Reflection: Learning Launch Tool

Selection and Challenge

The tool I have selected , and which I will detail in this reflection, is the Learning Launch Tool. The use of trials and experiments within quick succession and with minimal cost was an effective means of  testing my hypothesis: that a market existed for the resale of particular brands of shoes and clothing in  second-hand markets. As stated by William Williams in the Week 4 lectures, one of the purposes of the Learning  Launch is to form a hypothesis and to test the key assumptions fast. Given that I had at least a few  major assumptions in my hypothesis, that were grounded in little experience, the use of this tool was  the perfect opportunity to test them in reality. The selection of this tool was also useful in the sense that  it allowed me to focus on the identification of the needs of my potential customers and how I could  meet them; these are also key tenets of engaging in a learning launch according to William Williams.

The challenge(s) faced  were in the initial stages of launching an online second-hand business, as a  personal side venture. Testing the needs and desires of a particular area of the market in my country  was imperative within a short space of time and on a limited budget. Such constraints made the  challenge ideally suited to the use of the Learning Launch tool, as William Williams explains these are both  feasible and necessary in the use of Learning Launches.  The business involves selling second-hand  shoes and clothing as a registered small business. Sourcing the appropriate inventory, whilst important,  was not as crucial as obtaining the data on what the customers were willing to pay for which brands  and which styles. It was necessary that this data was obtained with limited resources (time and  finances) given my desire to not over invest in a non-viable business.  However, ultimately the  Learning Launch Tool should be used as a test of the truth, as explained by William Williams. These truths  would then inform my purchasing, marketing and pricing decisions for the next stage of the business.  Some of the initial assumptions that I had made were to be soon disproved whilst others remained  intact.

Application

Upon conducting my original research on areas of the US market for second-hand clothing and shoes, I  was then able to form my own hypothesis for a small business in resale. I supposed that given my  familiarity with certain brands and wholesalers of goods I would be able to establish a small-scale  business selling these brands for profit. Moreover, these brands proved to be popular with US online  resellers. My key assumptions at this stage were that there were a dozen brands I was very familiar  with that would have a space in the market in my home country. I also assumed that I would be able to  make sales over four particular styles of shoes (sports, casual, sandals, and formal dress). As explained  in the Week 4 lecture by William Williams, these assumptions, and the hypothesis,  should then be tested against  the learning launch process.

I went out and sourced inventory that covered a wide-base of brands, styles, and sizes. Purposefully  keeping the focus broader at this stage was essential to an effective application of the learning launch,

in my opinion, as it would then enable me to hone in on the areas that were working well and focus on  these. William Williams reiterated the need for lots of tests at this stage, and I made certain to apply this.  In my  application of this tool I was seeking “the customer need that is so burning...” (William Williams, 2016) and to  identify who these customers were through attempting to obtain quality data and a reasonable quantity  also. Hess explains the idea of seeking both the confirming and dis-confirming facts in the Learning  Launch process. The search for facts was directed and greatly assisted by my access to various data sets and metrics that could track what products were obtaining interest and what factors were leading to this degree of interest. In a matter of days I was able to test my assumptions in the marketplace and use this  data to pivot the direction of the business from there on. Toward the end of my trials I had refined my  list to 5-6 key brands that proved to be potential sellers in the shoes and clothing category, and to  identify an optimum price range for these. With regard to the shoes, I was only able to obtain sufficient  interest in 2-3 major brands, and across only two different styles.

Unfortunately, there were areas in which I was unable to apply this tool effectively or indeed at all. My  application of sourcing customer needs was measured in a fashion that was too quantitative, I believe. I was unable to engage in any meaningful conversations with my limited customers in these trials, and  this may prove detrimental to my assumptions going forward. Furthermore, Hess explains the  importance of seeking dis confirming facts and the value of seeking input from a skeptic and diverse  team. I did not actively seek the views of a skeptic, instead relying on my objective viewing of the  numbers and data to confirm and dis confirm my assumptions. Still, confirmation bias could easily  have influenced my decisions at this point.

Insight

The insight I have obtained  has profoundly shifted my thinking on the initial challenge, to a point that I have had to considerably re-frame the challenge itself. My attempts in using the Learning Launch tool  revealed that many of my key assumptions simply were not true for the New Zealand marketplace. This was quite demoralizing in that it became quite apparent that brands and styles that might be high  demand overseas were virtually unwanted here. However, as explained by William Williams, the application of  the Learning Launch will never be a failure if you learn something; Indeed, I was able to learn many a  valuable lesson. I feel I have a greater appreciation for the role of qualitative data from customers going forward, as my data sets were perhaps too quantitative in their nature- I wasn't actually engaging in  those crucial early conversations that would have been pivotal to selecting the right brands and styles.  This has allowed me to better appreciate the value of considering multiple design tools in the Design  Thinking process. Whilst the nature of this assessment was to focus on a single tool, I can see how in  isolation their worth is perhaps not as effective if say I had used a tool that better utilized ethnographic  methods. I've also gained an insight into the tools as just a single part of the Design Thinking process.  Perhaps if I had engaged in greater depth in the “what is?” and “what if?” stage of the process my  approach in the initial assumptions and hypothesis would have been closer to reality.

The value of fast and inexpensive cycles of testing is something I have also grown to appreciate  through this process. This is central to the Design Thinking process, as explained in the Week 1 video  lectures that explain the process as “learning in action”. Through small and fast experiments I was able  to enter the marketplace and test my key assumption without over-investing. It was a process of solving the initial problems I had in entering the resale business. However, in reality, the process proved to be  far more complex/ wicked than initially anticipated as other variables that were not initially considered

factored into the equation. I believe this reiterates that my focus on a single tool is not a summation of  the entire Design Thinking process, and Design Thinking is only one type of thinking- a point also  reiterated by Professor Liedtkain in the Week 1 video lectures.

Approach:

Whilst the reflection thus far has focused on what I have done effectively and ineffectively in the use of the Learning Launch Tool in this challenge, I have a few key aspects I would change next time around.  The overarching focus, in future attempts, would be to authentically integrate the use of the Learning  Launch tool, and other tools, into the Design Thinking process. The approach I have taken was too  isolated from Design Thinking as an entire process. I would also integrate ethnographic research into  my challenge very early on. I feel that my understanding of the customers thought process and needs is  still very vague. The insights I could have obtained from New Zealand consumers and potential  customers would have better informed my purchasing decisions and also affected my sourcing options  early in the first weeks of business. My customer empathy probably isn't authentic after the limited  qualitative information I was able to obtain. Identifying the unarticulated needs of my customers would have been better obtained through a journal tool, or another projective technique. If I had focused some of my finances on some initial customer research in the New Zealand market, perhaps I would have a  stronger understanding of my customers at this point in my business venture.

Having a set of solid design criteria that informed my purchasing and marketing decisions would also  have been useful prior to using the Learning Launch, I believe. I think my lack of effective research of  the New Zealand market really highlights the weakness of my work in the “what is?” and “what if  stage?”. Again, this comes back to the need to view the Design Thinking process as a holistic approach, and not one to be conducted through an isolation of its components.

