Tips for Experimentation in MVP Design

There’s one thing I use with all of my clients - an experimentation framework. Every month, we brainstorm ideas to close the gap between our demo request goal and what we think we can drive with the resources we have. Here’s how it works. 1 - The brainstorm meeting. This is where we pull a lot of the GTM team, including Sales, into a room for an hour to come up with as many ideas of things we can try as possible. No bad ideas. Also, this list can be added to throughout the month. 2 - Triage the ideas by scoring them. We score on a few different values - 1) Which KPI(s) it will influence. 2) How much effort it is to build. 3) What possible impact it might have on those KPIs. 4) Which areas it touches (to ensure we’re not only doing work in one area or only focused on short-term initiatives). 5) How confident we are that it will work. 3 - Choose which to work on. My preference is we tackle 3 of these per month - but this is all depending on the resources we have. The score is what’s primarily used to determine what gets worked on; however, some judgment is also used in this stage. 4 - Build a plan for how to bring each of these to market and assign a single owner. 5 - Implement and optimize - usually an MVP. It’s important to not over-engineer the solution in this stage because it’s an experiment. You should be a little embarrassed by the quality at this point - if you’re not, you may have spent too much time on it. 6 - Revisit the data and determine if it’s something to continue doing. If so, put it up on a shelf and put more money towards it. You also might consider if you want to put more development behind it to make it less of an MVP. This can all be managed in Airtable with a framework I got from the one and only Guillaume "𝑮" Cabane. If you’d like a copy of this framework - let me know. If enough folks would like it, I’ll create a clean version and get it out.

Experiments are a key building block to reaching the next stair steps of growth. As much as we want growth to be a smooth, up-and-to-the-right line graph, I find it more of a staggered stair-step approach (with some drops between steps - hold on! :) ). Typically, what got you to the current step will plateau, and you need to figure out what gets you to the next stage - which, a lot of times, is something new. This is where many companies and teams struggle and potentially stall because they don't have protected experimentation budgets and/or this mindset. Today, I'm presenting at our all hands with Ryan O. on how we’re tackling this with a client and early insights on one of our experiments (LinkedIn CTV). Also, Ryan is the true mastermind here and an incredible marketer - I highly recommend following him if you aren't already! Our client is also fantastic to work with and is forward-thinking, making this possible. Our approach: 1. The client had a protected experiment budget (critical!) that we will use outside of their typical paid spend 2. Based on their goals, we created an Experiment Brief document that outlined the structure and expectations for each experiment we pitched. This ensured we had the right goal, hypothesis, measurement, definition of success, and time needed to be documented to set the experiments up for success (routine misses, I see!). 3. From there, we decided with the client which experiments to bring in the near future and which ones to revisit. We launched 5 (Bing, YouTube Prospecting, YouTube Retargeting, LI Pipeline Acceleration (targeting additional buying committee members in open ops) & LI CTV), and had 3 more to come back to in the future (Wynter usage, Capterra, and G2). 4. We launched with MVP mindsets to prioritize execution, with refinement to come. (I see too many teams wait for perfect conditions and miss out on results) 5. Refined the MVP launch (e.g., working on tailored ads per buyer in pipeline acceleration and specifically creating LI CTV videos) 6. Report on early insights to the client, optimize accordingly and wait for the designated experiment timeframe to deem success or not. A fun early early insight was seeing a demo request with a “how did you hear about us?” list a local news station for the CTV experiment. This was screenshotted + dropped in the Slack channel for the team to see. (A couple of notes on the background of the client for context (I find these helpful): NOT selling to marketers/sellers, selling into the true enterprise (the Amazons), avg. sales cycle of nearly a year, large ACV, low volume on high intent conversions/deals due to the target audience. Like anything else, we’re trying to figure out how to spike growth in all areas and determine where their audience responds best to marketing.) I find frameworks and documented processes ensure movement for work, and this experimentation one did just that. Excited to report back on findings from them all!

There’s no denying the efficacy of Objectives and Key Results (OKRs) in driving alignment and focus within an organization. They've been a cornerstone in the strategic toolbox of many companies. However, when it comes to catalyzing innovation, OKRs can sometimes prove to be more of a straitjacket than a springboard. Here's why: 1️⃣ OKRs can stifle creativity: OKRs are typically tied to specific, measurable outcomes. While this works well for tracking progress, it can limit expansive, generative thinking. In an effort to 'meet targets', teams might be discouraged from exploring bold, disruptive ideas. 2️⃣ OKRs can create a tunnel vision: With a laser focus on the key results, organizations might overlook peripheral opportunities or 'happy accidents' that might have tremendous innovative potential. 3️⃣ OKRs may not adapt quickly: In the ever-changing landscape of innovation, the desired outcome can shift faster than the OKRs do. Rigidity can hamper adaptability, a core trait of any innovative organization. So, if not OKRs, then what? 💡 Enter Innovation Accounting: This is a way of evaluating progress when all the metrics typically used in an established company (like revenues and profits) are effectively zero. It involves creating a balanced scorecard that takes into account not just the financials, but also aspects like customer satisfaction, market validation, and process improvements. 💡 MVP and Iterative Experimentation: Instead of focusing solely on end-goals, the innovation process should be seen as a series of hypotheses that need to be tested. Develop minimum viable products, collect data, and learn. This allows you to adapt and evolve based on real-world feedback. 💡 Pulse Metrics: These are short-term, leading indicators of success that provide insight into whether you're on the right track. They're flexible, quickly adaptable, and keep a finger on the pulse of your innovation efforts. Innovation requires the courage to venture into the unknown and the wisdom to know "failure" isn’t a roadblock, but a stepping-stone. The right measurement framework can provide the freedom to experiment, iterate, and ultimately, innovate. #Innovation #OKRs #InnovationAccounting #MVP #PulseMetrics #BusinessStrategy