Why Your 'Correct' Discovery Method Might Be WrongDear Reader, "Which experiment should we run next?" This question comes up in almost every Discovery coaching session I facilitate. Teams often focus on finding the methodologically perfect way to test their assumptions. But here's the thing: the most technically correct experiment isn't always the right one to run. When choosing methods for Product Discovery, we often focus on what fits our research question or assumption best. Say you want to understand how users perceive features in your product. A diary study might be the perfect method—capturing real usage patterns over time. But what if it takes three months to get reliable insights? A series of well-structured interviews or shadowing sessions might get you 80% of the way there in just two weeks. Several factors determine your lead time to insight:
Here's another way to think about it: An A/B test might seem quick to start—taking just hours or days to implement. But depending on your traffic and conversion rates, it could take weeks or months to reach statistical significance. In contrast, while recruiting participants for qualitative interviews might take two weeks, you could have reliable insights within days of completing them. Neither method is inherently better. What matters is the total time to reliable insight, not just how quickly you can get started. So, when picking your next Discovery priority, ask yourself:
Here's a practical tip: When evaluating lead time, avoid abstract scoring systems. Instead, estimate the actual duration by adding:
This concrete timeline helps you make practical trade-offs between methods. Remember: The goal isn't to achieve perfect certainty. It's to reduce uncertainty enough to make confident decisions about what to build next. Did you enjoy the newsletter? Please forward it. It only takes two clicks. Creating this one took two hours. Thank you for Practicing Product, Tim Good News!Some last tickets are available for my in-person Product Discovery workshop on March 10 in London (as part of Mind the Product conference).
As a Product Management Coach, I guide Product Teams to measure the real progress of their evidence-informed decisions. I focus on better practices to connect the dots of Product Strategy, Product OKRs, and Product Discovery. |
1 tip & 3 resources per week to improve your Strategy, OKRs, and Discovery practices in less than 5 minutes. Explore my new book on realprogressbook.com
Product Practice #392 From Product Jargonto Plain English READ ON HERBIG.CO PUBLISHED Jan 23, 2026 READING TIME 3 min & 29 sec Dear Reader,I often feel that, somewhere along the way, we, as an industry, started optimizing for sounding like product people instead of speaking like humans in plain English (or any other language). What would happen if we dropped the product lingo and used plain English to describe what's needed? I find it increasingly liberating for product teams to describe...
Product Practice #391 Four Pragmatic Ways to Improve Opportunity Solution Trees in Practice READ ON HERBIG.CO PUBLISHED Jan 16, 2025 READING TIME 3 min & 56 sec Dear Reader, Opportunity Solution Trees (OSTs) are a widely popular visual aid for connecting solution space work to business goals through problem space elements (similar to Impact Mapping). From seeing the way product teams adopt them in practice, here are four ways I've seen improve their impact for your work: Remember that OSTs...
Product Practice #390 What's your Company'sAppetite for Risk? READ ON HERBIG.CO PUBLISHED Jan 9, 2026 READING TIME 5 min & 4 sec Dear Reader, Happy New Year! I hope you had a good time off during the holidays with a chance to reflect and recharge. I'm still recovering from over-caffeinization through The Barn's Christmas Coffee Selection and am so happy to be back to writing this newsletter. Onto this week's essay. The reason the adoption of new product operating models moves slowly in your...