feedback from the get-go (balancing act between what's in my head, what client 1 wants and what client 2 wants -- opening up to larger audience earlier is probably better for MVP).
Comments
I’ll start. Basic process: Applying solution from one domain to another + luck.
When I was working as a corporate lawyer, I noticed that both our clients and we could be a lot better at capturing institutional memory. The problem wasn’t that we didn’t have systems in place (we had email search, a wiki, an up-to-date website, top-notch on-staff researchers, etc.), but that there were no incentives for those with knowledge to take half an hour out of their day to contribute this knowledge to the systems. With size, the non-processes that work for smaller firms (coffee break, knowing what everyone’s working on, etc.) were failing.
From /. to StackOverflow via HN, Foursquare, etc. there are many examples and templates of how to use karma and game-elements (e.g. badges) to incentivize contributions. Moreover, many of these elements should be compatible with the work environment as they would permit management to identify contributors (high-karma and badges) and domain experts (subject-area of contribution versus job-title). The incentive-element should be very strong: if management is on board, employees are on board (e.g., if karma matters as part of one’s work-review).
The second part in my process was to speak to future clients (management at mid-sized companies), users (lower-level employees who would use the system) and other entrepreneurs to gauge whether the problem was actually a need (i.e., would anyone be willing to pay for it).
That's an interesting idea. How's it working out?
Pretty well, but too early to tell. Closed-beta w/ 4 clients is very positive. Hoping to open up to public in ~4-6 weeks.
Some issues: - 40+ employee companies which would really benefit from information retention / formalizing institutional memory require a real sales effort and can be resistent to switch to our SaaS approach for information which may be sensitive/private - not as useful for companies < 12 employees or for companies where everyone is colocated (obviously) - search is tough; it's easy to do ok, but we need it to be very very good; definitely stretching brain - unsurprisingly, for companies that user yammer / 37signals / web services (2 of 4 clients), it's natural for employees to switch general questions from email to our platform, but for other two clients much tougher; unclear whether this is because of something cultural at the businesses or what - am not good at sales (yet...) - current implementation alone may not be enough to warrant use (i.e., might do well to be integrated with existing project management or CRM or other web services already in use)
I tried to stay with a MVP approach, but it's tough for a tinkerer like myself. I always want to add this or that and constantly have to force myself to stay simple. Big learning experience w/ that and with integrating user feedback from the get-go (balancing act between what's in my head, what client 1 wants and what client 2 wants -- opening up to larger audience earlier is probably better for MVP).