增长黑客鼻祖揭秘秘诀 | Sean Ellis(《增长黑客》作者)
The original growth hacker reveals his secrets | Sean Ellis (author of “Hacking Growth”)
Introducing the Guest
Lenny Rachitsky: The Sean Ellis test, such a seemingly simple idea that has had such a profound impact on the startup world.
Sean Ellis: The question is, how would you feel if you could no longer use this product? Once you got a high enough percentage of users saying they’d be very disappointed, most of those products did pretty well. If you felt too low, those products tended to suffer.
Origins of the Sean Ellis Test
Lenny Rachitsky: Say someone is listening and they’re like, “Okay. Man, I’m getting like 10%. I don’t know what to do.” What do you find often works?
Sean Ellis: Just ignore the people who say they’d be somewhat disappointed. They’re telling you it’s a nice to have. If you start paying attention to what your somewhat disappointed users are telling you and then you start tweaking onboarding and product based on their feedback, maybe you’re going to dilute it for your must have users.
Case Study: Lookout’s Two-Week Score Boost
Lenny Rachitsky: Moving retention often is really hard, but I guess it sounds like there’s often something you can do.
Sean Ellis: It’s usually much more function of onboarding to the right user experience than it is about the kind of the tactical things that people try to do to improve retention.
Next Steps After Reaching 40%
Lenny Rachitsky: What are like three or four things that you think people should definitely try to help improve activation?
Uncovering User Context & Building Growth Flywheels
Sean Ellis: In my experience-
Certainty of the 40% Threshold & Team Focus
Lenny Rachitsky: Today, my guest is Sean Ellis. Sean is one of the earliest and most influential thinkers and operators in the world of growth. He coined the term growth hacking, invented the ICE prioritization framework, was one of the earliest people to use freemium as a growth strategy, and maybe most famously developed the Sean Ellis test to help you understand if you have product market fit, which a large percentage of founders use today and profoundly impacted the way startups are built. Over the course of his career, Sean was head of growth at Dropbox and Eventbrite, helped companies like Microsoft and Newbank refine their growth strategy, was on the founding team of LogMeIn, which eventually sold for over $4 billion, and he’s the author of one of the most popular growth books of all time called Hacking Growth. In our conversation, we dive deep into two topics. One, how to know if you’ve got product market fit and what to do if you don’t, and two, how to figure out how to grow once you’ve found product market fit.
If you’re in the early stages of a new product wrangling with product market fit or trying to figure out how to jumpstart or further accelerate growth for your product, this episode is for you. If you enjoy this podcast, don’t forget to subscribe and follow it in your favorite podcasting app or YouTube. It’s the best way to avoid missing feature episodes and it helps the podcast tremendously. With that, I bring you Sean Ellis.
Sean, thank you so much for being here and welcome to the podcast.
Sean Ellis: Thanks, Lenny. I’m super excited to be on with you.
False Positives, Switching Costs & Timing
Lenny Rachitsky: There’s so much that I want to talk about. There’s so many directions we can go, but to keep it focused, I want to spend time on two areas. I want to talk about how to know if you have product market fit and what to do once you have product market fit in terms of figuring out how to grow. I know these things are very linked. I know you spent a lot of time on these things. How does this feel?
Sean Ellis: Sounds perfect. Yeah, let’s do it.
Limitations of the Sean Ellis Test
Lenny Rachitsky: Okay. Okay, amazing. Let’s talk about, first of all, the Sean Ellis test, slash something people call sometimes the product fit test. Such a seemingly simple idea that has had such a profound impact on the startup world. I’ve never actually seen you talk about the history of this thing, how you came up with these questions, how you came up 40%, the whole journey of this thing. So let’s talk about this. But first of all, can you just tell people what is the Sean Ellis test for folks that aren’t exactly familiar with this?
Sean Ellis: It’s a simple question that helps you figure out, does anyone consider your product a must-have, or ideally, who and how many people consider it, but ultimately it’s about trying to figure out is your product a must-have, which could be equated to having product market fit. And so the question is, how would you feel if you could no longer use this product? And I give them the choice, very disappointed, somewhat disappointed, or even not disappointed or not applicable, I’ve already stopped using the product. And what I’m trying to find are those people who say, “I would be very disappointed if I could no longer use this product,” then that’s a really powerful vein to dig into when you discover that you actually have some people who would give a crap if your product disappears.
Prematurely Declaring Product-Market Fit
Lenny Rachitsky:
Gamma has become one of the fastest growing AI web products in the world, adding 20 million new users just this past year and is setting its sights on becoming the modern alternative to PowerPoint. Whether you have design skills or not, Gamma can save you hours of time synthesizing your ideas and shaping your content. Visit gamma.app and use promo code LENNY to get a free month of Gamma Pro. That’s G-A-M-M-A, .app.
Let me tell you about CommandBar. If you’re like me and most users I’ve built product for, you probably find those little in-product pop-ups really annoying. “Want to take a tour? Check out this new feature.” And these pop-ups are becoming less and less effective since most users don’t read what they say. They just want to close them as soon as possible. But every product builder knows that users need help to learn the ins and outs of your product. We use so many products every day and we can’t possibly know the ins and outs of everyone.
CommandBar is an AI-powered toolkit for product, growth, marketing and customer teams to help users get the most out of your product without annoying them. They use AI to get closer to user intent, so they have search and chat products that users describe what they’re trying to do in their own words and then see personalized results like customer walkthroughs or actions. And they do pop-ups too, but their nudges are based on in-product like confusion or intent classification, which makes them much less annoying and much more impactful. This works for web apps, mobile apps, and websites. And they work with industry-leading companies like Gusto, Freshworks, HashiCorp and LaunchDarkly. Over 15 million end-users have interacted with CommandBar. To try out CommandBar, you can sign up at commandbar.com/LENNY and you can unlock an extra 1,000 AI responses per month for any plan. That’s commandbar.com/LENNY. And the idea is that if you, 40% or more of people, say they’d be very disappointed if they can no longer use the product, you essentially have product market fit.
Customer Acquisition & Growth Readiness
Sean Ellis: I would say it’s a leading indicator of product market fit. The lightning indicator is, do they actually keep using it? So probably retention cohorts are more accurate, but the problem is, like your time at Airbnb, how long do you have to look at a retention cohort before you know that you’ve actually long-term retained someone?
And so with this question, you can kind of find out day one, you don’t need a good analytics system in place to be able to see if product market fit exists. And so yeah, the 40% was not something I originally had in there. Originally, I was trying to have just a filter so that I was not treating all feedback from customers the same, but I was trying to find feedback from customers who actually really cared about the product. And then was over time, at the time I was working for a couple of YC-backed companies, and so those companies were all pretty connected, and so I would share the question with a lot of other startups in Silicon Valley. And so over time, I started to see there was a pattern that once you got a high enough percentage of users saying they’d be very disappointed, most of those very disappointed without the product, most of those products did pretty well. And then if you felt too low, those products tended to suffer.
Adjusting the 40% Threshold
Lenny Rachitsky: Okay, there’s two things I want to definitely follow up on here. The first is such an important point that you made at the beginning when I introduced this test that you described it as a leading indicator of product market fit and actually retention, people actually using your product, the product actually being used by the market is the actual ultimate test. So the idea here is this is a good way to get a sense of, before you actually have data, are we headed in a good direction? Could you speak more about that, of like, when to use this and when it’s most useful in best [inaudible 00:08:34]?
Origin Story of the Test Question
Sean Ellis: Yeah. I mean, so for me in particular, when I come into a company, my goal is to help them grow. And so I don’t want to put myself in a situation where I’m going to fail because no one actually cares about the product. And so it can really be asked at a company of any stage. It’s helpful to understand who your must have users are. But essentially once you have even an MVP, like a very first MVP on the product, you can still get some useful feedback about the product if it’s resonating with anyone.
So I actually had a company where I had committed to work with them. It was right after I left Dropbox and I committed to work with these guys for six months to help them grow. I ran the question and it came back at only 7% of users saying they’d be very disappointed without the product. And so I’m like, “I have six months to help them grow and they’re only at 7% right now. It might take six months to get the 40%. Am I doing them a disservice by being in a growth role and being on payroll during this period of time?” But fortunately with the signal and the information we got from the initial survey, we were able to get them at 40% in two weeks.
Lenny Rachitsky: Wow. What did you do there just as a case study?
Silicon Valley’s Tech-Driven Early Adopters
Sean Ellis: Yeah. Yeah. So the company called Lookout, it’s a mobile security company, and now most of the things in Lookout are built into iPhones and Androids. But at that time, the product had everything from backup my data to find my lost phone to protecting your phone with a firewall and antivirus. And so when we ran this initial survey, I dug into the 7% who said they’d be very disappointed without the product and found that most of that 7% were focused on the antivirus functionality. So they were like, they know they need to protect their computer from viruses, smartphones were becoming more like computers, so it just made a lot of sense for them that they’d need to protect their phone. And interesting, at the time, I think there was only one kind of phone virus that had ever even happened, but it was a pretty easy mental leap for people.
And so now we knew, okay, it’s antivirus that people really valued. And so step one was just reposition the product on antivirus. So that kind of creates a filter. So anyone who now is coming in to sign up for the product who doesn’t care about antivirus is not going to convert, and those who are excited about antivirus are going to convert. We already know from the initial survey that people value that after they convert. So by setting the right expectations around it up front, you’re going to bring people in with the right expectations. But then the second thing that we did was we streamlined onboarding so that the first thing that they did after signing up for the product was to set up the antivirus and then get a message “you’re now protected from viruses.”
And so it’s really the combination of those two things. It’s set the right expectations and then speed to value. And so the next cohort of people that we surveyed were at 40% saying they’d be very disappointed without the product. So that literally took two weeks to make those changes. Six months later, it was 60% on the score. And then I think they hit the billion dollar valuation four or five years later on ultimately being one of the early unicorns.
And interestingly, as all of those things were built into mobile phones now, they’ve completely changed the business, but they continue to do really well, but they’ve continued to iterate the business. I think that having that kind of finger on the pulse early in the business was important to build the muscle in the business to be really responsive as the market changed.
Lenny Rachitsky: Sean, this is already amazing. There’s just a fractal of topics I want to explore from this very short conversation already. So the first is just follow this thread of basically you’re sharing kind of a growth strategy that I imagine you execute, is look for the percentage of people that would be very disappointed if your product went away, see who they are, see what they’re excited about and lean into that both positioning-wise, onboarding-wise, and probably also cut out stuff from your product that they don’t care about.
Durability of the Percentage & Sample Size
Sean Ellis: Yeah. And I was coming at it from a marketing perspective initially. Over time, I position myself more in a growth role with product and marketing as areas I could influence. But as a marketer, I probably didn’t have a lot of influence on a engineering founded company to say, “Let’s cut out stuff.” So it made more sense to say, “Let’s just sequence the onboarding so that we’re highlighting this and onboarding to this.” That was a little easier to sell.
Segmenting Audiences & Strategic Choices
Lenny Rachitsky: And just hearing that you can move this score so quickly without even changing the product substantially, I imagine what surprised a lot of people when you think about moving retention often is really hard. And maybe we talk about that, but I guess it sounds like there’s often something you can do that’s not very hard that might significantly shift this product market fit test.
Sean Ellis: Right. And then that ultimately moving retention is really hard, but it’s usually much more function of onboarding to the right user experience than it is about the tactical things that people try to do to improve retention.
Choosing Survey Tools
Lenny Rachitsky: Okay. I want to put a pin on that and come back to that because a really important topic. I’m going to come back to, say someone runs this survey and they get 40%, what should they have in their mind of like, “This is what this is telling me”? Because I think a lot of people are like, “I got product market fit. I got this. Let’s go, go, go.” What’s the best way to think about what this tells you?
Sean Ellis: Yeah, I mean it tells you something really important, which is, you haven’t created something that people don’t care about. So that’s an important insight. But until you deeply understand that product market fit, you kind of don’t have the tools to be able to grow the business. So that’s really the next step, is to dig in and figure out who considers it a must have, how are they using the product, what did they use before, what problem are they solving.
One of my favorite questions is… So I tend to have a lot of questions that I build off of that I’m using that filter, trying to drill into the users who say they’d be very disappointed without the product, and one of my favorite questions is, “What is the primary benefit that you get?” And then I use that initially as an open-ended question to kind of crowdsource different benefits people are getting. But then I run another survey where I turn it into a multiple choice question, force them to pick one of four distinctive benefit statements. And then the question that follows on that next survey is, “Why is that benefit important to you?” And then I start to get really good context.
So I actually came up with this question when I was working with an early YC company called Xobni, which is inbox felt backwards. And when I ran that question, basically the people who said they’d be very disappointed without the product we’re focused on, “Xobni helps me find things faster in my email.” So it’s great to know, okay, that’s the benefit. But when I asked, “Why is that benefit important to you?” They said, “Oh, I’m drowning in email.” I kept seeing that statement as a written statement. And so when I then was trying to figure out how to acquire customers, when I tested “drowning in email?”, that set such a good hook. That was the context that people were living in, that they were really responsive to the message of find things faster with Xobni and then a description of what Xobni is. So I think when you can really dig into the context of why that must have benefit is important to people, you start to get the ingredients to build that flywheel that leads to long-term sustainable growth.
From Leading Indicators to Retention Cohorts
Lenny Rachitsky: So what I’m hearing is whether you have 40%, whether you have 60% or even 7%, the actual best use of this tool is look at that percentage of highly disappointed and see what they’re looking for, what they’re excited about.
Superhuman’s Evolution of Survey Methods
Sean Ellis: Start drilling in, start feeling back that onion-
Follow-Up Surveys & PMFsurvey.com
Lenny Rachitsky: Start drilling in.
Sean Ellis: … and just deeply understand them and make sure that ultimately your product roadmap is doubling down on the things that are important to your must-have customers. Onboarding is bringing new people to the right experience. Your messaging is setting the right expectations, your acquisition campaigns are targeting people who actually have the need. And so it’s all about getting the right people to the right experience. And then even your engagement loop is about just reinforcing how to get people to experience that benefit more often.
Growth Priorities: Activation to Acquisition
Lenny Rachitsky: Awesome. And the 40% threshold, so what you shared is you basically emerged from just looking at tons of startups doing the survey and finding a pattern. How firm is that 40%? How big of a deal? Is it 39 versus 41?
Sean Ellis: I don’t think it’s that firm. To me, I think the real power is having some kind of target for the team to be shooting for that basically says, “We’re not going to aggressively start to grow until we hit this target.” And I think that as just a focusing piece is really important because I think one of the biggest challenges in an early stage startup is half the people feel like we’re years from having this product ready to grow, and half the people are like, “What are we waiting for?” Where if you can actually get people on the same page of what does product market fit look like for our business, and it’s at that point that we’re going to.
Before I ever heard the term product market fit, I remember the conversations back at LogMeIn in the mid 2000s of kind of like, “When do we step on the gas? What is the combination of factors that need to be in place before we start pouring fuel on the early fire?” And so yeah, I think that kind of nail it then scale it. It’s probably been a term that’s been around for decades now, but it’s all kind of pointing to that same concept of product market fit.
LogMeIn’s Activation Case Study
Lenny Rachitsky: How often have you seen false positives with this test where someone gets 40% and something is not right, they’re actually far from it? Or is it generally pretty accurate?
Deepening Understanding via Qualitative Research
Sean Ellis: If you’re having people say that they’d be very disappointed without your product, that’s a really good sign. What I can tell you is that not necessarily a false positive, but what is driving people to say they’d be very disappointed. One of my favorite books is Hooked by Nir Eyal and he talks about in the kind of engagement loop that your last step is investment.
And so I ran the survey on a business that I thought was a fairly commoditized business. Part of it I wanted to see, could I use the same go-to-market approach on a later stage company and use it to accelerate growth. And so this was a business called webs.com. They eventually got acquired by VistaPrint. But they’d been pretty flat for the year before I went in there. And then I started to use this approach to try to dial in their growth engine. I ran the survey thinking, “Yeah, you’ve had products like Wix and Weebly that have come on to the market since this more legacy website building product has been around. I personally think they’re a little easier to use, they’re a little better.” And so I didn’t have high hopes when I ran the survey, but it came back with one of the highest scores I’d ever seen. And it was like 90% of the people saying they’d be very disappointed if they could no longer use the product.
Defining Activation Metrics
Lenny Rachitsky: Holy shit. I’ve never seen that.
Sean Ellis: And I was like, “How could that be possible? This product is kind of a commoditized category. I wouldn’t even say it’s one of the best.” And then when I want to dug into it again, it comes back to that Nir Eyal Hooked model, is that the investment people have made in building that website, they put so much into that they know exactly how to make the changes and the kind of the CMS kind of side of things, they have spent a lot of time just making it beautiful. And so ultimately it was something that that was why they were saying they’d be very disappointed.
But fast-forward when I initially went in, still doing these things help the business resume growth and have significant growth over the next 12 months after we did these things. So still the signal we got from why people would be very disappointed without the product was important and speed to value. All the other things I think about in go-to-market for an early stage product still were relevant, but just I think they were a little stronger on the percentage he’d be very disappointed.
Even Eventbrite when I was there when we ran it was probably the second highest I’d ever seen. But with event organizers, if they’ve already set their event up on that platform and they’ve sent it out to their list and all those people are coming in and they’re managing their event, again, they’ve invested a lot in the platform. So sort of switching costs I think can factor in there. So it’s a function of both switching costs and utility of the product.
Growth Engines & Growth Loops
Lenny Rachitsky: So that’s a question I wanted to ask is, what’s your guidance on when to ask this question? What I’m hearing is, if you ask it very far along the journey, when they’re very invested, you’ll get a much higher score. Is there any advice on the timing and the best time to ask this question to your users?
Sean Ellis: What I recommend is a random sample of people who’ve really used your product. So they’ve gone in, they didn’t just sign up, but they went in and hopefully hit that deviation moment. They’ve used it twice, two plus times, and they’ve ideally used it, say, within the last week or two weeks, so they haven’t churned yet. So if it’s a random sample of those people, that’s kind of the ideal time to ask it.
Choosing Where to Focus Growth Efforts
Lenny Rachitsky: Got it. So basically it’s people that have activated whatever that means to you and have been using it for a couple weeks?
Sean Ellis: Yeah.
Finding Growth Inspiration via Customer Conversations
Lenny Rachitsky: Not people landing in your home page, not people just signing up, not people months later.
Birth of the Dropbox Referral Program
Sean Ellis: Not people who’ve seen a demo of your product, but it’s people who actually have experienced the product. But it’s okay if you’re hitting people who’ve used it months later, but in that Lookout example that I gave, if I’m testing people’s perception of the product after I made updates to the onboarding, I’m going to only want to survey people who went through the new onboarding.
Lenny Rachitsky: Yep. In the experimental. Yeah. Okay. So I asked people on Twitter what to ask you. A lot of people had a lot of awesome questions. I’m going to sprinkle in a couple of these questions throughout the chat.
Freemium & Word of Mouth
Sean Ellis: Sure.
Engagement & Natural Usage Cycles
Lenny Rachitsky: One came in from Shraaz Doshi, a popular guest of the podcast.
How to Choose a North Star Metric
Sean Ellis: One of the ones that I listened to recently.
Lenny Rachitsky: Amazing. I think it’s the second most popular episode behind Brian Chesky. Okay. So he had a question of just, “What are the limitations of the score? When does it break down? When should you not use it if ever?” Is there anything of just like, “Here’s when it’s not going to work for you”?
Evolution of Growth Strategies
Sean Ellis: Yeah. I think one-off products would probably, like, how would you feel if you could no longer watch the movie you just watch? I wouldn’t care. Even when I run a workshop, I don’t run this as part of my survey after I do a workshop because how would you feel if you could no longer attend the workshop you just attended? It doesn’t make sense. So I’ll ask an NPS question as my filtering question so that I’m looking at focusing in on feedback of people who love it, also then through a separate lens, looking at people maybe who would be my detractors. So I think one-off products are probably not good products to run the question on. There may be other places as well that I’m not thinking of right now, but that [inaudible 00:25:00].
ICE & RICE Prioritization Frameworks
Lenny Rachitsky: It sounds like not many. What I’m hearing is it’s generally widely applicable.
Sean Ellis: Yeah, I think it is, at least from my perspective. It’s been really useful for me anyway.
AI’s Impact on Growth Work
Lenny Rachitsky: Awesome. Okay. And then the follow-up question from Shraaz is, and I kind of asked this, but I’m curious if there’s anything more here, just, “Have you seen any instances of startups over relying on the score prematurely declaring product market fit when in reality they haven’t reached it yet? And just are there any other caveats of like, ‘Cool, I got 40%’?” Is there anything else you should know, like, ” Okay. But maybe check this one thing”?
AI & Cross-Functional Growth Challenges
Sean Ellis: Yeah, I mean, I think to me it’s kind of like what really is the definition of product market fit is the definition that people who get through my crappy onboarding and actually experience the product love it. And if I’m able to retain those people, that means I have product market fit. Or, is fixing that crappy onboarding part of getting to product market fit as well? I think that’s up for debate.
So to me, the hardest, I wouldn’t obsess on onboarding if I know those who kind of get through the challenge of getting started with the product still don’t like the product then feels like it’s a core product issue or wrong people using it in the wrong way issue. But once you have that, then ultimately it doesn’t mean that you’re ready to grow. When I focus on growth, then customer acquisition is almost the last step. Once I validate that it’s a must have for those early users, then I’m thinking about, “Okay, how do I optimize speed to value? How do I make sure that people have the right prompts to come back and use the product at the right time so that’s kind of more of that engagement loop? How do I get my existing users to bring in more users if there’s something that makes sense on that end? Even how do I optimize my revenue model?”
Once all of those things are working well, then I’ll obsess on the customer acquisition side. But customer acquisition is so hard that if you’re not really efficient at converting-
… customer acquisition is so hard that if you’re not really efficient at converting and retaining and monetizing people, you’re going to really struggle on the customer acquisition side.
Lenny Rachitsky: Yeah, cool. And we’ll talk about customer acquisition/growth.
Asking the Right Questions at the Right Time
Sean Ellis: Sure.
Lightning Q&A Session
Lenny Rachitsky: Another question I wanted to ask, and a couple listeners asked, is the 40%. I had Jag from Nubank on the podcast, I think you may have worked with them, and they use 50% as their threshold because apparently Brazilians are very nice.
Sean Ellis: Yeah. Optimistic I think is what I said.
The Customer Support Analogy
Lenny Rachitsky: Yeah. I guess the question is do you find instances where you should increase that percentage? And in B2B, is anything different? Do you change the percentage in B2B? Any advice there just when you adjust the threshold?
Sean Ellis: Yeah, I hadn’t really thought too much on that. Again, for me, generally I’m trying to just figure out is this a product that can grow? So if I got a 37%, am I going to be like, “Oh no, this would be impossible?” Or if I had a 70%, does that mean I’d say, “Oh yeah, I want to jump in and work with this company?” It’s more nuanced than that. Obviously, if it’s a 70%, but I have no idea how I grow the business, I’m going to be stuck there. But I do think he brought up a really good point that, culturally, some people are going to be more optimistic or pessimistic. Interestingly, when I came up with the question, I used to just use a normal satisfaction question.
When I was working at Xobni, I’m just an intensely curious person anyway, so I’m just trying to dig in and understand the customers, and so I’ve always done lots of surveying. But at Xobni, I was going to use my filter as a satisfaction question, so how satisfied are you with this? I’m very satisfied. I’m somewhat satisfied. And our main customers were actually senior management, and so I thought senior management’s never satisfied. I’m going to get always this super lukewarm thing. How can I change this question to give me a more real answer from these guys? Well, if I flip it and say, “How would you feel if you could no longer use this product?” I’ll probably get a more honest answer back from them. And of course, they’re very disappointed if they can’t get what they want.
And so initially it was just for the case of Xobni, but then I went to Dropbox right after Xobni and like, “Oh, I’ll try the question again.” And the insights I got back were really useful. And so each company I went to, I kept using the question. I’m like, this works way better than your typical satisfaction question. But initially, it was more about thinking just senior management to get a more honest answer out of them.
Behind the Scenes at TikTok
Lenny Rachitsky: So that’s the origin story right there?
How to Connect & Collaborate
Sean Ellis: Yeah.
Lenny Rachitsky: Wow. That senior managers are just very harsh and they don’t need anything?
Sean Ellis: Yeah.
Lenny Rachitsky: And you have to flip it. That is so interesting. That question is such a good reminder of how hard it is to build anything people really would be disappointed not to have. That’s why this works so well. People are like, “I don’t need this. Who cares?” That’s the core of this, is just that is hard.
Sean Ellis: Especially when I first moved to Silicon Valley. The first 15 years of my career were not in Silicon Valley, and so I was in Eastern Europe and then New York and then Boston. But you move to Silicon Valley and you have people who get really excited about technology for technology’s sake. And so just something being cool is like, “Isn’t it cool that we can actually do this?” drives a lot of people. And so to me, I’m very practical. If it’s not something that is really bringing value to people, then the likelihood that that product’s successful long-term is going to be pretty low.
Even, interestingly, at Dropbox, through the six months I was there, I’d ask one question multiple times a month. I broke the early beta users into a bunch of different lists. And I’d ask, “Which best describes you? I like to be among the first to try cool new technology, or, I only try things that I think will be useful for me?” And over the six months, it flipped from 90% being people who try things that they want to try cool new technology to six months later, it was people who only are going to try something that they feel like is useful. But what’s cool is just because what motivates you to try something is you’re an early adopter and you want to try something cool, if you’re going to keep using it, it’s because it’s giving you some utility. And so I can still use those early adopters to help me figure out where’s the value inside the product.
Lenny Rachitsky: Awesome. So actually, two questions along those lines. How durable do you find this percentage being? Say you hit 40%, how often does that fade and go away versus stay there or go higher?
Sean Ellis: Yeah, I haven’t seen it really fade back down, but I’ve seen companies fail despite having it. And I think a lot of times then, it becomes an execution challenge. Once you have product-market fit, not everyone’s going to be a good executor. But before that, I think getting to product-market fit, obviously there’s a lot of methodology for doing it today that might make it a bit easier for people, but I still think it’s fairly random and pretty dang hard. And so ultimately, the risk factor of creating something that people care about is really difficult. So if you can get to the point where you have 40% of the people who are using it saying they’d be very disappointed, and you have a reasonable sample size. Let’s say you’ve got 10 people and four of them said they’d be very disappointed without it, you’re still going to get something useful from those four. But I wouldn’t say that’s a sample size that you can really go to market on, so yeah.
Lenny Rachitsky: What’s a good sample size you look for of just, “Okay, this is actually good data I want to rely on?”
Sean Ellis: It’s really funny. So much of the stuff I self-learned, but I basically at one point said I need at least 30 responses, and I just thought I randomly made up a number and then I had people telling me, “Yeah, 30 is the minimum that you want on stuff.” Okay. And even when I first created this survey, I remember showing it to the co-founder of SlideShare and her PhD was in survey-related stuff like cognitive psychology, but she basically said it was really about surveying. And she’s like, “This methodology is amazing. How did you come up with this?” And so having some of that validation around these things helped. But a lot of it was just, again, driven by my own curiosity and also just knowing that that failure is such a likely outcome that trying to reverse engineer that failure, and then the number one reason for failure would be that people don’t actually care about the product. And so when I find that, that’s a really good sign that we’re now down to an execution challenge.
Lenny Rachitsky: And there’s this obvious element of you may have product-market fit with people, but that group might end up being very small and the business you build around it could actually be cool, but it’s not going to be a massive business. Is there anything there you can share? It’s hard to know the size opportunity even though some people really, really like it.
Sean Ellis: Yeah, I talked about I go to a multiple choice after I initially use open-ended questions to crowdsource the different use cases. But then I try to force people in a bucket, and then I can run filters on each of those buckets and I’ll be like, “Oh, people who use it this way are like 60% likely to be very disappointed without the product, but people who use it this way are 35% likely to be very disappointed, but way more people use it the 35% way.” And so then, do you want that intensely loyal group or the much broader group that’s maybe a bit less, but almost there?
I think that becomes a bit of a strategic conversation of do we want to have a better chance of surviving, going after a niche that we know we can serve well? Or have we raised so much money that we have to go after a really big market, and one that’s not going to be long-term? But maybe then you’re like, “Okay, once I have traction in that market, I can start to try to appeal to some other markets.” But I think that’s where some strategic decisions come in.
Lenny Rachitsky: Do you have a heuristic of which you often recommend or is it very dependent on the situation?
Sean Ellis: I prefer a more passionate customer base and work from there, just because I think your biggest competition when you’re really innovating is just being irrelevant. And so if you’re deeply relevant to anyone, I think that gives you a much better chance of long-term success.
Lenny Rachitsky: Awesome. That’s a really good insight. Okay, two more questions along this line and then I want to talk about growth strategy. One very tactical question. Is there a tool you recommend for doing this sort of survey? Do you recommend inline? In the product? An email? Something else?
Sean Ellis: I’ve used a lot of different tools. I actually had a survey business that I sold to private equity years ago. It is called Qualaroo. That’s an inflow survey tool. I think just using SurveyMonkey with emailed surveys works fine. And for me, it’s a lot more of what’s pleasant for the customer to fill out and then what’s going to give me something where I can work really easily with the data? So at Bounce, for example, they had already intercom in place that had just introduced surveying, but it was a really crappy customer experience, at least at that time. That’s been almost a year now or actually a little over a year. And so I’m really sensitive to is it a good survey experience for the consumer itself? But yeah, I don’t think I’m stuck to any one platform there.
Lenny Rachitsky: Such an important topic. Just, again, to remind people why this is so important, one of the most common questions founders ask is, “Do I have product-market fit? Have I built something people want?” That’s just an endless series of, “I don’t know. How do I know? When do I know?” And this is telling you in a really interesting way. So your advice is this is a leading indicator. You don’t actually know until people actually start using it and whether they retain and continue using it. Is there just advice on the shift you make from relying on the survey to actually looking at retention cohorts? Is it just once you have enough data, once you have a couple of cohorts, then start looking at that? Forget about the survey?
Sean Ellis: Yeah, but retention cohorts don’t give you any of the qualitative insights into the why, so that’s why we continue to do the survey. So initially I would say if the survey comes back and it shows whatever your target number is… If you want to be Nubank, it’d be a 50%. Or two of the companies I launched, we launched in Hungary, and I would say it was the opposite end of the spectrum of Brazil, maybe more pessimistic than the average culture. And so maybe 30% is good enough there, but that ultimately, whatever your target is, that you have the signal that says, “Okay, we have enough value here. Let’s start working on growing the business.” But while you’re working on growing the business, I would be paying attention to those retention cohorts. And if you’re churning out all the customers who were saying that they’d be very disappointed without the product, then okay, let’s retrench and rethink, do we really have product-market fit here and what do we need to do to get it if we don’t?
Lenny Rachitsky: Awesome. And speaking of Nubank, if anyone wants to see how a company has actually operationalized this in the way they operate, that there’s an episode that we’ll link to in the show notes where every new product at Nubank they build, before they launch it, they wait for 50% threshold. For people to say 50% of people would be disappointed if this product did not exist as they’re developing it. And only then do they launch it publicly.
Sean Ellis: Yeah, I think they even do it down to the feature level.
Lenny Rachitsky: Wow.
Sean Ellis: So if you think about it, how would you feel if you can no longer use this feature starts to give you, again, the signal, is that feature a must-have feature? And if it’s not, maybe we shouldn’t have it. And so yeah, I was super excited when I saw how they were using the survey and they were doing it before I engaged with them.
Lenny Rachitsky: Oh, wow. That’s awesome.
Sean Ellis: But they were doing it, I think, from pretty early on in the business.
Lenny Rachitsky: The reason they can do this is they have a lot of users. They have millions of millions of users, so they can ask some small percentage of people this question. Because people hearing this might be like, “Oh my God, how many times am I going to be asked this question when I’m using this feature?” But they have a lot of users, so it’s easier.
Sean Ellis: Yeah. Yeah.
Lenny Rachitsky: Okay. Last question, I promise, along these lines. Say someone is listening and they’re like, “Okay. Man, I’m getting 10%, I’m getting 15%. I don’t know what to do to increase my product-market fit.” You should have just a strategy of just dig into the people that are very disappointed and see what they have to say. But any other advice/what do you find often works in helping people move from, say, 10% to 40%?
Sean Ellis: Yeah, so one of the things that’s cool about almost open-sourcing the survey approach is, again, watching how Nubank has evolved their usage. But one of the other companies that I think used it in an interesting way is Superhuman. And I would say that they basically ended up probably putting a lot more momentum behind the question than it had even before. They posted something about how they did it on First Round Capital’s blog. And what I have always said, and again, it’s me coming at it from probably initially a marketing background, which is I’m taking the product as a fixed thing, and how do I actually figure out how to market and grow this product? And product changes are going to take a long time, and so what are the variables that I can control with a marketing background? So one of the things I’ve always said is just ignore the people who say they’d be somewhat disappointed. They’re telling you it’s a nice to have. They’re as good as gone, so just ignore those guys.
I’ll put one piece in the middle there before I say what Superhuman did. The reason that I say ignore those guys is that if you start paying attention to what you somewhat disappointed users are telling you, and then you start tweaking onboarding and product based on their feedback, maybe you’re going to dilute it for your must-have users. And ultimately, it becomes kind of good for everyone but not great for anyone. And so that was my fear of trying to read too much into the users who say they’d be somewhat disappointed. But the Superhuman guys actually found, I think, a good way around that where they said, “Okay, what is the benefit that my must-have users are focused on? And then of the users who say they’d be somewhat disappointed, so the nice-to-have users, of those users who are also focused on that benefit, what do they need in the product for it then to become a must-have for them?”
And so they’re staying true to that core benefit, but they’re trying to essentially take those on-the-fence users and moving them up. And so I think their way of approaching that addressed what my concern was, which is are we going to break it for the must-have users?
Lenny Rachitsky: That’s an awesome insight. By the way, did Rahul and the team there just do this on their own or were you involved in any way in this at Superhuman?
Sean Ellis: No. That’s the same thing. Like I said, I wasn’t initially involved with Nubank. I wasn’t involved with them. We wrote about it in our book in 2017, and so I think that I got it out there. But I actually teamed up with the Kissmetrics team in 2012, and essentially published this survey on survey.io where we just made it freely available for people and a really easy template to prepare and send out, and the how-to guide on it. It was all just free. Kissmetrics is using it as maybe lead gen. And for me, I just wanted a way to put something out for the community. And so it’s been out there for a long time, so it’s not surprising that different companies have found different unique ways to use it.
Lenny Rachitsky: That’s awesome. I think that post is one of the most popular in First Round. It really had an impact on a lot of people.
Sean Ellis: Yeah.
Lenny Rachitsky: So just to repeat, the approach you recommend for when you’re digging into… I wrote this down. When you were talking for how to dig into what benefit people are finding, your advice is it’s basically a follow-up survey to the extremely disappointed people asking them what is the primary benefit you get? It’s an open text initially. Then once you get a collection, you do it sounds like another survey as multiple choice. Here’s five benefits-
Sean Ellis: To a different group of people, to be clear.
Lenny Rachitsky: Different group. Yeah. Got it. Awesome. And then it’s like, which of these four or five benefits is what you’re getting out of this product? And then the question is, why is this benefit important to you?
Sean Ellis: Eventually the survey.io got closed down, but essentially the template that I typically used was then moved to PMFsurvey.com. And so you’ll see some other questions that I have on there as well, like what would you use instead if this product were no longer available? And that’s one of the interesting things is you start to see people who say they’d be somewhat disappointed, usually, they’re focused on a commodity use case and they know an easy alternative to switch to. So to be a must-have, it needs to be both valuable and unique.
Lenny Rachitsky: Okay. Anything else on this topic of the Sean Ellis task product-market fit test before we move on to growth strategy advice?
Sean Ellis: No, I think that’s it.
Lenny Rachitsky: I think we did almost an hour on that one topic, which I love because I feel like this is such a powerful tool that I think people sort of know and have used, but I think there’s a lot of opportunity to use it more effectively. And all the stuff you pointed out about it’s not just you have this threshold goal, let’s move, let’s grow. It’s like, this is how you figure out how to make it better and better and grow faster and faster. And it’s actually a good segue to talking about growth.
Even though you coined the term growth hacking, you spend most of your time on the opposite, essentially, which is helping companies figure out sustainable growth strategies, not just a bunch of hacks to grow for a little bit and then disappear. And from what I’ve seen, it’s all rooted in this idea of product-market fit and what helps you find product-market fit, and I imagine many of the stuff we’ve talked about.
Sean Ellis: Yeah. Just one quick interjection there is that when I coined growth hacking, I did not think of it as a bunch of one-off hacks. What I thought of it was what’s more about what is the way to ultimately drive sustainable growth? But it’s, over time, maybe more interpreted the way you described it, but just to jump in and say that.
Lenny Rachitsky: That’s a really good clarification, so how did you actually initially frame it when you first-
Sean Ellis: Yeah, I just said it’s about looking at every single thing that you’re doing and scrutinizing its impact on growth in the business. And particularly, I think most marketers, when I first moved to Silicon Valley, most CEOs who were asking me to help their companies, they were saying, “We need help with awareness-building,” and I’m getting introductions from top VCs. And so, so much of, I think, the way people were approaching growth was marketing textbook how to approach it. And startups just don’t have the luxury to do all of those things, and so you got to really focus on how do I acquire customers to an experience that’s going to make them keep using this product? And so maybe I picked the wrong term in calling it growth hacking, but I think it at least opened the conversation to getting more people thinking about maybe we should be thinking about growth in a different way than as it’s traditionally taught in marketing courses in school.
Lenny Rachitsky: Is there another term you think you should have used? Do you always think back, I should have called it this? Is there anything that you’ve had in your mind?
Sean Ellis: I don’t. I think sometimes having something that’s a little divisive is almost better because it’s too easy to just go completely unnoticed. But I was trying to put a name on not just how I was approaching growth, but seeing Facebook obviously had a very different approach to growth than most companies. LinkedIn, Twitter, there was a handful of companies that were approaching it in the same way I had previously been approaching it, and I just thought this thing needs a name. And so I sat down with a couple of friends, came up with a name and it stuck. But yeah, obviously from day one it was pretty divisive with different groups.
Lenny Rachitsky: That’s a fun story. Thanks for sharing that.
Okay, so talking about growth and helping companies figure out how to grow. Say you go to a company, they’re getting 42% on the Sean Ellis test, and they’re like, “Okay, cool, let’s start thinking about growth.” What’s your first piece of advice to them to start when they’re thinking about growth? And then just broadly, how do you approach helping them figure out how to grow?
Sean Ellis: Ultimately, it’s about trying to get as many of the right people to that same state that we just talked about with the must-have users, so trying to get as many people to experience the product in a way where they’d be very disappointed if they could no longer use the product. And so that’s not just acquisition, which is how most companies think about… Initially, it was awareness then maybe the more developed way was, oh, let’s at least focus on profitable acquisition. But in my experience, the hardest part really sits inside the product team, so how do you shape that first user experience so they actually use it in the right way and it’s not so difficult that they give up? And that ultimately, we understand what makes it a must-have product. And then what we’re trying to do is build a… Yeah, it sounds kind of theoretical here, but I can go into the details on how, but build a flywheel around that must-have value.
So step one would be understand it. Step two for me is then figure out a metric that essentially captures units of that value being delivered. And so when I think about a north star metric, that’s what I’m thinking about is something that reflects how many people are coming in and experiencing that product-market fit experience, whatever that is. And it’s not just me telling them, “Here’s what your north star metric should be.” It’s that ultimately the team needs to decide that together. And then really just diagramming, what are all of the different ways that we can grow that north star metric? So that’s where you start to actually build, I call it a value delivery engine, but it’s what does our onboarding look like? What’s that aha moment? That activation? What does the engagement loop look like? Is there any referral? Try to capture it as it is today.
And then, from there, thinking about where are the biggest opportunities for improvement, so those high-leverage opportunities, and then ultimately starting to run experiments against those opportunities. Generally, I think I touched on it a little bit earlier, but generally the sequence that I like to do is start with activation because that one’s just so critical and it’s easy to get lost in between, especially for an early product. The product team’s so focused on the roadmap. We’re two features away from not even needing marketing anymore. This thing’s going to take off. And then a marketing team so focused on bringing new people in, but how do you get those new people to a great first experience falls through the cracks a lot of times. So a lot of focus on activation and then engagement and referral and getting the revenue model right. And then once each of those pieces are working well, then starting to really obsess on the channel side.
One thing that I’ll say. When I go in and directly am involved with a company on the acquisition side, I am thinking about my hypotheses on the acquisition pretty early on, because if I go into it and I have no idea how we’ll acquire those customers, I’m not real confident I’ll figure it out when I’m there. So I want to have two or three things that seem pretty viable as ways to profitably acquire customers, and knowing that once I get deep into it, I’ll probably come up with one or two more and I’ve got five, one of them’s likely to work. But I don’t want to just be under the pressure of having to come up with that once I come in, if I don’t at least see an angle from that before I get involved with the company.
Lenny Rachitsky: What I’m hearing is when you come into a company and they’re asking, “Sean, how do we figure out how to grow this thing?” you actually focus first on activation onboarding, and we’re going to talk about all these things. Then, after that, basically these are priority order for you. Then it’s flywheel engagement referral stuff to see if there’s a way to drive that. Then revenue. How do we make money with this and how do we make sure we’re doing this profitably? And only then do you start to go big on acquisition top-of-funnel growth.
Sean Ellis: Yeah. I may need to do some acquisition stuff before just to bring enough flow-through, but I’m not obsessing on how scalable is this. It’s just like, yeah, let’s get enough people coming through that we can start to take the slack out. Part of it comes down to that the acquisition side is so competitive now that if you’re not really efficient at converting and retaining and monetizing customers, you can’t find scalable, profitable customer acquisition channels.
Lenny Rachitsky: This is fascinating because I think a lot of people probably do the opposite. Start driving a bunch of growth to a product, then we’ll fix onboarding, then we’ll figure out how we’re making money, and referrals comes along there. So I think this is really important for people to hear. So again, the reason you invest first and focus a lot on onboarding/getting people activated is because that is very correlated to retention and this must-have customer, this, “I’ll be very disappointed,” customer.
Sean Ellis: Yeah. And they’re at highest risk of losing them at that point. They-
They’re at highest risk of losing them at that point. They’re probably a little skeptical about a promise that you put out there, but they’re intrigued enough to want to use it. But until you get them to that must-have experience, until you kind of get them to that aha moment, they’re at their high risk of being lost. And so a lot of people focus on, “Well, I better get their email address or their phone number.” But then you’re essentially having to reacquire them at that point. So to me, if you can collapse that time to value, I can give you a couple of incredible examples of when we [inaudible 00:54:38]
So at LogMeIn, when we initially tried to grow the business, I was stuck at being able to spend… I couldn’t spend more than $10,000 per month profitably trying to grow the business. And then I dug into the data and I saw that 95% of the people signing up for LogMeIn. So LogMeIn, at the time free remote access for your computer. And so you install software and you can control it from any other computer. So 95% of the people signing up never once did a remote control session. And so not surprisingly, then I had to get my monetization off the 5% who did that was really limiting my ability to find channels that worked.
Credit our CEO with this, that I shared the data with him and he basically told the product team, “We are putting a complete freeze on the product development roadmap.” So every single person from product, engineering, design and then also said to me, “Stop trying to find new channels.” The three of us on the marketing side are all going to focus on improving the signup to usage rate. And so in three months, we improve the signup to usage rate by a thousand percent. So we went from only 5% of people using the product to 50%. I went back, tried the exact same channels that previously only scaled to $10,000 a month.
Now they scaled to a million dollars a month with a three-month payback on marketing dollars invested. 80% of new users were coming in through word of mouth. So there was this major inflection point by just focusing on activation.
Lenny Rachitsky:
And yes, if you need AI-ready data for your SaaS product, then Merge is the fastest way to get it. So want to solve your organization’s integration dilemma once and for all? Book and attend a meeting at merge.dev/lenny and receive a $50 Amazon gift card. That’s merge.dev/lenny. What do you find often works in helping increase activation? I know there’s a million things that people do, but I guess what are three or four things that you think people should definitely try to help improve activation and their onboarding conversion?
Sean Ellis: One of my favorite quotes is a quote from a guy Kettering, who was a hundred years ago at GM running innovation. And he says, “A problem well stated is a problem half solved.” And so I think a lot of it comes down to not the things you try, but how you deeply understand the problem that’s preventing someone from using your product effectively. And so I’ll just give you one example. We had one channel after we made a lot of these changes and had already driven a ton of improvement in the LogMeIn onboarding. We found a demand generation channel that was really cheap and the economics looked great, but at just the download step we had a 90% drop off rate.
And so we A/B tested a bunch of different things there to try to improve that conversion rate, and then finally 10 plus tests, not able to improve it. Finally, someone said, “When these people are registering. Why don’t we just ask them why they signed up and didn’t download the software?” And so we didn’t want to do it in too kind of a creepy way. So we made it look like a note coming from customer service. This channel was sending 200,000 people a day, so 20,000 people were converting to registering. So we had essentially 20,000 people we could email and then 18,000 of them who didn’t download. And so we just asked, “Hey, notice you haven’t had a chance to use the product yet.
It looked like it was coming from customer support. What happened?” And the answer we got back and not a formal survey was, “Oh, this seemed too good to be true. I didn’t believe this was free.” I mentioned to you we were one of the first freemium SaaS products out there. And so people were skeptical, especially in a demand gen channel where they hadn’t seen a radio or a TV advertisement from our competitor who was a premium only product. These were people who were discovering the category for the first time they were getting there. Once we articulated what the problem was, our next test gave us a 300% improvement in the download rate, which was…
We gave them a choice, download a trial of the paid version or download the free version, put a big graphical check mark next to the free version. But when they saw we had a business model and a trial of a paid version, the free version was credible. And so that essentially made that channel work for us. So I think again, it’s that combination of qualitative research, looking at how others did it. We had this theory, our previous company had been a game company that didn’t require a download. So initially we had this theory that maybe just downloadable software can’t be in the millions of new customers a month and so we’re being unrealistic here.
But then we were like, “Are there any counter examples to that”? And no, the instant messengers are downloadable and they have hundreds of millions of customers, so let’s study their download and install process and see if we have any ideas that we could borrow from that. So again, some inspiration, tried some of those things, it was a combination of just trying a bunch of different stuff that ultimately led to, I wouldn’t say there was one big gain, it was a bunch of small gains.
Lenny Rachitsky: Awesome. So a few things for people to try if they’re like, “Hey, how do I improve my activation rate? How do I improve my conversion rate?” Just drill further into what is stopping people from progressing. Ask them, “Why did you bounce here? What did you think this was going to be? Why didn’t you end up using this?” Look for inspiration from other products, I think people probably already know that. You talked about earlier this idea of the positioning, having a big impact of just figuring out.
They want an antivirus software. Let’s make that very clear. “Hey we’ve got the best antivirus software, that’s what we’re here for.” So there’s probably just messaging that you find works a lot of times, right?
Sean Ellis: I mean your two big levers on driving a conversion are increase desire, reduce friction. And so you definitely want to increase the right desire. Sometimes it can also just be reminding people along the way of what benefits you’re going to get. In the case of LogmeIn, it was probably the most complicated funnel I’ve ever seen because you couldn’t even get to the aha moment while you’re sitting in front of the computer. You had to actually go to a different computer and to use the service to remote control the computer you’re in front of.
So it’s not surprising that there was so many steps where we could lose people, but we just weren’t that intentional about designing each of those steps initially. And it wasn’t until we thought through why would we lose someone at this step and studying the data, which steps were we losing the most people at? Then deeply trying to contextualize why are we losing them there, coming up with a set of tests that we want to run and then having a good way of deciding which one to test first and ultimately focusing the tests on the areas where we’re losing the most people.
Lenny Rachitsky: The other element of this is coming up with an activation metric and aligning on here’s what we consider so activated. I know this is very dependent on the product, but any advice or heuristic for how to help people decide this is our activated user.
Sean Ellis: I tend to start qualitatively. So just like when do I think they’ve had a good enough experience with the product to really know it? And so in the case of LogMeIn, it was pretty easy. If they didn’t do a remote control session, they didn’t use the product. There was no value along the way there. And then at least try to see if there’s a correlation to long-term retention of doing that. Causation is you need to do some experimentation to prove causation. At the very least, I want to see that correlation, but if I start with two or three ideas of what it might be and then go and study the data, that can help you focus.
But again, I don’t think there’s necessarily one exact right answer of what is that aha moment. There might be two or three different things. I think it’s that intentionality about picking something that’s experience-based and saying, “What is a likely experience that someone’s going to get a good enough taste of this product?” And then I do see some companies that are like, “Well, the activation moment should be, they’ve used it a hundred times.” That’s going to correlate to long-term retention, but it’s just not very actionable. It’s so far down the user experience.
So ideally if there’s a way that I could get them there in the first session, in the first day, that’s great. And so it’s sort of something that’s value that can be experienced super early. To give you an example from the first company I worked on was a game company, where I actually flipped it and basically instead of making a traditional funnel where they could play our games after they signed up, I made our games the advertisements. So basically we syndicated our games to 40,000 websites.
They started gameplay experience on the other website, then they would get a message that they now have a qualifying score and if they register, they’ll be in the drawing for the weekly cash prize and then we could pull them into multiplayer games on the site. And so it’s kind of the strategy that YouTube used to grow, but it was two years before YouTube introduced the approach.
Lenny Rachitsky: It feels like you basically created Zynga, is what I’m hearing there. So let’s move further down the funnel. So we’ve talked about activation, onboarding. The next phase that you focus on is basically some people call this growth loops, growth engines, flywheels. Basically it’s the thing that helps your business grow and something I am curious if this resonates.
I found there’s basically four ways to grow and usually one of these engines is responsible for almost all of your growth. So what I’ve seen is basically you’re going to go through sales, you’re going to grow through SEO, you’re going to go through virality, word of mouth or paid growth. Does that resonate? Does that feel right?
Sean Ellis: And I wouldn’t say it’s necessarily one or the other. I think Bounce is a really interesting example where SEO is super important for Bounce. So people who are essentially saying, “Luggage storage, Paris. Luggage storage…” Most people when they’re trying to find a place to store their luggage, they’re starting with Google, but at the same time, a huge percentage of the people who use Bounce are dragging their bag down a street over cobblestones in Paris. And then they pass a sign that says, “Store your bag here for $5 a day.” And it’s like, “Oh, no-brainer.” And so 10,000 partners around the world means that there’s a lot of people in the right situation on the demand gen side.
One would be, I actually think of kind of… I’m not sure how it would map to this, but demand generation versus demand harvesting. And so one of those examples would be a… Demand generation example, when you see the signs when you’re passing, it’s high context, right place. And then obviously the demand harvesting would be anyone who’s Googling. And so they do paid search and organic search there.
Lenny Rachitsky: Interesting. I don’t see that sign approach work often, but I definitely have seen it work. Like Yelp I think grew in a lot of ways of just little Yelp stickers in all the restaurant. DoorDash I think probably grows through that.
Sean Ellis: I think every business could be a little bit different, but for Bounce it makes sense that that would be a really good opportunity for them.
Lenny Rachitsky: How do you help a business figure out which area to bet on? Whether they should go paid, whether they should go SEO, whether they should hire sales. Sales is probably an easier one. B2B, you’re probably going to have to be a sales team, I guess just to help them pick, “Here’s where you have a big opportunity.”
Sean Ellis: Again, it kind of comes down as I’m going into it, I’m thinking what are the realistic customer acquisition angles for this business? And I want to have ideally two or three that I’m coming into it with, but it’s going to… Obviously Dropbox is a classic one of like, “Oh man, this product…” User get user is going to be just a classic. There’s file share built into it, folder collaboration. There’s so many pieces of it that cross from one user to the next. But interestingly, it was fairly similar to LogMeIn in some senses, it’s two businesses are solving similar problems in different ways. Where LogMeIn, we grew almost entirely off of paid search. And part of it again is that for us, we had a competitor that was spending tens of millions of dollars a month creating the category with a premium only product through radio and TV advertising. GoToMyPC, they’re creating all this latent demand. And so it just made sense for us to disrupt them with a freemium service and to insert ourselves in the flow of someone… What was that thing that I heard about on the TV commercial? And now they go and they Google it and same thing, but free. So we weren’t really pushing for differentiation, but just really trying to harvest that.
So I couldn’t do that at Dropbox. No one was looking for when I went there. And so we tried a little bit with search to see can we make it work on cloud storage or backup or kind of going to some of these traditional categories. Cloud storage wasn’t even a traditional category at that point, but backup was, and it was fairly expensive and there was just not that much demand there that way. And so it just made more sense to focus on the user get user loops at Dropbox.
I think basically for each business it’s just thinking about what’s unique for that business that is going to open up channel opportunities and everyone’s going to be a little bit, I think jaded from whatever the last thing that worked really well. They’re going to think they can apply it in the next business. But after enough times myself, I tend to get the most inspiration by just talking to customers and finding out how did they find it, how do they typically find something like that? And that starts to give me some ideas as well.
Lenny Rachitsky: I think that last point is really powerful and I’m just writing it down. You said, essentially one of your tactics is talking to users, asking them how did you find this product and how do you normally find products like this? Is that the second question? I think it’s similar to your [inaudible 01:21:02] test. It’s such a simple question, but it’s so powerful because how else will people find your product? They go to a place to find stuff like this, and I searched Google for folder sharing. There’s so much there that you just skip over.
Sean Ellis: I think the reason that you don’t actually hear people taking the obvious route there a lot of times is because, and I used to be in the same thing, that people tend to be either over indexed on qualitative or over indexed on quantitative. So it’s like analytics, I’m going to get all my answers from testing and analytics or I’m going to get all my answers from traditional customer research. And I was very much in that initial camp for the first five years of my career. I’m just going to measure everything and test the heck out of things and find stuff that works. But I had a VC who was our lead VC at LogMeIn who just said, “When was the last time you talked to a customer?”
Just pushed me to survey and talk to customers all the time. And at first I gave the smart-ass answer, “I don’t care what they say, I care what they do.” And he’s like, “No, you got to talk to him.” Then just to appease him, I would try to have a conversation every day because he was in our office a lot and so I could say, “Hey, yeah, I talked to a customer today,” when he would ask me. But I started finding that my experiments were so much better the more I talked to customers, and eventually I became very much… The blend of qualitative and quantitative research leads to much better tests.
Lenny Rachitsky: That is another amazing story and insight. It’s so interesting that people sometimes think of you as growth hacker guy experiments data, when most of the advice we’ve been sharing so far is very qualitative driven, very survey driven, targeting customers driven.
Sean Ellis: And it is just really hard to run good experiments when you can’t deeply contextualize what’s going on.
Lenny Rachitsky: I love this. By the way, I don’t know if I knew this. So you helped develop the Dropbox referral program?
Sean Ellis: I was there at the time. Basically, even when I first started talking with Drew. Before I came in, I was like, “I think the way we’re going to grow this business is by leveraging the really passionate customer base and that’s what we need to double down on.” And we had tried a similar kind of referral program at Zabni and a friend who actually started Ring, Jamie Simonoff, previously had a company called PhoneTag way before Ring, and he had actually done a lot of the testing on double-sided referral programs and having incentive on both sides, and he found that that worked the best.
And so between what we had tested at Zabni and those conversations with him, I hadn’t actually seen PayPal yet at that point, what they were doing. But that was kind of like… It seems like a referral program where we have incentives on both sides is the best way to go. Interestingly, six months before I was at Dropbox, I was at LogMeIn, and I really thought about having incentivized referrals at LogMeIn, but 80% of our new users were coming in through word of mouth. And I had a hundred million devices connected in on our system, and I was just so afraid of breaking this growth engine by adding an incentive that I didn’t want to risk it.
But at Dropbox it was so early. I would still say no experiment is one person. It happened to be when I was there, I had some insights that I brought in, but ultimately… The guy who built it was actually an intern named Albert Knee and he ended up dropping out, I think, out of MIT to stay with Dropbox for a few years after that. But he was kind of my right-hand guy to collaborating on growth day to day.
Lenny Rachitsky: Wow. I would say Dropbox is the referral program, and the PayPal referral program, as you mentioned, are the two most legendary, studied, copied referral programs out there.
Sean Ellis: Unfortunately, I think that what they don’t realize is that before the referral program, Dropbox had amazing referral rate. Companies that are trying to copy it are like, “Why isn’t anyone talking about a product? Let’s add a referral program with incentives.” To me, I think it’s a great accelerant when it’s already working, but it can’t fix it if people don’t want to talk about your product.
Lenny Rachitsky: That’s an awesome point and something I was just going to ask about and just coming back to this topic of growing engagement, growing referrals as a growth mechanism, what do you look for to tell you that there’s an opportunity there? And I’ll just answer it, partly I’ve seen exactly what you just said, which is you need to already have strong word of mouth growth because referrals kind sits on that and gives you a little more incentive to share. So maybe do you agree with that, not agree to that? Any other advice on helping figure out is there some kind of loop here that we can build?
Sean Ellis: Well, one thing I will say is freemium when we first started with it, as I said, we were one of the first with it, so it took me a while to figure out exactly how freemium worked, but to me, freemium towards having a free and a premium version of your product to really work in any business, it needs to be that your free product is so good that people naturally have word of mouth around that product. And then to be economically viable, you have to have a premium product that’s better enough and differentiated enough that people are going to upgrade to the premium product.
But I think a lot of times people are so worried about the second part that they make the free version not very good and then they’re surprised when word of mouth isn’t very strong there. So I think you have to essentially have two distinct products that are great on their own. So that would be the one piece, but then obviously companies that have any kind of collaborative layer to them are going to be more likely to work well with referral. And then I think on the engagement side, a lot of it comes down to just the nature of the product.
Like Airbnb, you’re not going to use it every day unless you’re like a vagrant or something and then you wouldn’t have money to pay for it. So there’s kind a natural usage cycle to products and you want to be able to maximize against that cycle. That’s where I was saying, coming back to the hooked model, I think is a really good way to help to have a framework to think about how do I improve engagement. One good counter example to that though of the natural frequency of using a product is Facebook when they change their North Star Metric from monthly active users to daily active users. I think, again, just having what gets measured gets managed.
Once Facebook was on a daily active user goal, the team suddenly had a lot more incentive to think about, “How do I bring people back every day and use this product?” Where when it was monthly active users, they kind of only got credit for that person for using once in that month. And even if they used 10 times, they didn’t get 10 times the credit. It was just like a, “Oh, that’s cool too.” But they weren’t sort of measured on that. And so I think it was sort of a random decision for Mark Zuckerberg to move from a monthly active to a daily active because they hit 1 billion monthly active users and they’re like, “Okay, let’s go for 1 billion daily active users.”
But it had a really big impact on making that product way more addictive to the point where obviously they ended up in Congress or get a lot of pushback. I’m not sure they went to Congress for that, but they got a lot of pushback for having a product that’s maybe too addictive. And the same thing carrying into Instagram and some of the other Meta products or basically anything that is highly engaging. So I do think the right incentives can actually help a team to focus on it, but there’s going to be sort of a natural usage cycle to any product as well.
Lenny Rachitsky: I’m glad you mentioned North Star Metrics. I actually have a post I will link to in the show notes where I collected the North Star Metrics of 30 different companies to give you some inspiration. I know this is a deep topic of its own, but just when someone is trying to pick their own North Star Metrics, which I 1000% agree, informs so much about how your company operates. It basically focuses everyone’s incentives to let’s drive this thing. And that changes so much of what you’re building. Any just bullet point piece of advice for helping you pick your North Star Metrics?
Sean Ellis: I start with the value that’s uncovered through the [inaudible 01:21:02] test. So with a company, I’ll say, “Okay, this is what the must have value is according to our most passionate customers, and we want to think about a metric that reflects us delivering that value.” And then I’ll give them kind of a framework of ways to think about a North Star Metric. But I think it’s really important for it to be a time capped group conversation. And if you give a team 30 days, they’ll take 30 days. If you give them six months, they’ll take six months.
But I think generally a team can come up with a pretty good North Star Metric after 30 minutes if they have the right raw ingredients and a checklist of what’s important in a North Star Metric. Something that’s not a ratio, it’s something that can be up onto the right over time. So you can keep managing it and feeling good. It should correlate to revenue growth, but revenue shouldn’t be the North Star Metric, but as you grow value across your customer base, you should be able to grow revenue at the same rate. And so there’s-
Revenue at the same rate. And so there’s some other things, but I think that would be the most important, is that it’s something that could be up and to the right over time and reflects value that you’re delivering to customers.
Lenny Rachitsky: Awesome. And I was going to ask about revenue in your opinion there. And so your advice is don’t make revenue or North star metric?
Sean Ellis: No. Even Amazon, and again, this is just what I know of Amazon’s as being but monthly purchases, but someone else might say Amazon, no Amazon’s is GMV or something. But I think monthly purchases is great because it maps to value that people are getting from Amazon. And so even if I spend say 3 on a or $10 on an electric toothbrush, Amazon from the consumer’s perspective delivered the same value. I needed something, Amazon helped me find that thing. And so units of value from the customer perspective I think is more important than overall revenue. But clearly with Amazon focusing on driving more monthly purchases, at least on their store side of the business, that has helped them become one of most valuable companies in the world. So I think focusing on value is, revenue should be a product of doing things. Right. It shouldn’t kind of guide your day-to-day actions.
Lenny Rachitsky: To make this even more concrete for people, are there some North star metric examples you could share that you’ve seen that are good? Like say for Eventbrite or Dropbox or any companies you’ve worked with? And I’ll share one real quick as you’re thinking about it. At Airbnb, our North star metric was nights booked. And so it’s similar to Amazon. It’s not like the money Airbnb made from bookings, but it’s like nights booked and it was really, and basically every experiment ran is like, is this increasing night booked or is this decreasing night’s book?
Sean Ellis: And so that’s a really good marketplace one. Uber obviously weekly rides. I’m always surprised with the Airbnb, that there’s not a kind of time piece on it, like the weekly rides that you have with Uber, but maybe it’s because it’s such an infrequent use case on travel that it doesn’t make sense to focus on. Yeah.
Lenny Rachitsky: Yeah. Why is the timeframe important to you? Why do you encourage that?
Sean Ellis: Just daily active users, you saw the difference between monthly active users and daily active users could change behavior a lot at Facebook. It gives you a quantifiable way, if you’re just kind of taking an aggregate number over time, it always looks like it’s going up.
Lenny Rachitsky: So it’s an engagement element of how often are they engaging.
Sean Ellis: Yeah. But,-
Lenny Rachitsky: Any others? Any others real quick?
Sean Ellis: Yeah, I mean, I didn’t really think about North star metrics when I was at Dropbox and Eventbrite, like the term itself, but I was thinking about what is a valuable experience with Dropbox and how do I get people to have that more time? But I don’t even know what they go with today, but maybe files in Dropbox, files access might be better than just files hosted. And then probably for Eventbrite, again, I would say weekly tickets or something like you could say weekly events, but then you have events that don’t sell any tickets where weekly tickets would be more likely to reflect, events are going to be happy if they’re selling tickets and yeah.
Lenny Rachitsky: Okay. Sean, we’ve gone through so much stuff. I’m trying to limit how many more questions we get through just so that we don’t,-
Sean Ellis: We’re going long.
Lenny Rachitsky: We’re going long, which is amazing. I think there’s so much value here that we’re collecting for folks. So let just ask maybe a couple more quick questions. One is actually from Andrew Chen who is currently partnered at a partner at A16z. He wrote about growth for the longest time. I think he helped popularize growth hacking for better or worse with his article and it being the future of VP of what is it? Growth Hacking is the new VP of marketing, right, Is the title. So he actually had a question for you that he shared with me. His question is, growth strategies have changed a lot over the past decade. What is the biggest difference now versus when you first started working on growth?
Sean Ellis: When I first started just being data-driven on customer acquisition was enough to win and being test and data-driven on customer acquisition. All the other companies were like CPM focused and so we could do really well just with lots of testing and some creativity in how it all worked. But that over time as, now I would say most online marketers are very data and test drive. They know they need to do lots of testing. And so to be competitive today, you actually have to be able to be super efficient at all parts of the business.
So again, like how you convert, retain, monetize, and that’s when it gets hard. Getting a marketing team to be data and test-driven is pretty easy. Once you start getting into activation and referral and engagement and retention, now you’re talking about the overlap between marketing, product if it’s B2B, bringing sales in there, customer success, and those teams are not used to working together. And so it’s really hard to drive the collaboration that’s needed to have an effective testing program across the entire growth engine. And that’s pretty much any business that’s been successful with it, implemented it super early in the business, and so very few later stage companies have been able to make much progress in replicating that type of approach.
Lenny Rachitsky: It’s just gotten harder basically. Things are just getting harder.
Sean Ellis: It’s gotten harder, but I think it’s possible. So it’s what I obsess about all the time, is how do you get cross-functional teams working together on growth now? And it’s still a huge advantage when you can pull it off.
Lenny Rachitsky: Okay. Totally unrelated question, going in completely different direction as we close out our chat. So you came up with ICE, the very popular way of prioritizing work, which is crazy. I did not know that until I started prepping for this conversation. What’s your thoughts on RICE, the intercom version of ICE, where R stands for reach, I believe.
Sean Ellis: Yeah.
Lenny Rachitsky: Thoughts?
Sean Ellis: So I think it’s an unnecessary addition, but maybe I’m just being protective of my original idea, that the I in ICE is impact and it’s essentially saying best case scenario, how much impact could we get from this? And reach is a super important part of impact. And so I think it’s already factored in the I in ICE. And so I think if there’s anything that I would be accused of, it would be being over simplifying things and I’m not saying them, but there’s a lot of people who approach things with, there’s got to be a more complex way to approach this and that’s just not me. And so yeah, more testing is better.
No, it doesn’t just work like that. I mean, better tests are better than bad tests, but just if you have to hold yourself accountable to anything, more testing would be better. And so I think one just quick note on ICE is that in order to be able to effectively run a high velocity testing program, you need to be able to source ideas from across the company. And that’s why I came up with ICE, that if you’re having people submit ideas and you can’t tell them why their idea was not chosen, they’re just going to get upset and you’re going to waste a lot of time. But if you have a systematic way of being able to compare ideas, it’s more likely that people will be able to get it and they’ll be able to come up with better ideas.
Lenny Rachitsky: I love the way you think, Sean. I have a post on prioritization where I basically just make the same argument that there’s all these complicated ways to prioritize. In the end, it’s just impact, confidence, and effort and it really works and rarely is more work. On the other hand, I do also have a guest post called DRICE by these two guys called Detailed RICE, which actually I think is a really good point where sometimes it’s worth spending like 30 minutes per idea to just really estimate how long will it take to avoid doing things that are just going to not work and very unlikely. So we’re basically doing this reach piece and spending the time too. Right. And I think there’s a lot of good value there.
Sean Ellis: Yeah. And what I thinks going to be really interesting is that over time, I think AI is going to actually change our ability to model out potential outcomes on experiments and start to, whether it’s a more informed way of doing ICE or replaces ICE, that ultimately probability of outcomes is something that AI will be pretty good at.
Lenny Rachitsky: Well, amazing segue to the final question. The actually final question is I wanted to ask you about any ways you’ve been using AI or ways you think AI will impact the work you’re doing or other folks are doing? And maybe you just answered it, but you tell me.
Sean Ellis: No, I’ll touch on a couple. One is that probably the funnest way that I’m using it today. Obviously I’ve done it for coming up with experiment ideas, but the funnest way I personally use it is I get a lot of people asking me for advice, and I don’t have very much time to answer with thoughtful answers to people. And so almost every question that I get, I go to ChatGPT say, how would Sean Ellis answer this? And it gives me an initial draft to make a couple of tweaks and definitely allows me to answer a lot more. So it helps to have a book that’s indexed in there and lots of writing.
Lenny Rachitsky: That is so funny, and that the question, that’s as simple as the prompt is how would Sean Ellis answer,-
Sean Ellis: Yeah, because then a lot of times it’ll say, Sean Ellis, author of Hacking Growth dah, dah, dah, believes that, and then it’ll obviously pull that part out in the answer.
Lenny Rachitsky: Oh my God. So you’re one step away from a Chrome extension or something that just automatically plugs that into your,-
Sean Ellis: Yeah, exactly. And I can even start to have my personal assistant maybe start to answer some of those questions as me, but I’m a little bit afraid to send something without reviewing it first because,-
Lenny Rachitsky: Absolutely.
Sean Ellis: Sometimes there’s stuff that’s pretty different from how I would answer it, but longer term, I actually think, as I said, I think the cross-functional challenge to growth is a thing that holds a lot of companies back from being able to implement this a bit later. Mostly product teams don’t want to get direction from marketing teams. Marketing teams don’t want to get direction from product teams, and maybe a growth layer can help to do these things, but I find that if AI is essentially saying, you’re underperforming in this area of your business, you should drive some experiments in this area. It’s a lot harder to kind of let ego get in the way when it’s kind of dispassionate recommendations from a system.
And so I actually think, I think the ability to come up with great experiments is going to keep growing with AI and identifying opportunities. And then obviously the analytical AI side of things is going to be really exciting in terms of being, I do find with most companies, once we get a real high velocity of experiments going, the bottleneck ends up happening more on the analysis side. And I think AI will help a lot with that as well.
Lenny Rachitsky: Super cool. These are awesome examples. Okay, Sean, is there anything else you wanted to share or leave listeners with before we get to our very exciting lightning round, which we’ll go through real fast? Because we’ve gone very long and I want to let you go.
Sean Ellis: Yeah. As I’ve gone through and done a lot of workshops and programs with companies, I keep coming back to this advice that I heard from guy Oleg Yakubenkov, which is it often comes down to asking the right question at the right time in how you figure things out. And he’s a former data scientist from Meta and so where he basically boils data science down to learning how to ask the right questions. And so I actually have a course with him called Gopractice.io, where that’s really the big benefit of the course, is to learn how to ask the right questions and yeah, you learn how to query them and amplitude, but more importantly, being able to ask the right question. I think it’s kind of cool to hear that from a data scientist from Meta, the importance of that.
But every time I’m going through exercises in my workshops, it almost always comes down to people who aren’t able to come up with the right or a good answer in a business. It’s because they’re not asking the obvious question. And as soon as they have, like why aren’t users downloading the software? Let’s just ask them that question. That would be one example from my workshop. Who considers the product a must have? That part of getting, to figuring out the must have kind of benefit that then allows you to hone in on product market fit. And so yeah, right questions, right time I think is a really important way to think about growth and even getting to product market fit.
Lenny Rachitsky: I love this advice because I think it gives us a glimpse into how your brain has developed these really seemingly simple ideas that end up being really powerful. And it feels like the advice is just think a lot about the question you need to ask because that’ll get you just something that a lot of people just kind of under think or don’t. There’s things, maybe it’s too simple.
Sean Ellis: Yeah, or they just jump right into the solution side of things where they’re not really trying to understand what’s going on.
Lenny Rachitsky: Yeah. Yeah. Amazing. Okay, well with that, Sean, we’ve reached our very exciting lightning round. Are you ready?
Sean Ellis: I am.
Lenny Rachitsky: All right. Our first question is, what are two or three books you’ve recommended most to other people?
Sean Ellis: Increasingly, I’m recommending a book called Presenting to Win that’s been around forever, but it really helped me with my presenting. And so of course when I’m out traveling, I’m often sharing the stage with other speakers and yeah, I like to recommend that one to them. I’ve already talked about Muriel’s Hooked. I recommend that always, and we’ll just stick with two. That’s good two.
Lenny Rachitsky: Within Presenting to Win, is there one tip that sticks with you of here’s something that helped me be a better presenter?
Sean Ellis: Ultimately, confidence in presenting comes down to having very well organized information that you’re going to present. And when you organize it correctly, you are much more likely to deliver it with confidence. And so he basically says, if I had a presentation to do and I had an hour to present, I’d spend 55 minutes creating the right presentation and then five minutes practicing it. But yeah, there’s a lot more to it, but,-
Lenny Rachitsky: Wow. Amazing. Okay. We’ll link to that book in the show notes. Do you have a favorite recent movie or TV show you’ve really enjoyed?
Sean Ellis: Yeah, so I’ve been binging the Olympics. I love that, just watching people who worked their ass off for years and then maybe have 30 seconds to do the thing that they worked hard for. So Olympics have been awesome. And then the movie, I actually just saw Blackberry, I don’t know if you’ve seen that.
Lenny Rachitsky: Oh, the story of the Blackberry?
Sean Ellis: Yeah. I mean obviously we all kind of know the story, but it was so really, I mean, it’s a classic example of product market fit and then not. Actually, it’s probably even a counter example to the dangers of the how would you feel if we could no longer use this product? Pretty sure most people would’ve said on Blackberry, it’s the keyboard, and until iPhone came along, the keyboard was super important and then suddenly it wasn’t. But yeah, it’s also interesting on egos and other things that everybody’s getting friendly in the beginning and then egos take over and things get a lot harder later on.
Lenny Rachitsky: That was actually a really good movie. There’s also an amazing movie called Tetris. For some reason, I think of these two together,-
Sean Ellis: Okay.
Lenny Rachitsky: About the story of Tetris, and it’s a similar parallels to those two movies.
Sean Ellis: Awesome. I’ll have to see that one.
Lenny Rachitsky: Next question, do you have a favorite product you’ve recently discovered that you really love?
Sean Ellis: I forget the name of it, but I think or it’s called Pack Gear Hanging Suitcase, and I basically like, I’ve done almost 100,000 miles in travel this year, and I have another trip scheduled for next week, and I love it because it basically has all my clothes folded in this little insert that goes into my suitcase, and then I just pull it out and hang it up and just makes travel way easier.
Lenny Rachitsky: It’s called the Pack Gear Suitcase?
Sean Ellis: Pack Gear Hanging Suitcase Organizer.
Lenny Rachitsky: So cool. Going to check that out. Two more questions. Do you have a favorite life motto that you often come back to that you find useful in work or in life? Maybe share with friends and family sometimes.
Sean Ellis: Focus on reputation and learning over earnings has served me super well that, and I’ll give you an example. I had two companies when I was doing a lot of this early interim stuff yeah, 10 plus years ago, and I had two of them where I talked to the founders afterwards and I could tell they weren’t that stoked on my contributions. And I offered a full refund to both of them with a thought that like I have this reputation that’s, like I randomly pulled the number and said, my reputation worth 20,000? And so one of them, I gave the check back to them and he was happy to take it, but he had said, “Oh, you can make it up to me. You don’t have to give me the check, just make it up to me by continuing to help me for an unlimited amount of time going forward.”
I was like, “Oh, take the check.” And then the other one said, “No, no, I’m actually really happy with what you did. We’re fine.” But the two VCs who had made those introductions were the first two to give me term sheets when I went out to raise money for my company. And the pre-money ultimately ended up being valued at more than double what I had put my personal reputation at. So I, yeah, I think the, yeah, unfortunately the company didn’t do that well itself because of the elusive product market fit challenges. But yeah, the learning there of just focus on learning and reputation. Reputation opened the door to more and more learning. And as I got more learning, the reputation grew. And so yeah.
Lenny Rachitsky: There’s a really good corollary there with customer support. If someone just hates your product and wants a refund, just give them a refund and let them move on versus being upset.
Sean Ellis: Yeah, absolutely.
Lenny Rachitsky: I love that. Final question. You mentioned to me before we started recording that you were maybe indirectly responsible for TikTok’s success. Maybe share that story.
Sean Ellis: Yeah, I mean, I don’t want to overstate it, but I yeah, my trip around the world that I did three months ago, I think I wrapped it up. I met with the original founding growth team at TikTok. They’re based in Singapore and they had, I can’t remember what the previous product was called, but they started with the previous product. And then when TikTok came, they were in place to be the initial growth team for TikTok, and they basically said all the early stuff we did to grow TikTok was based on your writing. So that was before the book came out.
So it’s a lot of just blogging that I had done, but it was really, really cool to get that feedback that, yeah, I’ve always said I have some really good wins, a lot of unicorns that I helped, but none of the really, really big guys. And then to hear that, it felt really good to know that I played some kind of role in TikTok. Of course, almost the same week they told me that that was Congress having TikTok ban conversations. So it was good. And at the same time, knowing that maybe if they hadn’t read my stuff, Congress wouldn’t be wasting their time on TikTok bans.
Lenny Rachitsky: Oh man. Bittersweet. I hope they don’t pull you into some hearings. Sean, this was incredible. This was everything I was hoping it’d be. I feel like we collected so much wisdom here for folks to them figure out product market fit, find product market fit, iterate, grow their products. So happy we did this. Two final questions. Where can folks find stuff that you’re up to if they want to learn more and maybe work with you in various ways? And how can listeners be useful to you?
Sean Ellis: Awesome. Yeah, so Seanellis.me is the website where I kind of link to all the things that I’m doing. And so that would be one place where, and there’s contact forms on there if anyone wants to reach out. Obviously LinkedIn people can contact me there. And then I did mention GoPractice. So gopractice.io. Really cool way to learn growth through a simulated environment of being able to try to grow products. So check out GoPractice and maybe go to Seanellis.me. When this comes out, I’ll put a special offer on there for Lenny’s listeners so you can save some money.
Lenny Rachitsky: And there’s also a LLM AI kind of,-
Sean Ellis: I wasn’t directly involved on that one, but there’s yeah, there’s some other really cool stuff that Oleg and the team are doing. Data-driven product management, and the user growth programs are the ones that I helped with.
Lenny Rachitsky: Awesome. And then for folks, if they’re wondering, do you do advising? How do you work with companies in case they’re like, hey, I need Sean.
Sean Ellis: Yeah, I mean, so the sweet spot for me on companies that I go hands-on with are ideally pretty early just after they get to product market fit and now you know how to measure it. So if you’re kind of pre-scale, but you’re seeing that 40%, or even if you’re a bit earlier than that, we can start talking earlier. But to me, that’s my favorite time to get in there, build it right from the beginning. It’s so hard to retroactively do these things. And I’ll go in for three to six months and I’m all in full-time, one of the team trying to really help build traction in the business. I do one of those every maybe year or maybe every year or two because I purposely burn myself out and then have fun doing more lecturing and workshops and stuff.
Lenny Rachitsky: Awesome. Well, you might get a flood of requests after this comes out. Hope you’re ready. Sean, thank you so much for being here.
Sean Ellis: Awesome. Thank you, Lenny. I really appreciate you having me on.
Lenny Rachitsky: Bye everyone. Thank you so much for listening. If you found this valuable, you can subscribe to the show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your favorite podcast app. Also, please consider giving us a rating or leaving a review as that really helps other listeners find the podcast. You can find all past episodes or learn more about the show at LennysPodcasts.com. See you in the next episode.
Glossary
| English | 中文 |
|---|---|
| A16z | A16z |
| activation | 激活 |
| aha moment | 顿悟时刻 |
| Albert Knee | Albert Knee |
| Amplitude | Amplitude |
| Andrew Chen | Andrew Chen |
| Blackberry | 《Blackberry》 |
| Bounce | Bounce |
| ChatGPT | ChatGPT |
| Chrome | Chrome |
| CMS | 内容管理系统(CMS) |
| CPM | CPM |
| demand generation | 需求生成 |
| demand harvesting | 需求收割 |
| deviation moment | 偏差时刻(deviation moment) |
| DoorDash | DoorDash |
| Drew | Drew |
| Dropbox | Dropbox |
| engagement loop | 参与循环 |
| Eventbrite | Eventbrite |
| First Round Capital | First Round Capital |
| freemium | 免费增值 |
| GM | 通用汽车(GM) |
| GMV | 商品交易总额(GMV) |
| Gopractice.io | Gopractice.io |
| GoToMyPC | GoToMyPC |
| growth hacking | 增长黑客 |
| Hacking Growth | 《增长黑客》 |
| high-leverage opportunities | 高杠杆机会 |
| Hooked | 《上瘾》(Hooked) |
| ICE prioritization framework | ICE 优先级排序框架 |
| impact | 影响力(impact) |
| Intercom | Intercom |
| Jag | Jag |
| Jamie Simonoff | Jamie Simonoff |
| Kettering | 凯特林 |
| Kissmetrics | Kissmetrics |
| leading indicator | 领先指标 |
| Lenny Rachitsky | Lenny Rachitsky |
| LLM AI | 大语言模型(LLM)AI |
| LogMeIn | LogMeIn |
| Lookout | Lookout |
| must have | 刚需 |
| MVP | 最小可行性产品(MVP) |
| nice to have | 锦上添花 |
| Nir Eyal | Nir Eyal |
| north star metric | 北极星指标 |
| NPS | 净推荐值(NPS) |
| Nubank | Nubank |
| Oleg Yakubenkov | Oleg Yakubenkov |
| onboarding | 新用户引导 |
| Pack Gear Hanging Suitcase Organizer | Pack Gear Hanging Suitcase Organizer |
| PhoneTag | PhoneTag |
| PMFsurvey.com | PMFsurvey.com |
| pre-money | 投前估值 |
| Presenting to Win | 《Presenting to Win》 |
| product market fit | 产品市场契合度 |
| Qualaroo | Qualaroo |
| Rahul | Rahul |
| reach | 覆盖范围(reach) |
| retention | 留存率 |
| retention cohorts | 留存同期群 |
| Sean Ellis | Sean Ellis |
| Shraaz Doshi | Shraaz Doshi |
| SlideShare | SlideShare |
| Superhuman | Superhuman |
| survey.io | survey.io |
| SurveyMonkey | SurveyMonkey |
| switching costs | 转换成本 |
| term sheets | 投资意向书 |
| Tetris | 《Tetris》 |
| user get user | 用户带来用户 |
| value delivery engine | 价值交付引擎 |
| VistaPrint | VistaPrint |
| webs.com | webs.com |
| Weebly | Weebly |
| Wix | Wix |
| word of mouth | 口碑 |
| Xobni | Xobni |
| Yelp | Yelp |
| Zynga | Zynga |
Reformatted by reformat_english.py
“增长黑客”概念提出者Sean Ellis在此篇访谈中,系统分享了他对产品增长的核心洞见。文章聚焦于如何衡量与实现产品市场契合度(PMF),并深入剖析了著名的“Sean Ellis测试”——通过询问用户“若无法继续使用产品会有何感受”来预判产品生命力。Ellis指出,超40%的用户回答“非常失望”是达成PMF的领先指标;他同时提醒,应果断忽略“有些失望”的反馈,以免为迎合边缘需求而稀释产品的核心价值。在提升留存方面,他强调优化新用户引导体验远比单纯的战术手段更为有效。对于正探寻PMF或寻求增长破局的创业者而言,本文提供了回归产品本质的务实指引。
增长黑客鼻祖揭秘秘诀 | Sean Ellis(《增长黑客》作者)
Lenny Rachitsky: Sean Ellis 测试,这样一个看似简单的想法,却对初创企业界产生了如此深远的影响。
Sean Ellis: 这个问题是,如果你不能再使用这个产品,你会有什么感觉?一旦有足够高比例的用户说他们会非常失望,这些产品大多表现得相当好。如果比例太低,那些产品往往会陷入困境。
Lenny Rachitsky: 假设有人在听,他们会想,“好吧,天哪,我只得到了大概10%。我不知道该怎么办。”你发现通常什么方法有效?
Sean Ellis: 忽略那些说他们会有些失望的人。他们在告诉你这只是一个锦上添花。如果你开始关注那些有些失望的用户的反馈,然后开始根据他们的反馈调整新用户引导和产品,也许你会为你的刚需用户稀释掉它的价值。
Lenny Rachitsky: 提升留存率通常真的很难,但我猜听起来往往还是有些办法的。
Sean Ellis: 这通常更多取决于通过新用户引导达到正确的用户体验,而不是人们试图用来改善留存率的那些战术性手段。
Lenny Rachitsky: 你认为有哪些三四种人们绝对应该尝试来帮助改善激活的方法?
Sean Ellis: 根据我的经验——
嘉宾介绍
Lenny Rachitsky: 今天,我的嘉宾是 Sean Ellis。Sean 是增长领域最早且最具影响力的思想家和操盘手之一。他创造了增长黑客一词,发明了 ICE 优先级排序框架,是最早将免费增值作为增长策略的人之一,也许最著名的是开发了 Sean Ellis 测试,帮助你了解是否达到了产品市场契合度,如今有很大比例的创始人在使用它,并深刻影响了初创企业的构建方式。在他的职业生涯中,Sean 曾是 Dropbox 和 Eventbrite 的增长负责人,帮助微软和 Newbank 等公司完善增长战略,是 LogMeIn 创始团队的成员,该公司最终以超过 40 亿美元的价格被收购,他还是史上最受欢迎的增长类书籍之一《增长黑客》的作者。在我们的对话中,我们深入探讨了两个主题。第一,如何知道你是否达到了产品市场契合度,如果没有达到该怎么办;第二,一旦找到产品市场契合度,如何弄清楚如何增长。如果你正处于新产品的早期阶段,正在为产品市场契合度而挣扎,或者试图弄清楚如何启动或进一步加速你的产品增长,这期节目就是为你准备的。如果你喜欢这个播客,别忘了在你最喜欢的播客应用或 YouTube 上订阅和关注。这是避免错过后续节目的最好方法,也对播客有极大的帮助。话不多说,为你请出 Sean Ellis。Sean,非常感谢你来到这里,欢迎来到播客。
Sean Ellis: 谢谢,Lenny。我非常兴奋能和你一起。
Lenny Rachitsky: 我想谈的有很多。我们可以聊的方向太多了,但为了保持聚焦,我想把时间花在两个领域。我想谈谈如何知道你是否达到了产品市场契合度,以及一旦达到产品市场契合度,在弄清楚如何增长方面该怎么做。我知道这些东西非常相关。我知道你在这些方面花了很多时间。感觉怎么样?
Sean Ellis: 听起来很完美。好,我们开始吧。
Sean Ellis 测试的起源
Lenny Rachitsky: 好的,好的,太棒了。首先,我们来谈谈 Sean Ellis 测试,或者有时人们称之为产品契合度测试。这样一个看似简单的想法,却对初创企业界产生了如此深远的影响。我其实从没听你讲过这个东西的历史,你是怎么想出这些问题的,怎么得出 40% 这个数字的,这整个发展过程。所以让我们来聊聊这个。但首先,你能不能告诉那些不太熟悉的人,什么是 Sean Ellis 测试?
Sean Ellis: 这是一个简单的问题,帮助你弄清楚,是否有人认为你的产品是刚需,或者理想情况下,是谁以及有多少人认为它是刚需,但最终这是为了试图弄清楚你的产品是否是刚需,这可以等同于拥有产品市场契合度。所以问题是,如果你不能再使用这个产品,你会有什么感觉?我给他们选择:非常失望、有些失望、甚至不失望,或者不适用,我已经停止使用该产品了。而我试图寻找的是那些说“如果不能再使用这个产品,我会非常失望”的人,当你发现确实有一些人会在意你的产品消失时,这就是一个非常值得深挖的强大脉络。
Lenny Rachitsky: 这个理念是,如果有 40% 或更多的人说如果不能再使用该产品他们会非常失望,你基本上就达到了产品市场契合度。
Sean Ellis: 我会说这是产品市场契合度的领先指标。最直观的指标是,他们真的在继续使用它吗?所以可能留存同期群更准确,但问题是,就像你在 Airbnb 的时候一样,你需要观察一个留存同期群多久,才能知道你真的长期留存了某人?
Sean Ellis: 因此,通过这个问题,你基本上在第一天就能弄清楚,你不需要一个完善的分析系统就能看出是否存在产品市场契合度。所以,是的,40% 这个数字最初并不是我设定好的。最初,我只是想设立一个筛选机制,这样我就不会同等对待所有客户的反馈,而是试图找到那些真正在意产品的客户的反馈。后来随着时间推移,当时我为几家 YC 支持的公司工作,这些公司之间联系都很紧密,所以我与硅谷的许多其他初创公司分享了这个问题。随着时间的推移,我开始看到一种模式:一旦有足够高比例的用户说没有该产品他们会非常失望,那些拥有高比例此类用户的产品,大多数都做得相当好。而如果这个比例太低,那些产品往往会陷入困境。
Lenny Rachitsky: 好的,这里有两点我一定要跟进。第一点是你在开头提出的一个非常重要的观点,当我介绍这个测试时,你将其描述为产品市场契合度的领先指标,而实际上留存率,即人们是否真正在使用你的产品,产品是否真正被市场使用,才是最终的考验。所以这里的理念是,在实际拥有数据之前,这是一种了解我们是否朝着好的方向发展的好方法。你能多谈谈这一点吗,比如什么时候使用这个测试,什么时候它最有用?
Sean Ellis: 是的。我的意思是,特别是对我而言,当我进入一家公司时,我的目标是帮助他们增长。因此,我不想把自己置于一种注定会失败的境地,因为根本没人在意这个产品。所以在任何阶段的公司都可以问这个问题。这有助于了解你的刚需用户是谁。但基本上,一旦你甚至有了一个最小可行性产品(MVP),就像产品的第一个 MVP,如果它引起了某些人的共鸣,你仍然可以得到一些有用的反馈。
案例分析:Lookout 如何在两周内提升得分
所以实际上有一家公司,我已经承诺与他们合作。那是我离开 Dropbox 之后,我承诺与这些人合作六个月以帮助他们增长。我运行了这个问题,结果只有 7% 的用户说如果没有该产品他们会非常失望。所以我当时想,“我有六个月的时间来帮助他们增长,而他们现在只有 7%。可能需要六个月才能达到 40%。在这段时间里,我处于增长职位并领着工资,是不是在帮倒忙?”但幸运的是,凭借我们从最初调查中获得的信号和信息,我们在两周内就让他们达到了 40%。
Lenny Rachitsky: 哇。作为一个案例研究,你当时做了什么?
Sean Ellis: 是的。这家公司叫 Lookout,是一家移动安全公司,现在 Lookout 的大部分功能都已经内置到 iPhone 和 Android 手机中了。但在当时,该产品拥有从备份数据、寻找丢失手机到用防火墙和杀毒软件保护手机的所有功能。因此,当我们进行初步调查时,我深入研究了那 7% 说没有该产品会非常失望的人,发现那 7% 中的大多数人关注的是杀毒功能。所以他们的想法是,他们知道需要保护电脑免受病毒侵害,智能手机变得越来越像电脑,所以他们需要保护手机也就顺理成章了。有趣的是,在当时,我想曾经出现过的手机病毒只有一种,但这在人们心理上是一个很容易跨越的联想。
所以现在我们知道了,好的,杀毒才是人们真正看重的。因此,第一步就是将产品重新定位在杀毒上。这相当于建立了一个筛选机制。现在任何进来注册该产品但不关心杀毒的人都不会转化,而那些对杀毒感到兴奋的人则会转化。我们从最初的调查中已经知道,人们转化后会看重这一点。因此,通过预先设定正确的期望,你就能带着正确的期望吸引人们进来。然后我们做的第二件事是,我们优化了新用户引导,使他们注册产品后做的第一件事就是设置杀毒功能,然后收到一条消息:“你现在已受到病毒保护。”
所以这真的是这两件事的结合。设定正确的期望,然后尽快传递价值(speed to value)。因此,我们调查的下一批人中,有 40% 说如果没有该产品他们会非常失望。实际上只花了两周时间就做出了这些改变。六个月后,这个分数达到了 60%。然后我想,他们在四五年后达到了十亿美元的估值,最终成为了早期的独角兽公司之一。
有趣的是,随着所有这些功能现在都被内置到手机中,他们彻底改变了业务,但他们继续做得很好,而且他们一直在迭代业务。我认为,在业务早期把准这种脉搏,对于在企业内部建立肌肉记忆以在市场变化时做出真正的响应,是非常重要的。
Lenny Rachitsky: Sean,这已经非常精彩了。仅仅从这段简短的对话中,我就想探索无数个话题。所以首先,顺着你分享的这种增长策略的思路,我想象中你执行的是这样:寻找如果产品消失会非常失望的人的比例,看看他们是谁,看看他们对什么感到兴奋,并在定位和新用户引导上向这方面倾斜,可能还要从产品中删减他们不关心的东西。
Sean Ellis: 是的。最初我是从营销的角度切入的。随着时间的推移,我把自己定位在一个增长角色上,产品和营销是我可以影响的领域。但作为一名营销人员,我可能对工程师创立的公司没有太大的影响力去说“让我们删掉一些东西吧”。所以说“让我们只调整新用户引导的顺序,以便我们强调这一点并引导用户去使用它”更有意义。这更容易被接受。
Lenny Rachitsky: 听到你可以在不大幅改变产品的情况下如此快地移动这个分数,我想很多人会感到惊讶,因为通常来说提高留存率是非常困难的。也许我们可以谈谈这一点,但我想听起来往往有一些并不难做的事情,可能会显著改变这个产品市场契合度测试的结果。
Sean Ellis: 对。最终提高留存率确实很难,但这通常更多是新用户引导至正确用户体验的作用,而不是人们试图改善留存率的战术手段。
达到 40% 之后的下一步
Lenny Rachitsky: 好的。我想先记下这一点稍后再回来谈,因为这是一个非常重要的话题。我稍后会回到这个问题,假设有人运行了这个调查并得到了 40%,他们脑海中应该想到什么,比如“这是在告诉我什么”?因为我认为很多人会想,“我达到了产品市场契合度。我搞定了。冲冲冲。”思考这告诉你什么的最佳方式是什么?
Sean Ellis: 是的,我的意思是它告诉你一件非常重要的事情,那就是,你没有创造出人们根本不在乎的东西。这是一个重要的洞察。但在你深入了解那种产品市场契合度之前,你基本上没有能够增长业务的工具。所以这真的是下一步,即深入挖掘并弄清楚谁认为它是刚需,他们是如何使用产品的,他们以前用什么,他们在解决什么问题。
挖掘用户背景与构建增长飞轮
Sean Ellis: 我最喜欢的问题之一是……我往往会基于那个筛选条件衍生出很多问题,试图深入挖掘那些表示如果没有该产品会非常失望的用户。我最喜欢的问题之一是:“你获得的主要收益是什么?”起初我把它作为开放式问题,用来众包人们获得的不同收益。但接着我会进行另一项调查,把它变成多选题,要求他们从四个不同的收益陈述中选择一个。然后在后续调查中紧随其后的问题是:“为什么这个收益对你很重要?”这样我就开始获得了非常好的背景信息。
实际上,我是在与一家早期的 YC 公司 Xobni 合作时想出这个问题的,Xobni 这个词是 inbox 倒过来的拼写。当我提出那个问题时,基本上那些表示如果没有该产品会非常失望的用户都集中在:“Xobni 帮我在邮件中更快地找到东西。”知道这点很好,好的,这就是收益。但当我问“为什么这个收益对你很重要?”时,他们说:“哦,我快淹死在邮件里了。”我不断看到这句话作为书面陈述出现。因此,当我后来试图弄清楚如何获客时,我测试了“快淹死在邮件里了?”这句话,它成了一个非常棒的钩子。那就是人们所处的真实情境,他们对“用 Xobni 更快地找到东西”以及随后关于 Xobni 是什么的描述响应强烈。所以我认为,当你真正深入挖掘为什么那个刚需收益对人们很重要的背景时,你就开始获得了构建飞轮的要素,从而实现长期可持续增长。
Lenny Rachitsky: 所以我听到的是,无论你是有 40%、60% 还是甚至只有 7%,这个工具真正的最佳用法是关注那部分会非常失望的用户,看看他们在寻找什么,对什么感到兴奋。
Sean Ellis: 开始深挖,开始剥开那颗洋葱——
Lenny Rachitsky: 开始深挖。
Sean Ellis: ……并且只是深刻理解他们,确保最终你的产品路线图是在加倍投入对你的刚需客户重要的事情。新用户引导是给新用户带来正确的体验。你的信息传递设定了正确的期望,你的获客活动针对的是真正有需求的人。所以这一切都是关于让正确的人获得正确的体验。然后甚至你的参与循环也只是强化如何让人们更频繁地体验那个收益。
40% 阈值的确定性与团队聚焦
Lenny Rachitsky: 太棒了。关于 40% 这个阈值,你刚才分享说,它基本上是你在观察了大量初创公司做这个调查并发现规律后得出的。这个 40% 有多确定?有多大的影响?39% 和 41% 有区别吗?
Sean Ellis: 我认为它没那么绝对。对我来说,我认为真正的力量在于给团队设定一个可以瞄准的目标,基本上就是宣告:“在达到这个目标之前,我们不会开始激进地扩张。”我认为仅仅作为一个聚焦点就非常重要,因为我认为早期初创公司面临的最大挑战之一是,一半人觉得我们的产品离准备好增长还有好几年,而另一半人则觉得“我们还在等什么?”如果你能让人们在“我们的业务达到产品市场契合度究竟是什么样”上达成共识,并在达到那个点时才发力。在我听到产品市场契合度这个词之前,我记得早在 2000 年代中期在 LogMeIn 时的对话就像这样:“我们什么时候踩油门?在我们开始往早期的火上浇油之前,需要具备哪些组合因素?”所以是的,我认为那种“先搞定再扩张”的做法,这可能是一个已经存在了几十年的术语了,但它们都指向同一个产品市场契合度的概念。
假阳性、转换成本与提问时机
Lenny Rachitsky: 你有多经常看到这个测试出现假阳性,比如有人得到了 40% 但有些不对劲,他们实际上离得很远?还是说通常相当准确?
Sean Ellis: 如果人们说如果没有你的产品他们会非常失望,那是一个非常好的迹象。我能告诉你的是,这不一定是假阳性,而是要弄清楚是什么在驱使人们说他们会非常失望。我最喜欢的书之一是 Nir Eyal 的《上瘾》(Hooked),他谈到在那种参与循环中,最后一步是投入。因此,我在一个我认为属于相当同质化的业务上运行了这个调查。部分原因我想看看,能否在一家较后期的公司使用同样的进入市场策略来加速增长。这是一家名为 webs.com 的公司,最终被 VistaPrint 收购了。但在我加入之前的一年里,他们的增长基本停滞。然后我开始使用这种方法,试图调整他们的增长引擎。我运行调查时想:“是啊,自从这款更老牌的建站产品出现以来,市场上已经有了 Wix 和 Weebly 这样的产品。我个人觉得它们更好用一点,也更好一点。”所以我对调查结果没抱太大希望,但结果却返回了我见过的最高分之一。大约 90% 的人说如果不能再使用该产品,他们会非常失望。
Lenny Rachitsky: 我的天。我从来没见过这种情况。
Sean Ellis: 我当时就想:“这怎么可能?这个产品属于同质化类别。我甚至都不觉得它是最好的之一。”然后当我深入挖掘时,又回到了 Nir Eyal 的《上瘾》模型,那就是人们在建立那个网站上所投入的沉没成本,他们投入了太多,以至于他们确切知道如何进行修改以及内容管理系统(CMS)之类的事情,他们花了很多时间只是为了让它变得漂亮。所以最终,这就是为什么他们会说会非常失望的原因。但快进到我最初加入时,做这些事情依然帮助业务恢复了增长,并且在我们采取这些措施后的 12 个月内实现了显著增长。所以我们从“为什么人们没有该产品会非常失望”中获得的信号仍然很重要,以及实现价值的速度。对于早期产品进入市场,我考虑的所有其他因素仍然适用,只是他们在“会非常失望”的百分比上偏高了一点。甚至我在 Eventbrite 时运行这个调查,它也是我见过的第二高的分数。但对于活动组织者来说,如果他们已经在该平台上设置了活动,并且已经发送给了他们的名单,所有那些人都在涌入,他们正在管理自己的活动,同样,他们在平台上投入了很多。所以我认为转换成本可以说是其中的一个因素。因此,这是转换成本和产品效用的函数。
Lenny Rachitsky: 这正是我想问的问题,关于什么时候问这个问题你有什么建议?我听到的是,如果你在用户旅程很靠后的阶段才问,当他们投入很多时,你会得到高得多的分数。关于时机以及向用户提出这个问题的最佳时间,有什么建议吗?
Sean Ellis: 我的建议是,对真正使用过你产品的人进行随机抽样。所以他们进去过,不仅仅是注册,而是真正使用过,并希望达到了那个偏差时刻。他们至少使用了两次,理想情况下在最近一周或两周内使用过,也就是说他们还没有流失。所以如果是对这类人群的随机抽样,那就是提出这个问题的理想时机。
Lenny Rachitsky: 明白了。所以基本上,就是那些已经激活了的用户——不管“激活”对你们意味着什么——而且已经使用了几周的人?
Sean Ellis: 是的。
Lenny Rachitsky: 不是访问你首页的人,不是刚注册的人,也不是几个月后的人。
Sean Ellis: 不是那些只看过产品演示的人,而是那些真正体验过产品的人。不过,如果你调查的是几个月后还在使用的人也没关系,但在我举的那个 Lookout 的例子中,如果我要在更新了新用户引导之后测试用户对产品的感知,我就只想调查那些经历过新新用户引导的人。
Sean Ellis 测试的局限性
Lenny Rachitsky: 对,在实验组里。好的,我在 Twitter 上问大家该问你什么。很多人提出了很棒的问题。我会在聊天过程中穿插几个这样的问题。
Sean Ellis: 好的。
Lenny Rachitsky: 其中一个问题来自 Shraaz Doshi,他是这档播客很受欢迎的嘉宾。
Sean Ellis: 我最近刚听过他那一期。
Lenny Rachitsky: 太棒了。我想那是仅次于布莱恩·切斯基(Brian Chesky)的第二受欢迎的一期。好的,他的问题是,“这个分数的局限性是什么?它什么时候会失效?如果有的话,什么时候不应该使用它?”有没有类似“这就是它对你不起作用的时候”的情况?
Sean Ellis: 有的。我认为一次性产品可能,比如,如果你不能再看你刚看过的电影,你会感觉如何?我不会在意。即使我举办研讨会,我也不会在研讨会结束后的调查中提出这个问题,因为如果你不能再参加你刚参加过的研讨会,你会怎么想?这说不通。所以我会问一个净推荐值(NPS)问题作为我的筛选问题,这样我就可以把注意力集中在喜爱它的人的反馈上,同时再通过另一个视角,看看那些可能是我贬损者的人。因此,我认为一次性产品可能不适合使用这个问题。可能还有其他我现在想不到的地方,但那个……
Lenny Rachitsky: 听起来不多。我听到的是它基本上普遍适用。
Sean Ellis: 是的,我认为是的,至少从我的角度来看。不管怎样,它对我来说一直非常有用。
过早宣布产品市场契合度
Lenny Rachitsky: 太棒了。好的。Shraaz 的后续问题是,我之前有点问过这个,但我好奇是否还有更多内容,就是,“你有没有见过初创公司过度依赖这个分数,过早宣布达到了产品市场契合度,而实际上他们还没有达到的例子?还有没有其他像‘酷,我得到了 40%’这样的警告?”有没有其他你应该知道的,比如,“好的,但也许检查一下这个东西”?
Sean Ellis: 是的,我的意思是,我认为对我来说,产品市场契合度的真正定义到底是什么,是那些经历过我糟糕的新用户引导并真正体验过产品的人喜欢它。如果我能够留住这些人,那就意味着我有了产品市场契合度。或者,修复那个糟糕的新用户引导是否也是达到产品市场契合度的一部分?我认为这是有争议的。
客户获取与增长准备
Sean Ellis: 所以对我来说,最困难的……如果我知道那些克服了开始使用产品的挑战的人仍然不喜欢这个产品,那感觉就像是一个核心产品问题,或者是错误的人以错误的方式使用它的问题,我就不会执着于新用户引导。但是一旦你有了这一点,那么最终这并不意味着你准备好增长了。当我关注增长时,客户获取几乎是最后一步。一旦我验证了它对那些早期用户是刚需,那么我就会思考,“好吧,我如何优化价值实现的速度?我如何确保人们有正确的提示,让他们在正确的时间回来使用产品,这有点像那个参与循环?如果在这方面有合理的做法,我如何让现有用户带来更多用户?甚至如何优化我的收入模式?”
Sean Ellis: 一旦所有这些都运转良好,我就会开始专注于客户获取方面。但是客户获取是如此困难,如果你在转化、留存和变现用户方面不是真正高效,你将在客户获取方面非常挣扎。
Lenny Rachitsky: 是的,酷。我们会谈谈客户获取和增长的。
Sean Ellis: 好的。
调整 40% 的阈值
Lenny Rachitsky: 我想问的另一个问题,也是几个听众问过的,是关于 40%。我在播客上邀请过 Nubank 的 Jag,我想你可能和他们合作过,他们使用 50% 作为阈值,因为显然巴西人非常友好。
Sean Ellis: 是的。我想我之前说的是他们很乐观。
Lenny Rachitsky: 是的。我想问题是,你有没有发现应该提高这个百分比的情况?在 B2B 中,有什么不同吗?你在 B2B 中会改变这个百分比吗?关于调整阈值有什么建议吗?
Sean Ellis: 是的,我没怎么深入思考过这个问题。再说一次,对我来说,通常我只是想弄清楚这是一个可以增长的产品吗?所以如果我得到 37%,我会说,“哦不,这不可能吗?”或者如果我有 70%,这是否意味着我会说,“哦是的,我想加入并与这家公司合作?”事情比这更微妙。显然,如果是 70%,但我不知道如何发展业务,我就会卡在那里。但我确实认为他提出了一个很好的观点,在文化上,有些人会更乐观或悲观。有趣的是,当我提出这个问题时,我过去只是使用一个普通的满意度问题。
测试问题的起源故事
Sean Ellis: 当我在 Xobni 工作时,我本来就是一个极其好奇的人,所以我只是想深入挖掘并了解客户,因此我总是做大量的调查。但在 Xobni,我打算用满意度问题作为我的筛选问题,所以你对这个有多满意?我非常满意。我有些满意。而我们的主要客户实际上是高级管理层,所以我认为高级管理层永远不会满足。我总是会得到这种极其不冷不热的反馈。我怎样才能改变这个问题,从这些人那里得到更真实的答案?好吧,如果我反过来问,“如果你不能再使用这个产品,你会感觉如何?”我可能会从他们那里得到更诚实的答案。当然,如果他们得不到想要的东西,他们会非常失望。
Sean Ellis: 所以最初这只是为了 Xobni 的案例,但随后我在 Xobni 之后去了 Dropbox,心想,“哦,我再用一次这个问题。”我得到的见解真的非常有用。所以我去每家公司,都继续使用这个问题。我想,这比典型的满意度问题好用得多。但最初,更多的是考虑到高级管理层,只是为了从他们那里得到更诚实的答案。
Lenny Rachitsky: 所以这就是起源故事?
Sean Ellis: 是的。
Lenny Rachitsky: 哇。高级经理们就是非常苛刻,他们什么都不需要?
Sean Ellis: 是的。
Lenny Rachitsky: 而且你必须反转问题。这太有趣了。这个问题很好地提醒了人们,打造任何人们如果没有了就会真正感到失望的东西是多么困难。这就是为什么它如此有效。人们会说,“我不需要这个。谁在乎?”这就是核心,就是这很难。
硅谷的纯技术驱动与早期采用者
Sean Ellis: 尤其是当我刚搬到硅谷的时候。我职业生涯的前15年不在硅谷,我在东欧,然后是纽约,然后是波士顿。但是你搬到硅谷后,那里的人们会为了技术本身而对技术感到非常兴奋。所以,仅仅因为某样东西很酷,就像“我们居然能做这个,是不是很酷?”就能驱动很多人。对我来说,我很务实。如果它不能真正给人们带来价值,那么这个产品长期成功的可能性就会相当低。
有趣的是,甚至在 Dropbox,在我那里的六个月期间,我每个月都会多次问同一个问题。我把早期的测试版用户分成了许多不同的列表。我会问,“以下哪个最能描述你?我喜欢成为尝试炫酷新技术的第一批人,还是,我只尝试我认为对我有用的东西?”在这六个月里,情况发生了翻转,从90%的人是想尝试炫酷新技术的人,变成了六个月后,都是只尝试他们认为有用之物的人。但很酷的是,仅仅因为促使你尝试某物的动机是你是早期采用者且想尝试酷炫的东西,如果你打算继续使用它,那是因为它给了你一些实用性。因此,我仍然可以利用这些早期采用者来帮助我找出产品内部的价值所在。
Lenny Rachitsky: 太棒了。实际上,关于这方面有两个问题。你发现这个百分比有多持久?假设你达到了40%,它消退和消失的频率有多高,相比之下,它留在那里或变得更高的频率又如何?
百分比的持久性与样本量
Sean Ellis: 是的,我还没见过它真的消退回去,但我见过公司尽管拥有它却仍然失败。我认为很多时候,这就变成了一个执行挑战。一旦你达到了产品市场契合度(product-market fit),并不是每个人都会是一个好的执行者。但在那之前,我认为达到产品市场契合度,显然现在有很多方法论可以让人们做起来更容易一点,但我仍然认为这是相当随机且相当困难的。所以最终,创造人们关心的东西的风险因素是非常困难的。所以,如果你能达到这样一种状态:40%的使用它的人说如果没有它他们会非常失望,而且你有一个合理的样本量。假设你有10个人,其中4个人说如果没有它他们会非常失望,你仍然可以从这4个人那里得到一些有用的东西。但我不会说那是一个你真正可以推向市场的样本量,是的。
Lenny Rachitsky: 你寻找的好样本量是多少,也就是,“好吧,这实际上是我想依赖的好数据”?
Sean Ellis: 这真的很有趣。很多东西都是我自学的,但我基本上在某个时候说我至少需要30份回复,我只是觉得我随便编了一个数字,然后有人告诉我,“是的,30是你在这类事情上想要的最低限度。”好的。甚至当我最初创建这个调查时,我记得把它展示给 SlideShare 的联合创始人,她的博士学位是调查相关的东西,比如认知心理学,但她基本上说这真的是关于调查的。她就像,“这个方法论太棒了。你是怎么想出来的?”所以在这类事情上得到一些这种验证是有帮助的。但很多时候,同样,这只是由我自己的好奇心驱动的,而且也知道失败是一个极有可能的结果,所以试图对这种失败进行逆向工程,而失败的头号原因就是人们实际上并不关心这个产品。所以当我发现这一点时,这就是一个非常好的迹象,表明我们现在面临的是一个执行挑战。
细分群体与战略选择
Lenny Rachitsky: 还有一个明显的因素,你可能与人们达到了产品市场契合度,但那个群体最终可能非常小,而你围绕它建立的业务实际上可能很酷,但它不会是一个巨大的业务。这方面你有什么可以分享的吗?即使有些人真的非常喜欢它,也很难知道机会的规模。
Sean Ellis: 是的,我说过,在我最初使用开放式问题来众包不同的用例之后,我会转向多项选择。但随后我试图把人们强制分入某个类别,然后我可以对每个类别运行过滤器,我就会说,“哦,以这种方式使用的人,如果没有该产品,有60%的可能性会非常失望,但以那种方式使用的人,有35%的可能性会非常失望,但有更多的人以35%的方式使用它。”那么,你是想要那个极其忠诚的群体,还是那个可能稍微逊色一点,但规模大得多且几乎达标的群体?
我认为这就成了一个战略层面的讨论:我们是想要有更好的生存机会,去追求一个我们知道自己能服务好的利基市场?还是我们已经筹集了太多资金,以至于不得不去追求一个真正巨大的市场,而且是一个不会长久的市场?但也许那时你会想,“好吧,一旦我在那个市场获得了牵引力,我就可以开始尝试吸引其他一些市场了。”但我认为这就是需要做出一些战略决策的地方。
Lenny Rachitsky: 你有没有一个你经常推荐的启发式方法,还是说它非常依赖于具体情况?
Sean Ellis: 我更喜欢一个更有激情的客户群,并从那里开始努力,只是因为我认为当你真正创新时,你最大的竞争就是变得无关紧要。所以,如果你与某些人深度相关,我认为这会给你带来大得多的长期成功机会。
调查工具的选择
Lenny Rachitsky: 太棒了。这是一个非常好的见解。好的,沿着这条线还有两个问题,然后我想谈谈增长策略。一个非常战术性的问题。你有没有推荐用于做这类调查的工具?你推荐内嵌的吗?产品内的?电子邮件的?还是其他的?
Sean Ellis: 我用过很多不同的工具。实际上,我几年前有一家调查业务,卖给了私募股权公司。它叫 Qualaroo。那是一个流入式调查工具。我认为只用 SurveyMonkey 配合电子邮件调查就可以了。对我来说,更重要的是什么对客户来说填写起来很愉快,然后什么能给我一些我可以非常轻松地处理数据的东西?例如,在 Bounce,他们已经安装了 Intercom,刚刚引入了调查功能,但那是一个非常糟糕的客户体验,至少在当时是这样。那差不多是一年前的事了,或者实际上一年多一点。所以我真的对消费者本身的调查体验是否良好非常敏感。但是,是的,我不认为我局限于任何一个平台。
从领先指标到留存同期群
Lenny Rachitsky: 这是一个如此重要的话题。只是,再次提醒人们为什么这如此重要,创始人最常问的问题之一是,“我是否达到了产品市场契合度?我是否构建了人们想要的东西?”这只是无休止的“我不知道。我怎么知道?我什么时候才能知道?”而这正以一种非常有趣的方式告诉你。所以你的建议是,这是一个领先指标(leading indicator)。你实际上并不知道,直到人们真正开始使用它,以及他们是否留存并继续使用它。对于从依赖调查转向实际观察留存同期群(retention cohorts),你有什么建议吗?是不是一旦你有了足够的数据,一旦你有了一组同期群,就开始看那个?把调查忘掉?
Sean Ellis: 是的,但是留存同期群(retention cohorts)无法为你提供关于“为什么”的任何定性洞察,所以这就是我们继续做调查的原因。因此,最初我会说,如果调查结果返回并显示了无论你的目标数字是多少……如果你想成为 Nubank,那会是 50%。或者我推出的两家公司,我们在匈牙利推出,我想说那与巴西截然相反,可能比一般文化更悲观。所以在那里也许 30% 就足够好了,但最终,无论你的目标是什么,你都要得到这样一个信号:“好吧,我们在这里有足够的价值了。让我们开始努力发展业务吧。”但在你努力发展业务的同时,我会关注那些留存同期群。如果你正在流失所有那些表示如果没有该产品会非常失望的客户,那么好吧,让我们收缩战线并重新思考,我们真的拥有产品市场契合度吗?如果没有,我们需要做什么来获得它?
Lenny Rachitsky: 太棒了。说到 Nubank,如果有人想看看一家公司是如何在实际运营中将这一点操作化的,我们有一期节目会在节目备注中附上链接,Nubank 构建的每一款新产品,在发布之前,他们都会等待达到 50% 的阈值。也就是在他们开发时,等待有 50% 的人表示如果这款产品不存在他们会感到失望。只有达到这个标准,他们才会公开发布。
Sean Ellis: 是的,我认为他们甚至将其细化到了功能层面。所以如果你想想看,“如果你无法再使用这个功能,你会有什么感觉”这个问题再次开始给你信号,那个功能是刚需功能吗?如果不是,也许我们就不该保留它。所以是的,当我看到他们如何使用这项调查,而且他们在我接触他们之前就这样做了,我超级兴奋。
Lenny Rachitsky: 哇,太棒了。
Sean Ellis: 但我认为,他们从业务相当早期就开始这样做了。
Lenny Rachitsky: 他们能做到这一点的原因是他们有很多用户。他们有数以百万计的用户,所以他们可以向一小部分人提问这个问题。因为听到这个的人可能会想,“天哪,我在使用这个功能时会被问这个问题多少次?”但他们有大量用户,所以比较容易。
Sean Ellis: 是的,是的。
Lenny Rachitsky: 好的。我保证,关于这个思路的最后一个问题。假设有听众在想,“好吧,天哪,我只有 10%,只有 15%。我不知道该怎么做才能提高我的产品市场契合度。”你刚才建议的策略是深挖那些非常失望的人,看看他们怎么说。但除此之外还有其他建议吗?你发现通常有什么方法能帮助人们从比如 10% 提升到 40%?
Superhuman 对调查方法的演进
Sean Ellis: 是的,所以几乎将这种调查方法开源的酷事之一,就是能看着 Nubank 如何演进他们的用法。但我认为另一家以有趣方式使用它的公司是 Superhuman。我想说,他们基本上最终可能让这个问题获得了比以往大得多的推动力。他们在 First Round Capital 的博客上发布了一篇关于他们如何操作的文章。而我一直在说的是,再说一遍,这可能是从我最初的营销背景出发,也就是我把产品看作一个固定不变的东西,我到底该如何弄清楚如何营销和发展这个产品?产品变更需要很长时间,那么以营销背景我能控制的变量有哪些?所以我一直说的一件事就是,直接忽略那些说他们会有些失望的人。他们在告诉你这是锦上添花(nice to have)。他们基本等同于流失了,所以直接忽略这些人。
在我说 Superhuman 的做法之前,我先在中间补充一点。我说忽略这些人的原因是,如果你开始关注有些失望的用户告诉你的内容,然后你开始根据他们的反馈调整新用户引导和产品,也许你会为你的刚需用户冲淡价值。最终,它变得对所有人都还可以,但对任何人都不够出色。所以这就是我担心过度解读那些说他们会有些失望的用户的原因。但是 Superhuman 的人实际上找到了,我认为,一个很好的解决方法,他们说,“好吧,我的刚需用户关注的好处是什么?然后在那些说他们会有些失望的用户中,也就是锦上添花用户中,那些同样关注那个好处的用户,他们需要在产品中得到什么才能让它成为他们的刚需?”所以他们忠于那个核心好处,但他们本质上试图拿那些摇摆不定的用户并将他们往上推。所以我认为他们处理这个问题的方式解决了我所担忧的问题,也就是我们会不会为刚需用户破坏了体验?
Lenny Rachitsky: 这是一个极好的洞察。顺便问一下,Rahul 和他们的团队只是自己这样做的,还是你在 Superhuman 以任何方式参与了这件事?
Sean Ellis: 没有。情况是一样的。就像我说的,我最初没有参与 Nubank。我也没有参与他们。我们在 2017 年的书里写了这个,所以我想是我把它推广出去的。但我实际上在 2012 年与 Kissmetrics 团队合作,基本上在 survey.io 上发布了这项调查,我们只是让人们可以免费使用它,提供了一个非常易于准备和发送的模板,以及相关的操作指南。这一切都是免费的。Kissmetrics 可能将其用作线索生成。对我来说,我只是想找到一种方式为社区贡献一些东西。所以它已经存在很长时间了,不同的公司找到了不同的独特使用方式也就不足为奇了。
Lenny Rachitsky: 太棒了。我认为那篇文章是 First Round 上最受欢迎的文章之一。它真的对很多人产生了影响。
Sean Ellis: 是的。
后续调查与 PMFsurvey.com
Lenny Rachitsky: 所以只是重复一下,当你深挖时你推荐的方法是……我记下来了。当你在谈论如何深挖人们发现的好处时,你的建议基本上是对那些非常失望的人进行后续调查,问他们“你得到的主要好处是什么?”。最初是开放式文本。然后一旦你收集到了一堆答案,听起来你好像做了另一项多选调查。这里有五个好处——
Sean Ellis: 发给另一群人,需要明确一下。
Lenny Rachitsky: 另一群人。是的。明白了。太棒了。然后就像是,这四五个好处中哪一个是你从这款产品中得到的?然后问题是,为什么这个好处对你很重要?
Sean Ellis: 最终 survey.io 关闭了,但基本上我通常使用的模板随后被转移到了 PMFsurvey.com。所以你也会在上面看到我提出的一些其他问题,比如“如果这款产品不再可用,你会转而使用什么?”有趣的是,你会开始发现那些说他们会有些失望的人,通常关注的是同质化的使用场景,而且他们知道可以轻松切换的替代品。所以要成为刚需,它需要既有价值又独特。
Lenny Rachitsky: 好的。在我们进入增长策略建议之前,关于 Sean Ellis 产品市场契合度测试这个话题还有什么吗?
Sean Ellis: 没有,我想就这些了。
Lenny Rachitsky: 我想我们在那个话题上花了将近一个小时,我很喜欢这一点,因为我觉得这是一个非常强大的工具,人们似乎知道并使用过它,但我认为有很多机会可以更有效地使用它。而且你指出的所有内容,不仅仅是说你有了一个门槛目标,我们就可以行动了,可以增长了。而是,这是你弄清楚如何让它越来越好、增长越来越快的方法。这其实正好引出了关于增长的讨论。即使你创造了“增长黑客”这个词,你大部分时间其实花在了相反的事情上,也就是帮助公司找出可持续的增长策略,而不是一堆只能短暂增长然后消失的把戏。据我所知,这一切都根植于产品市场契合度这个理念,以及是什么帮助你找到产品市场契合度,我想应该包括我们讨论过的很多东西。
Sean Ellis: 是的。只想快速插一句,当我创造“增长黑客”这个词时,我并没有把它看作是一堆一次性的把戏。我当时的想法更多是,最终推动可持续增长的方式是什么?但随着时间的推移,它可能更多被解读为你描述的那种方式,我只是想插句嘴说明一下。
Lenny Rachitsky: 这是一个非常好的澄清,那么你最初实际上是如何界定它的,当你第一次——
Sean Ellis: 是的,我只是说这是关于审视你正在做的每一件事,并仔细审查它对业务增长的影响。特别是,我认为大多数营销人员,当我刚搬到硅谷时,大多数要求我帮助他们公司的CEO都在说,“我们需要在建立知名度方面得到帮助”,而我正在从顶级风投那里获得引荐。所以,我认为人们对待增长的方式很大程度上是营销教科书上的方法。而创业公司根本没有余裕去做所有那些事情,所以你必须真正专注于,我如何获客并让他们进入一种会使其持续使用这款产品的体验?所以也许我把它叫做增长黑客选错了词,但我认为它至少开启了对话,让更多人开始思考,也许我们应该以一种不同于学校营销课程传统教学的方式来思考增长。
Lenny Rachitsky: 有没有你认为本应该使用的其他术语?你是否总会回想,我本该叫它这个?你脑海中有什么其他的想法吗?
Sean Ellis: 没有。我认为有时候有一点争议性反而更好,因为太容易完全不被注意了。但我当时是想为不仅仅是我对待增长的方式命名,而且我看到 Facebook 显然拥有与大多数公司非常不同的增长方式。LinkedIn、Twitter,有少数几家公司正在以我以前对待增长的相同方式来做,我只是觉得这东西需要一个名字。所以我找了几个朋友坐下来,想出了一个名字,然后它就传开了。但是,显然从一开始它就在不同群体中引起了相当大的分歧。
Lenny Rachitsky: 这是一个有趣的故事。谢谢分享。
增长策略的优先级:从激活到获客
Lenny Rachitsky: 好的,那么谈谈增长以及帮助公司弄清楚如何增长。假设你去一家公司,他们在 Sean Ellis 测试中得到了 42%,他们会说,“好的,太酷了,让我们开始考虑增长吧。”当他们考虑增长时,你给他们的第一个建议是什么?然后从广义上讲,你如何着手帮助他们弄清楚如何增长?
Sean Ellis: 最终,这是关于试图让尽可能多的合适的人达到我们刚才讨论的刚需用户所处的状态,所以试图让尽可能多的人体验产品,使得如果他们不能再使用这款产品,他们会感到非常失望。因此,这不仅仅是获客,而这是大多数公司如何思考的……最初是知名度,然后也许更成熟的方式是,哦,让我们至少专注于有利可图的获客。但根据我的经验,最困难的部分实际上在于产品团队内部,所以你如何塑造那个最初的用户体验,让他们真正以正确的方式使用它,而且不至于太困难以至于他们放弃?最终,我们要理解是什么让它成为一款刚需产品。然后我们试图做的是建立一个……是的,这听起来有点理论化,但我可以深入探讨如何做,也就是围绕那个刚需价值建立一个飞轮。
所以第一步是理解它。对我来说,第二步是找出一个指标,基本上能捕捉到正在交付的这种价值的单位。因此,当我考虑北极星指标时,我考虑的是反映有多少人进来并体验了那种产品市场契合度体验的东西,无论那是什么。而且不仅仅是我告诉他们,“这是你们的北极星指标应该是什么。”而是最终团队需要共同决定这一点。然后真正地绘制图表,我们可以增长那个北极星指标的所有不同方式是什么?这就是你开始实际构建的地方,我称之为价值交付引擎,但这也就是我们的新用户引导是什么样的?那个顿悟时刻是什么?那个激活?参与循环是什么样的?有没有任何推荐?试图捕捉它今天的原貌。
然后,从那里开始,思考改进的最大机会在哪里,也就是那些高杠杆机会,然后最终开始针对这些机会运行实验。通常,我想我早些时候稍微提到过,但通常我喜欢做的顺序是从激活开始,因为那个太关键了,而且很容易在中间迷失,特别是对于早期产品。产品团队太专注于路线图了。我们离甚至不再需要营销只差两个功能了。这东西要起飞了。然后营销团队又太专注于引入新人,但如何让那些新人获得极好的首次体验往往被遗漏了。所以重点关注激活,然后是参与和推荐,并把收入模型弄对。然后一旦这些部分都运作良好,就开始真正痴迷于渠道方面。
有一件事我要说。当我进入一家公司并直接参与获客方面的工作时,我很早就会思考我对获客的假设,因为如果我进入其中而不知道我们将如何获取那些客户,我并不是很确信我在那里时能弄清楚。所以我希望有两三种看起来相当可行的方法来有利可图地获客,并且知道一旦我深入了解,我可能会想出一两个,我就有了五个,其中一个很可能会奏效。但我不想只是承受着一旦我进来就必须想出办法的压力,如果在参与这家公司之前我至少没有看到那个角度的话。
Lenny Rachitsky: 我听到的是,当你进入一家公司,他们问,“Sean,我们如何弄清楚如何让这个东西增长?”你实际上首先关注的是激活和新用户引导,我们稍后会讨论所有这些事情。然后,在那之后,基本上这些对你来说是优先级顺序。然后是飞轮、参与、推荐之类的东西,看看是否有办法驱动它。然后是收入。我们如何用它赚钱,我们如何确保我们在有利可图地做这件事?只有在那之后,你才开始在获客漏斗顶端的增长上大举投入。
Sean Ellis: 是的。我可能需要先做一些获客的工作,只是为了带来足够的流量,但我不会痴迷于它的可扩展性。就像,好吧,让足够多的人进来,这样我们就可以开始解决问题。部分原因在于,现在获客端的竞争如此激烈,如果你在转化、留存和变现客户方面不够高效,你就找不到可扩展且有利可图的客户获取渠道。
Lenny Rachitsky: 这很有意思,因为我想很多人可能恰恰相反。先给产品引入大量增长,然后我们再去修补新用户引导,再去想怎么赚钱,推荐什么的以后再说。所以我觉得让大家听到这一点真的很重要。再强调一下,你之所以首先投入并重点关注新用户引导/让用户激活,是因为这与留存率以及那种刚需客户,也就是回答“我会非常失望”的客户,高度相关。
Sean Ellis: 是的。而且在这个阶段失去他们的风险是最高的。他们对你提出的承诺可能还有点怀疑,但又足够好奇想去试试。但在你让他们获得那种刚需体验之前,在你让他们达到那种顿悟时刻之前,他们处于流失的高风险之中。所以很多人把重点放在,“好吧,我最好弄到他们的邮箱地址或电话号码。”但那样的话,你本质上就必须重新获取他们。所以对我来说,如果你能压缩实现价值的时间,我可以给你几个不可思议的例子,当时我们……
LogMeIn 的激活案例
所以在 LogMeIn,当我们最初尝试增长业务时,我卡在了一个支出上限上……我每月无法在盈利状态下投入超过一万美元来尝试增长业务。然后我深挖数据,发现 95% 注册 LogMeIn 的人——LogMeIn 当时提供电脑的免费远程访问,你安装软件后就可以从任何其他电脑控制它——95% 的注册用户从未进行过一次远程控制操作。毫不奇怪,我不得不从那 5% 的人身上获得变现,这极大限制了我寻找有效渠道的能力。
这要归功于我们的 CEO,我和他分享了数据,他直接告诉产品团队:“我们要完全冻结产品开发路线图。”产品、工程和设计的每一个人都要停下;他也对我说:“停止寻找新渠道。”我们营销方面的三个人都将专注于提高从注册到使用的转化率。三个月内,我们将从注册到使用的转化率提高了 1000%。我们从只有 5% 的人使用产品,提高到了 50%。我回去尝试了之前每月只能扩展到 1 万美元的完全相同的渠道。现在它们每月扩展到了 100 万美元,营销投资的回收期为三个月。80% 的新用户是通过口碑进来的。仅仅通过专注于激活,就出现了这样一个重大的拐点。
Lenny Rachitsky: 你发现通常有什么方法能有效提高激活?我知道人们有很多招数,但我想有哪三四个方法是你认为大家绝对应该尝试,以帮助改善激活和新用户引导转化率的?
深度理解问题与定性研究
Sean Ellis: 我最喜欢的一句引言来自 Kettering,一百年前他在通用汽车负责创新。他说:“问题阐述清楚了,就解决了一半。”所以我认为,很多时候关键不在于你尝试了什么,而在于你如何深刻理解阻碍用户有效使用产品的问题。我给你举个例子。在我们做了很多这类改变,并且已经在 LogMeIn 的新用户引导上取得了大量改进之后,我们发现了一个非常便宜的需求生成渠道,经济效益看起来很棒,但仅仅在下载这一步,我们的流失率就高达 90%。
于是我们针对那里进行了很多 A/B 测试,试图提高转化率,最后测了十多次都没能提升。终于有人说:“当这些人注册的时候,我们为什么不直接问问他们为什么注册了却没下载软件呢?”我们不想做得太像跟踪狂让人反感,所以把它做成像客服发来的便条。这个渠道每天进来的有 20 万人,所以有 2 万人转化成了注册。我们基本上可以给这 2 万人发邮件,其中有 1 万 8 千人没有下载。于是我们就问:“嘿,注意到您还没机会使用产品。怎么了?”
我们得到的回答不是什么正式调查,而是:“哦,这看起来好得不像真的。我不相信这是免费的。”我跟你提过,我们是当时最早的免费增值 SaaS 产品之一。所以人们持怀疑态度,尤其是在需求生成渠道中,他们没看过我们那家只做付费产品的竞争对手的广播或电视广告。这些人是第一次接触这个品类。一旦我们弄清楚问题出在哪,下一次测试就让下载率提升了 300%,这……我们给了他们一个选择,下载付费版的试用,或者下载免费版,在免费版旁边放了一个大大的图形勾号。当他们看到我们有商业模式和付费版的试用时,免费版就变得可信了。这基本上就让那个渠道为我们奏效了。
所以我想再说一次,这是定性研究与观察他人做法的结合。我们之前的公司是一家不需要下载的游戏公司,所以我们最初有一种理论,也许仅仅是可下载软件就不可能每月获得数百万新客户,所以我们的想法是不切实际的。但后来我们想,“有反例吗”?等等,有的,即时通讯软件也是可下载的,而且它们有数亿客户,所以让我们研究一下它们的下载和安装过程,看看有没有我们可以借鉴的想法。所以,同样地,获得一些灵感,尝试其中一些东西,这是尝试一堆不同东西的综合结果,最终带来了……我不会说是某一个大突破,而是一堆小提升的积累。
Lenny Rachitsky: 太棒了。所以如果人们在想,“嘿,我该如何提高激活率?我该如何提高转化率?”有几件事可以尝试。只需进一步深挖是什么阻止了人们继续推进。问他们,“你为什么在这里跳出?你以为这会是什么?你为什么最终没用它?”从其他产品中寻找灵感,我想人们可能已经知道这一点。你之前谈过定位的想法,仅仅是弄清楚定位就能产生巨大影响。他们想要杀毒软件,让我们把这点说得非常清楚。“嘿,我们有最好的杀毒软件,这就是我们的目的。”所以很多时候可能只是找到有效的信息传递,对吧?
Sean Ellis: 我的意思是,推动转化的两个主要杠杆是增加欲望和减少摩擦。所以你肯定想增加正确的欲望。有时候,这也可能只是在过程中提醒人们他们将获得什么好处。以 LogMeIn 为例,这可能是我见过的最复杂的漏斗,因为你坐在电脑前甚至无法达到顿悟时刻(aha moment)。你实际上必须去另一台电脑上,才能使用服务远程控制你面前的那台电脑。所以我们会在那么多步骤中流失用户,这并不奇怪,但最初我们在设计每个步骤时并没有那么刻意。直到我们仔细思考为什么会在这一步流失用户,并研究数据,看看我们在哪些步骤流失的人最多?然后深入结合情境尝试理解我们为什么在那里流失他们,提出一组我们想要运行的测试,然后有一个好的方法来决定先测试哪一个,最终把测试集中在流失最多人的领域。
确定激活指标
Lenny Rachitsky: 这其中的另一个要素是提出一个激活指标,并就“我们认为怎样才算已激活”达成一致。我知道这非常取决于产品,但在帮助人们决定“这就是我们的激活用户”方面,有什么建议或经验法则吗?
Sean Ellis: 我倾向于从定性开始。就像我认为他们何时对产品有了足够好的体验以至于真正了解它?在 LogMeIn 的例子中,这相当容易。如果他们没有进行远程控制会话,他们就没有使用产品,在这个过程中没有任何价值。然后至少尝试看看这样做与长期留存率是否存在相关性。因果性则需要你做一些实验来证明。至少,我想看到那种相关性,但如果我从两三个可能的想法开始,然后去研究数据,那可以帮助你聚焦。但同样,我认为顿悟时刻(aha moment)是什么,不一定有一个完全正确的答案,可能有两三种不同的事情。我认为关键在于刻意挑选基于体验的东西,然后说,“什么样的可能体验能让某人足够好地尝到这个产品的甜头?”然后我确实看到一些公司说,“嗯,激活时刻应该是他们使用了一百次。”那将与长期留存率相关,但就是不太具有可操作性,它在用户体验中太靠后了。
所以理想情况下,如果有一种方法能让我在第一次会话中,在第一天就把他们带到那里,那就太好了。所以这有点像一种可以极早体验到的价值。举一个我在第一家公司工作的例子,那是一家游戏公司,我实际上反转了思路,基本上我没有做一个传统的漏斗让他们注册后玩我们的游戏,而是把我们的游戏变成了广告。基本上我们将游戏分发到了4万个网站上。他们在其他网站上开始游戏体验,然后他们会收到一条消息,说他们现在有了一个合格分数,如果注册,就能参加每周现金奖的抽奖,然后我们就可以把他们拉到我们网站上的多人游戏中。这有点像 YouTube 用来增长的策略,但比 YouTube 推出这种方法早了两年。
增长引擎与增长循环
Lenny Rachitsky: 感觉你基本上创造了 Zynga,这是我听出来的。让我们继续往下看漏斗。我们已经讨论了激活、新用户引导。你关注的下一个阶段基本上就是有些人称之为增长循环、增长引擎、飞轮的东西。基本上就是帮助你的业务增长的事物,我很好奇这是否会引起共鸣。我发现基本上有四种增长方式,通常其中一个引擎几乎负责你所有的增长。所以我看到的基本上是你将通过销售增长,通过 SEO 增长,通过病毒式传播、口碑传播或付费增长。这有共鸣吗?感觉对吗?
Sean Ellis: 我不会说这一定是非此即彼的。我认为 Bounce 是一个很有趣的例子,对 Bounce 来说 SEO 超级重要。所以那些本质上是在搜索“巴黎行李寄存。行李寄存……”的人,当大多数人试图寻找存放行李的地方时,他们会从谷歌开始,但与此同时,使用 Bounce 的人中有很大一部分正拖着行李走在巴黎鹅卵石街道上。然后他们经过一个牌子,上面写着“在这里存放行李,每天5美元”。这就好比,“哦,想都不用想。”所以全世界有1万个合作伙伴意味着在需求生成方面有很多人处于正确的情境中。一个是,我实际上有点认为……我不确定它如何映射到这上面,但这是需求生成与需求收割的对比。其中一个例子是……需求生成的例子,当你经过时看到那些牌子,这是高情境的,在正确的地点。然后显然需求收割就是任何在谷歌上搜索的人。所以他们在这里做付费搜索和自然搜索。
Lenny Rachitsky: 有意思。我不常看到那种指示牌方法奏效,但我确实见过它有效。比如 Yelp,我认为在很多方面就是靠所有餐厅里的小 Yelp 贴纸增长的。DoorDash 可能也是通过这种方式增长的。
Sean Ellis: 我认为每家企业都可能有点不同,但对 Bounce 来说,这对他们来说是一个非常好的机会,这是说得通的。
如何选择重点投入的增长领域
Lenny Rachitsky: 你如何帮助企业弄清楚该押注哪个领域?他们应该做付费,应该做 SEO,还是应该雇销售。销售可能更容易一些。B2B 的话,你可能必须得有一支销售团队,我想只是为了帮助他们选择,“这是你拥有大机会的地方。”
Sean Ellis: 说到底,当我接手时,我通常会想,这家企业现实的获客角度是什么?理想情况下,我希望能带着两三个角度切入,但显然……Dropbox 是一个经典的例子,“天哪,这个产品……”用户带来用户将成为经典。它内置了文件共享、文件夹协作功能,有太多功能是从一个用户跨越到另一个用户的。但有趣的是,它在某些方面与 LogMeIn 相当相似,这两家企业用不同的方式解决相似的问题。在 LogMeIn,我们的增长几乎完全依靠付费搜索。部分原因再次在于,我们有一个竞争对手每个月在电台和电视广告上花费数千万美元,用一款纯付费产品来开创这个品类。GoToMyPC,他们创造了所有这些潜在需求。因此,我们用免费增值服务来颠覆他们,并将自己插入用户的流程中就变得顺理成章:我在电视广告上听到的那个东西是什么来着?然后他们去谷歌搜索,发现同样的东西,但是免费的。所以我们并没有真正去推动差异化,而只是真正试图收割需求。
所以我在 Dropbox 做不到这一点。我去的时候,根本没人在搜索它。所以我们尝试了一点搜索,看看能不能在云存储或备份上做文章,或者尝试一些传统品类。云存储在当时甚至还算不上传统品类,但备份是,而且相当昂贵,那个方向并没有那么多需求。因此,把重点放在 Dropbox 的用户带来用户循环上才更有意义。
我认为基本上对每家企业来说,只需思考这家企业有什么独特之处能开启渠道机会,而每个人多少都会对上一个非常有效的方法产生路径依赖。他们会认为自己可以在下一家企业应用它。但在我自己经历了足够多次后,我倾向于通过与客户交谈来获得最大的灵感,弄清楚他们是如何发现它的,他们通常是如何发现类似的东西的?这也开始给了我一些想法。
通过与客户交谈寻找增长灵感
Lenny Rachitsky: 我认为最后一点非常有力,我正在把它记下来。你说,基本上你的策略之一就是与用户交谈,问他们“你是如何发现这个产品的”以及“你通常是如何发现这类产品的”?这是第二个问题吗?我认为这类似于你的[听不清]测试。这是一个如此简单的问题,却如此强大,因为人们还能通过什么其他方式找到你的产品呢?他们会去一个寻找这类东西的地方,比如我在谷歌上搜索文件夹共享。这里面有太多你直接忽略掉的信息了。
Sean Ellis: 我认为人们很多时候不走这条明显路线的原因是,我以前也一样,人们往往要么过度依赖定性,要么过度依赖定量。就像,我要从测试和分析中得到所有答案,或者我要从传统的客户研究中得到所有答案。在我职业生涯的前五年,我非常属于前一个阵营。我只打算测量一切,疯狂测试,然后找到有效的东西。但我们在 LogMeIn 的领投风投曾对我说:“你上一次和客户交谈是什么时候?”他一直催促我去做调查并与客户交谈。起初我给了一个自作聪明的回答:“我不在乎他们怎么说,我在乎他们怎么做。”他说,“不,你必须和他们谈。”后来只是为了敷衍他,我试着每天都进行一次对话,因为他经常在我们的办公室,所以当他问我时,我可以说:“嘿,是的,我今天和一位客户谈过了。”但我开始发现,我和客户交谈得越多,我的实验就越好,最终我变得非常……定性和定量研究的结合会带来更好的测试。
Lenny Rachitsky: 这是另一个精彩的故事和洞察。非常有趣的是,人们有时把你视为增长黑客、实验和数据专家,而我们到目前为止分享的大部分建议都是非常受定性驱动、受调查驱动、受目标客户驱动的。
Sean Ellis: 当你无法深入了解正在发生的事情的背景时,真的很难进行好的实验。
Lenny Rachitsky: 我很喜欢这点。顺便说一句,我不知道我是否知道这件事。所以你帮助开发了 Dropbox 的推荐计划?
Dropbox 推荐计划的诞生
Sean Ellis: 我当时在那里。基本上,甚至当我刚开始和 Drew 交谈时,在我加入之前,我就在想:“我认为我们发展这项业务的方式是利用真正充满热情的客户群,这就是我们需要加倍投入的。”我们在 Xobni 尝试过类似的推荐计划,还有一位创办了 Ring 的朋友 Jamie Simonoff,在 Ring 之前他早先有一家叫 PhoneTag 的公司,他实际上对双边推荐计划做过很多测试,即双方都有激励,他发现那是效果最好的。因此,结合我们在 Xobni 测试的结果以及与他的对话,那时我实际上还没见过 PayPal 的做法。但那有点像……似乎一个双边都有激励的推荐计划是最好的选择。
有趣的是,在我加入 Dropbox 的六个月前,我在 LogMeIn,我确实考虑过在 LogMeIn 做激励推荐,但我们 80% 的新用户都是通过口碑进来的。而且我们系统上连接了一亿台设备,我非常害怕增加激励会破坏这个增长引擎,所以我不想冒险。但在 Dropbox,一切还太早。我仍然想说,没有哪个实验是一个人的功劳。碰巧我在那里的时候,我带入了一些洞察,但最终……开发它的人其实是一个名叫 Albert Knee 的实习生,我记得他后来从麻省理工学院退学,之后在 Dropbox 待了几年。但他算是我在日常增长协作中的得力助手。
Lenny Rachitsky: 哇。我会说 Dropbox 的推荐计划,以及你提到的 PayPal 的推荐计划,是现存最传奇、被研究最多、被抄袭最多的两个推荐计划。
Sean Ellis: 遗憾的是,我认为他们没有意识到,在推荐计划之前,Dropbox 就有惊人的推荐率。试图抄袭它的公司就像这样:“为什么没有人在谈论我们的产品?让我们加一个带激励的推荐计划吧。”对我来说,我认为当它已经起作用时,它是一个极好的加速器,但如果人们不想谈论你的产品,它无法解决根本问题。
Lenny Rachitsky: 这是非常棒的一点,也是我正要问的,回到增加参与度、增加推荐作为一种增长机制的话题,你会寻找什么迹象来告诉你那里存在机会?我先自己部分回答一下,我恰好看到了你刚才说的,即你需要已经有强劲的口碑增长,因为推荐是建立在口碑之上的,并给你一点额外的分享激励。所以也许你同意还是不同意这个观点?关于帮助弄清楚我们是否可以建立某种循环,还有其他建议吗?
免费增值与口碑
Sean Ellis: 嗯,我想说的一点是,当我们刚开始采用免费增值时,正如我所说,我们是首批采用者之一,所以我花了一段时间才弄清楚免费增值到底是如何运作的。但对我来说,要让提供免费版和高级版的产品在任何业务中真正发挥作用,你的免费产品必须足够好,以至于人们自然会围绕它产生口碑。然后,为了在经济上可行,你必须有一个足够好、足够差异化的高级产品,让人们愿意升级到高级产品。但我认为很多时候人们过于担心第二部分,以至于他们把免费版做得不是很好,然后当口碑不是很强时又感到惊讶。所以我认为你基本上必须有两个各自独立的优秀产品。这是其中一点,但显然,任何具有协作层的公司都更有可能在推荐上运作良好。然后我认为在参与度方面,很大程度上取决于产品的性质。
参与度与自然使用周期
像 Airbnb,你不会每天都使用它,除非你像个流浪汉什么的,而那样你又付不起钱。所以产品存在一种自然的使用周期,你希望能够针对该周期实现最大化。这就是我刚才说的,回到《上瘾》(Hooked)模型,我认为这是一个很好的方法,可以帮助建立一个框架来思考如何提高参与度。然而,关于产品使用的自然频率,一个很好的反面例子是 Facebook,当他们将北极星指标从月活跃用户改为日活跃用户时。我认为,同样地,凡是衡量的就能被管理。一旦 Facebook 设定了日活跃用户目标,团队突然就有了更多的动力去思考,“我如何让人们每天都回来使用这个产品?”而当目标是月活跃用户时,他们几乎只能因为那个人在那个月使用一次而获得认可。即使他们使用了10次,他们也不会得到10倍的认可。就像是,“哦,那也挺好。”但他们并没有在这方面被衡量。所以我认为马克·扎克伯格从月活跃转向日活跃是一个有点随机的决定,因为他们达到了10亿月活跃用户,他们就说,“好吧,让我们去争取10亿日活跃用户。”但这在让该产品变得更加令人上瘾方面产生了非常大的影响,以至于显然他们最终去了国会或者受到了很多抵制。我不确定他们是不是因为这个去了国会,但他们因为拥有一个可能过于令人上瘾的产品而受到了很多抵制。同样的事情也延续到了 Instagram 和其他一些 Meta 产品,或者基本上任何具有高参与度的东西上。所以我确实认为,正确的激励实际上可以帮助团队集中注意力,但任何产品也会有其自然的使用周期。
Lenny Rachitsky: 我很高兴你提到了北极星指标。我实际上有一篇文章,我会在节目笔记中链接到,我在其中收集了30家不同公司的北极星指标,给你一些灵感。我知道这本身就是一个深刻的话题,但当有人试图选择他们自己的北极星指标时,我百分之千同意,它很大程度上决定了你的公司如何运作。它基本上集中了所有人的激励,让我们来推动这件事。这极大地改变了你们正在构建的东西。关于帮助选择北极星指标,有什么要点式的建议吗?
如何选择北极星指标
Sean Ellis: 我从通过[听不清]测试揭示的价值开始。所以对于一家公司,我会说,“好吧,根据我们最热情的客户,这就是刚需价值,我们想考虑一个反映我们交付该价值的指标。”然后我会给他们一种框架,来思考北极星指标。但我认为,将其设为有时间限制的群体对话非常重要。如果你给一个团队30天,他们就会花30天。如果你给他们六个月,他们就会花六个月。但我认为通常情况下,如果团队有正确的原始要素和关于北极星指标重要性的清单,他们可以在30分钟后想出一个相当不错的北极星指标。它不是比率,而是随着时间的推移可以持续向右上方攀升的东西。这样你就可以不断地管理它并感觉良好。它应该与收入增长相关,但收入不应是北极星指标,而是随着你在客户群中增长价值,你应该能够以同样的速度增长收入。所以还有一些其他事情,但我认为那将是最重要的,即它是一个随着时间的推移可以持续向右上方攀升并反映你向客户交付价值的东西。
Lenny Rachitsky: 太棒了。我正想问你对收入的看法。所以你的建议是不要把收入作为北极星指标?
Sean Ellis: 不要。即使是亚马逊,再次声明,这只是我所知道的亚马逊的指标,即每月购买量,但其他人可能会说亚马逊的不是这个,亚马逊的是商品交易总额(GMV)之类的。但我认为每月购买量很棒,因为它映射了人们从亚马逊获得的价值。所以即使我在亚马逊花1000美元买一台电视机,对比花3美元或10美元买一把电动牙刷,从消费者的角度来看,亚马逊交付了同样的价值。我需要某样东西,亚马逊帮我找到了那样东西。所以我认为从客户角度来看的价值单位比总收入更重要。但显然,亚马逊专注于推动更多的每月购买量,至少在他们的商店业务方面,这帮助它们成为了世界上最有价值的公司之一。所以我认为关注价值意味着,收入应该是做事的产物。对。它不应该指导你的日常行动。
Lenny Rachitsky: 为了让大家更具体地理解,你能分享一些你见过的好北极星指标例子吗?比如 Eventbrite 或 Dropbox,或者任何你合作过的公司?当你思考的时候,我快速分享一个。在 Airbnb,我们的北极星指标是预订夜晚数。所以这类似于亚马逊。这不是 Airbnb 从预订中赚到的钱,而是预订夜晚数,这真的是,基本上运行的每个实验都是,这是增加了预订夜晚数还是减少了预订夜晚数?
Sean Ellis: 这是一个非常好的市场指标。Uber 显然是每周乘车数。我总是对 Airbnb 感到惊讶,它上面没有一种时间维度,就像 Uber 的每周乘车数那样,但也许这是因为旅行是一个非常不频繁的使用场景,所以关注时间维度没有意义。是的。
Lenny Rachitsky: 是的。为什么时间段对你来说很重要?你为什么鼓励这样做?
Sean Ellis: 就是日活跃用户,你看到了月活跃用户和日活跃用户之间的差异可以在 Facebook 极大地改变行为。它给了你一种可量化的方式,如果你只是随着时间的推移取一个总数,它看起来总是像在上升。
Lenny Rachitsky: 所以这是一个关于他们参与频率的参与度元素。
Sean Ellis: 是的。但是——
Lenny Rachitsky: 还有其他的吗?还有其他的快速说一下吗?
Sean Ellis: 是的,我的意思是,当我在 Dropbox 和 Eventbrite 时,我并没有真正思考过北极星指标,就像这个术语本身那样,但我当时在思考的是,Dropbox 什么样的体验是有价值的,以及我如何让人们更多地获得这种体验?我甚至不知道他们今天用的是什么,也许是 Dropbox 中的文件,文件访问量可能比单纯的文件托管量更好。然后对于 Eventbrite,同样地,我会说每周售票量之类的,你可能可以说每周活动数,但那样你就会把卖不出票的活动也算进去,而每周售票量更有可能反映真实情况,如果活动在售票,主办方就会满意,嗯。
Lenny Rachitsky: 好的。Sean,我们已经聊了太多内容了。我正试图限制我们再问多少问题,以免我们——
Sean Ellis: 时间太长了。
Lenny Rachitsky: 时间确实很长,但这太棒了。我觉得我们在这里为大家收集了非常多有价值的内容。那么我就再问几个简短的问题吧。其中一个其实来自 Andrew Chen,他目前是 A16z 的合伙人。他写了很长时间关于增长的文章。我想不管怎样,他写的那篇文章帮着普及了增长黑客,那篇文章叫什么来着?《增长黑客是新的营销副总裁》,对吧,就是这标题。所以他其实有一个问你的问题,他跟我分享了。他的问题是,过去十年里增长策略发生了很大变化。现在与你刚开始做增长时相比,最大的区别是什么?
增长策略的演变
Sean Ellis: 当我刚开始做的时候,只要在客户获取上做到数据驱动就足以取胜,在客户获取上做到测试和数据驱动就行了。所有其他公司都只关注 CPM,所以我们仅仅通过大量测试和一些运作方式上的创造力就能做得非常好。但随着时间的推移,现在我会说大多数在线营销人员都是非常数据驱动和测试驱动的。他们知道需要做大量的测试。因此,要在今天保持竞争力,你实际上必须在业务的各个部分都做到极其高效。
所以同样地,比如你如何转化、留存、变现,这就变得困难了。让营销团队变得数据驱动和测试驱动是相当容易的。一旦你开始涉及激活、推荐、参与和留存,你现在讨论的就是营销、产品之间的交叉,如果是 B2B 的话还要加入销售和客户成功,而这些团队不习惯一起工作。因此,要推动整个增长引擎中有效测试程序所需的协作真的很难。几乎所有在这方面取得成功的企业,都是在业务极早期就实施了它,因此很少有后期的公司能够在复制这种方法上取得太大进展。
Lenny Rachitsky: 基本上就是变得更难了。事情正变得越来越难。
Sean Ellis: 变得更难了,但我认为这是可能的。这也是我一直痴迷的问题,就是现在你如何让跨职能团队在增长上协同工作?当你能做到这一点时,它仍然是一个巨大的优势。
ICE 与 RICE 优先级框架
Lenny Rachitsky: 好的。完全不相关的问题,在我们聊天即将结束时换个完全不同的方向。所以你提出了 ICE,这种非常流行的工作优先级排序方式,这太疯狂了。直到我开始准备这次对话时我才知道。你对 RICE 有什么看法,也就是 Intercom 版本的 ICE,其中 R 代表覆盖范围(reach),我相信是。
Sean Ellis: 是的。
Lenny Rachitsky: 有什么想法?
Sean Ellis: 所以我认为这是一个不必要的补充,但也许我只是在保护我最初的想法,ICE 中的 I 是影响力(impact),它本质上是在说,在最好的情况下,我们能从中获得多大影响力?而覆盖范围是影响力中极其重要的一部分。所以我认为它已经包含在 ICE 的 I 中了。因此,如果说我会被指责什么,那就是把事情过度简单化了,我不是在说他们,但很多人处理事情的方式是,必须有一种更复杂的方法来处理这个,而这不是我。所以是的,更多测试更好。
不,事情不是那样运作的。我的意思是,更好的测试比糟糕的测试好,但如果你必须对自己有什么约束的话,更多测试会更好。所以我认为关于 ICE 有一个快速的备注,那就是为了能够有效地运行高速测试程序,你需要能够从全公司收集想法。这就是为什么我提出 ICE,如果你让人们提交想法,而你又不能告诉他们为什么他们的想法没被选中,他们只会感到沮丧,你也会浪费很多时间。但如果你有一种系统的方法来比较想法,人们就更有可能理解,并且能够想出更好的主意。
Lenny Rachitsky: 我喜欢你的思维方式,Sean。我有一篇关于优先级排序的文章,我基本上提出了同样的论点,有各种复杂的优先级排序方式。归根结底,就是影响力、信心和投入,这真的很有效,而且很少需要更多工作。另一方面,我确实也有一篇客座文章叫 DRICE,由两个人写的,叫详细 RICE(Detailed RICE),实际上我认为这是一个非常好的观点,有时值得花大约 30 分钟对每个想法进行评估,以真正估算需要多长时间,从而避免做那些行不通且极不可能成功的事情。所以我们基本上是在做这个覆盖范围的部分,并花时间在上面。对。我认为这里面有很多好的价值。
Sean Ellis: 是的。而且我认为真正有趣的是,随着时间的推移,我认为 AI 实际上会改变我们对实验潜在结果进行建模的能力,并开始,无论它是一种更知情的执行 ICE 的方式,还是取代 ICE,最终结果的概率是 AI 会非常擅长的东西。
AI 对增长工作的影响
Lenny Rachitsky: 好吧,完美的过渡到最后一个问题。真正最后的一个问题是,我想问问你有没有什么使用 AI 的方式,或者你认为 AI 将如何影响你或其他人正在做的工作?也许你刚刚已经回答了,但你告诉我。
Sean Ellis: 不,我会谈几点。其一可能是我今天使用它最有趣的方式。显然我用它来提出实验想法,但我个人使用它最有趣的方式是,有很多人向我寻求建议,而我没有太多时间给人们深思熟虑的答复。所以几乎我收到的每一个问题,我都会去 ChatGPT 问,Sean Ellis 会怎么回答这个问题?它给我一个初稿,我再做一些微调,这绝对让我能够回答更多问题。所以有一本被收录索引在那里的书和大量的文字作品是很有帮助的。
Lenny Rachitsky: 那太有趣了,而且那个提示词就这么简单,“Sean Ellis 会怎么回答”——
Sean Ellis: 是的,因为很多时候它会回答,“《增长黑客》的作者 Sean Ellis 等等等等 认为”,然后它显然会在答案中提取出那部分内容。
Lenny Rachitsky: 我的天哪。所以你离做一个 Chrome 扩展程序或者什么能自动把它插入你——的东西只差一步了,
Sean Ellis: 对,没错。我甚至可以开始让我的私人助理也许开始作为我来回答其中一些问题,但我有点害怕在没有先审查的情况下发送什么东西,因为——
Lenny Rachitsky: 绝对的。
AI 与跨职能增长挑战
Sean Ellis: 有时候它的回答和我的回答有很大不同,但长远来看,我实际上认为,正如我所说,增长的跨职能挑战是阻碍许多公司稍后实施这一点的原因。主要是产品团队不想从营销团队那里获得指示,营销团队也不想从产品团队那里获得指示,也许一个增长层可以帮助做这些事情,但我发现,如果 AI 本质上在说,你在业务的这个领域表现不佳,你应该在这个领域推动一些实验,那么当这是来自系统的客观建议时,自尊心就很难作祟了。
所以我实际上认为,提出出色实验的能力将随着 AI 和识别机会而不断增长。然后很明显,AI 在分析方面将非常令人兴奋,因为我确实发现,在大多数公司中,一旦我们进入实验的高频运转状态,瓶颈最终往往会发生在分析端。我认为 AI 也会在这方面提供很大帮助。
Lenny Rachitsky: 太酷了。这些例子太棒了。好了,Sean,在我们进入非常令人兴奋的、将快速进行的闪电问答环节之前,你还有什么想分享或留给听众的吗?因为我们已经聊了很长时间了,我想放你走了。
在正确的时间提出正确的问题
Sean Ellis: 是的。在我与公司进行大量研讨会和项目的过程中,我不断回想起我从 Oleg Yakubenkov 那里听到的建议,即在如何弄清楚事情时,它通常归结为在正确的时间提出正确的问题。他曾是 Meta 的数据科学家,所以他基本上将数据科学归结为学习如何提出正确的问题。所以我实际上和他有一门名为 Gopractice.io 的课程,这门课程最大的好处就是学习如何提出正确的问题,是的,你学习如何在 Amplitude 中查询它们,但更重要的是,能够提出正确的问题。我认为从 Meta 的数据科学家那里听到这一点的重要性,是很酷的。
但每次我在研讨会中进行练习时,它几乎总是归结为那些在业务中无法得出正确或好答案的人,这是因为他们没有提出显而易见的问题。一旦他们有了,比如为什么用户不下载软件?我们就问他们那个问题。这将是我研讨会上的一个例子。谁认为产品是刚需?弄清那种能让你进一步聚焦于产品市场契合度的刚需益处,就是其中一环。所以是的,正确的问题,正确的时间,我认为这是思考增长甚至达到产品市场契合度的一个非常重要的方式。
Lenny Rachitsky: 我喜欢这个建议,因为我认为它让我们得以一瞥你的大脑是如何发展出这些看似简单却最终非常强大的想法的。感觉这个建议就是多思考你需要提出的问题,因为这会让你得到一些人们往往思考不足或没有思考的东西。有些事情,也许它太简单了。
Sean Ellis: 是的,或者他们只是直接跳到解决方案那一面,而不是真正试图了解发生了什么。
Lenny Rachitsky: 是的,是的。太棒了。好了,说完这些,Sean,我们已经到了非常令人兴奋的闪电问答环节。你准备好了吗?
Sean Ellis: 准备好了。
闪电问答环节
Lenny Rachitsky: 好的。我们的第一个问题是,你最常向别人推荐的两三本书是什么?
Sean Ellis: 越来越多地,我推荐一本叫《Presenting to Win》的书,它已经存在很久了,但它真的对我的演讲很有帮助。当然,当我外出旅行时,我经常与其他演讲者同台,是的,我喜欢向他们推荐这本书。我已经谈过 Nir Eyal 的《上瘾》(Hooked)了,我一直推荐它,我们就只谈这两本吧。这两本很好。
Lenny Rachitsky: 在《Presenting to Win》中,有没有一个让你铭记在心的技巧,就是这里有一件帮助你成为更好演讲者的事情?
Sean Ellis: 归根结底,演讲的自信取决于你将要展示的信息组织得非常完善。当你正确地组织它时,你更有可能自信地表达出来。所以他基本上说,如果我有一个演讲要做,我有一个小时的时间,我会花 55 分钟创建正确的演示文稿,然后花五分钟练习它。但是,是的,还有很多内容,但是——
Lenny Rachitsky: 哇。太棒了。好的。我们会在节目说明中链接到那本书。你有最近非常喜欢的一部电影或电视节目吗?
Sean Ellis: 有,我一直在刷奥运会。我喜欢那个,只是看着那些苦干多年的人,然后也许只有 30 秒的时间去做他们为之努力的事情。所以奥运会一直很棒。然后是电影,我其实刚看了《Blackberry》,我不知道你看过没。
Lenny Rachitsky: 哦,黑莓的故事?
Sean Ellis: 是的。我的意思是,显然我们都知道那个故事,但它真的非常,我的意思是,这是拥有产品市场契合度随后又失去它的经典案例。实际上,它甚至可能是“如果你不能再使用这款产品你会有什么感觉”这种危险性的一个反面例子。很确定大多数人对黑莓会说,是键盘,在 iPhone 出现之前,键盘是超级重要的,然后突然就不重要了。但是,是的,在自尊心和其他方面也很有趣,一开始每个人都很友好,然后自尊心占据主导,事情后来变得困难得多。
Lenny Rachitsky: 那确实是一部很好的电影。还有一部很棒的电影叫《Tetris》。出于某种原因,我把这两部电影联系在一起,
Sean Ellis: 好的。
Lenny Rachitsky: 关于俄罗斯方块的故事,和那两部电影有着相似的平行轨迹。
Sean Ellis: 太棒了。我得去看看那部。
Lenny Rachitsky: 下一个问题,你有最近发现的非常喜欢的最爱产品吗?
Sean Ellis: 我忘了它的名字,但我认为或者它叫 Pack Gear Hanging Suitcase,我基本上,今年我旅行了将近十万英里,下周我还安排了另一次旅行,我喜欢它是因为它基本上把我的所有衣服折叠在这个小内胆里,放进我的手提箱,然后我只要把它拿出来挂起来,这让旅行变得容易多了。
Lenny Rachitsky: 叫 Pack Gear Suitcase?
Sean Ellis: Pack Gear Hanging Suitcase Organizer。
Lenny Rachitsky: 太酷了。我去看看。还有两个问题。你有最喜欢的人生座右铭吗,你经常回想起的,在工作中或生活中觉得有用的?有时也许会和亲友分享的。
Sean Ellis: 注重声誉和学习而不是收入,这让我受益匪浅,我给你举个例子。十多年前,当我做很多早期临时工作的时候,我合作过两家公司,后来我和创始人聊过,我能感觉出他们对我的贡献没那么满意。我向他们都提供了全额退款,因为我觉得我的声誉……我随便估了个数字,说我的声誉值500万美元。我怎么会为了2万美元去抵押我的声誉呢?所以其中一家,我把支票退给了他们,他很乐意地收下了,但他说:“哦,你可以补偿我的。你不必给我支票,只要在未来无限期地继续帮助我来补偿我就行。”
我当时想:“哦,拿走支票吧。”然后另一家说:“不,不,我其实对你所做的非常满意。我们没事的。”但是给我介绍这两家公司的两位风险投资人,后来在我为公司融资时,是最先给我投资意向书(term sheets)的人。最终的投前估值(pre-money)最终达到了我对自己个人声誉估价的两倍多。所以,是的,我觉得,遗憾的是,由于难以捉摸的产品市场契合度挑战,这家公司本身发展得并不好。但那里的经验就是专注于学习和声誉。声誉打开了越来越多学习的大门。而随着我学到更多,声誉也在增长。就是这样。
客户支持的类比
Lenny Rachitsky: 这与客户支持有一个非常好的类比。如果有人就是讨厌你的产品并想要退款,那就直接给他们退款,让他们走人,而不是让他们心生怨恨。
Sean Ellis: 是的,绝对如此。
TikTok 的幕后故事
Lenny Rachitsky: 我喜欢这个。最后一个问题。你在我们开始录音前跟我提到,你也许对TikTok的成功负有间接责任。或许可以分享一下这个故事。
Sean Ellis: 是的,我的意思是,我不想夸大其词,但是我三个月前进行的环球旅行,我想那时候刚结束。我见到了TikTok最初的创始增长团队。他们在新加坡,我记不清之前的产品叫什么了,但他们是从之前的产品开始的。然后当TikTok出现时,他们自然而然地成为了TikTok的初始增长团队,他们基本上说,我们早期为TikTok做增长所做的所有事情,都是基于你的文章。那是在那本书出版之前。
所以那只是我写的大量博客,但得到这种反馈真的很酷,是的,我一直说我有一些非常好的成绩,帮助过很多独角兽,但没有真正意义上的巨头。然后听到这些,感觉真的很好,知道自己在TikTok中发挥了某种作用。当然,几乎在他们告诉我的同一周,国会正在进行关于TikTok禁令的对话。所以这感觉挺微妙的。同时我也在想,也许如果他们没有读过我的东西,国会就不会在TikTok禁令上浪费时间了。
Lenny Rachitsky: 天哪。苦乐参半。我希望他们不会把你拉去参加听证会。Sean,这太不可思议了。这就是我所期望的一切。我觉得我们在这里收集了这么多智慧,可以帮助人们弄清楚产品市场契合度,找到产品市场契合度,迭代,增长他们的产品。真高兴我们做了这期节目。最后两个问题。如果大家想了解更多,或者想以各种方式和你合作,他们可以在哪里找到你正在做的事情?听众如何能帮到你?
如何联系与合作
Sean Ellis: 太棒了。是的,Seanellis.me 是我的网站,我在上面链接了我正在做的所有事情。所以那是一个渠道,上面有联系表单,如果有人想联系的话。显然,人们也可以通过LinkedIn联系我。然后我确实提到过 GoPractice。也就是 gopractice.io。通过一个能够尝试增长产品的模拟环境来学习增长,这是一种非常酷的方式。所以去看看 GoPractice,也许还可以去 Seanellis.me。当这期节目发布时,我会在上面为 Lenny 的听众放一个特别优惠,这样你们可以省点钱。
Lenny Rachitsky: 还有一个大语言模型(LLM)AI 之类的,——
Sean Ellis: 我没有直接参与那个,但是是的,Oleg 和团队还在做一些其他非常酷的事情。数据驱动产品管理,以及我参与帮助的用户增长项目。
Lenny Rachitsky: 太棒了。然后对于大家来说,如果他们想知道,你做顾问吗?你是如何与公司合作的,以防他们觉得,嘿,我需要 Sean。
Sean Ellis: 是的,我的意思是,所以我亲自下场参与的公司的最佳切入点,理想情况下是在他们达到产品市场契合度之后非常早期的时候,现在你知道如何衡量它了。所以如果你处于规模化前期,但你看到了那个40%,或者甚至比你更早的时候,我们可以更早开始谈。但对我来说,那是我最喜欢的介入时机,从一开始就把事情做对。事后补救做这些事情太难了。我会进去三到六个月,全职投入,作为团队的一员,真正帮助业务建立动力。我大概每年或者每隔一年做一次这样的事,因为我是故意让自己精疲力尽,然后再去享受做更多讲座和研讨会之类的事情。
Lenny Rachitsky: 太棒了。好吧,这期节目播出后你可能会收到海量请求。希望你准备好了。Sean,非常感谢你能来。
Sean Ellis: 太棒了。谢谢你,Lenny。非常感谢你邀请我。
Lenny Rachitsky: 大家再见。非常感谢大家的收听。如果你觉得这期节目有价值,可以在 Apple Podcasts、Spotify 或你最喜欢的播客应用上订阅节目。另外,请考虑给我们打分或留下评论,因为这真的能帮助其他听众找到这个播客。你可以在 LennysPodcasts.com 找到所有往期节目或了解更多关于节目的信息。下期见。
术语表
| 原文 | 中文 |
|---|---|
| A16z | A16z |
| activation | 激活 |
| aha moment | 顿悟时刻 |
| Albert Knee | Albert Knee |
| Amplitude | Amplitude |
| Andrew Chen | Andrew Chen |
| Blackberry | 《Blackberry》 |
| Bounce | Bounce |
| ChatGPT | ChatGPT |
| Chrome | Chrome |
| CMS | 内容管理系统(CMS) |
| CPM | CPM |
| demand generation | 需求生成 |
| demand harvesting | 需求收割 |
| deviation moment | 偏差时刻(deviation moment) |
| DoorDash | DoorDash |
| Drew | Drew |
| Dropbox | Dropbox |
| engagement loop | 参与循环 |
| Eventbrite | Eventbrite |
| First Round Capital | First Round Capital |
| freemium | 免费增值 |
| GM | 通用汽车(GM) |
| GMV | 商品交易总额(GMV) |
| Gopractice.io | Gopractice.io |
| GoToMyPC | GoToMyPC |
| growth hacking | 增长黑客 |
| Hacking Growth | 《增长黑客》 |
| high-leverage opportunities | 高杠杆机会 |
| Hooked | 《上瘾》(Hooked) |
| ICE prioritization framework | ICE 优先级排序框架 |
| impact | 影响力(impact) |
| Intercom | Intercom |
| Jag | Jag |
| Jamie Simonoff | Jamie Simonoff |
| Kettering | 凯特林 |
| Kissmetrics | Kissmetrics |
| leading indicator | 领先指标 |
| Lenny Rachitsky | Lenny Rachitsky |
| LLM AI | 大语言模型(LLM)AI |
| LogMeIn | LogMeIn |
| Lookout | Lookout |
| must have | 刚需 |
| MVP | 最小可行性产品(MVP) |
| nice to have | 锦上添花 |
| Nir Eyal | Nir Eyal |
| north star metric | 北极星指标 |
| NPS | 净推荐值(NPS) |
| Nubank | Nubank |
| Oleg Yakubenkov | Oleg Yakubenkov |
| onboarding | 新用户引导 |
| Pack Gear Hanging Suitcase Organizer | Pack Gear Hanging Suitcase Organizer |
| PhoneTag | PhoneTag |
| PMFsurvey.com | PMFsurvey.com |
| pre-money | 投前估值 |
| Presenting to Win | 《Presenting to Win》 |
| product market fit | 产品市场契合度 |
| Qualaroo | Qualaroo |
| Rahul | Rahul |
| reach | 覆盖范围(reach) |
| retention | 留存率 |
| retention cohorts | 留存同期群 |
| Sean Ellis | Sean Ellis |
| Shraaz Doshi | Shraaz Doshi |
| SlideShare | SlideShare |
| Superhuman | Superhuman |
| survey.io | survey.io |
| SurveyMonkey | SurveyMonkey |
| switching costs | 转换成本 |
| term sheets | 投资意向书 |
| Tetris | 《Tetris》 |
| user get user | 用户带来用户 |
| value delivery engine | 价值交付引擎 |
| VistaPrint | VistaPrint |
| webs.com | webs.com |
| Weebly | Weebly |
| Wix | Wix |
| word of mouth | 口碑 |
| Xobni | Xobni |
| Yelp | Yelp |
| Zynga | Zynga |
此文档由 AI 分片翻译(translate_long_document)