People will always have a variety of new ideas. Among them, a very small number of “appropriate and reliable ” ideas will become products and benefit netizens, while more product ideas will only become materials for talks or blog posts, such as the following This piece of thought. So, is it wrong to have uncomfortable and unreliable ideas? I don’t think it is. The process of “ideas generation-idea game-idea destruction” is at least a kind of conjecture on the Internet market, analysis of user needs, and creation of product planning models for a new product person. . The key is whether you can conduct an anatomy of an idea you like through simple market research and rational demand analysis to gain insight into its value. This process of anatomical analysis is the process of exercise and growth.
Therefore, I dragged the following idea onto the dissection platform, and followed the process of “generation-decomposition-analysis-realization-review-evaluation of the problem” to briefly evaluate whether it should be suitable for the situation and whether it is reliable or not.
Demand generation: When I read it on the PC, I always find some “extremely stunning, inspiring, or thought-provoking” fragments in a certain article. At this time, I always hope to store these fragments easily for collection and review without disturbing the reading process. The argument to raise a little grade is one of the so-called “knowledge management” behaviors.
Requirements decomposition:
1. Read on a PC, so the scene may be a browser, reader, WORD, etc.;
2. Store fragments during reading;
3. Store quickly, and you can read the stored content later.
Demand analysis:
Level 1: useful
●Implement the text storage behavior, and facilitate future review and reading; the storage behavior is completed during the reading process, which requires fast and convenient.
Layer 2: Easy to use
●Network storage: The concept of cloud storage is the most fun. I can put clips into the cloud or watch it from the cloud wherever I go.
●Category index: There must be no less categories and tags, even notes and sources. First, it is convenient for me to manage the content; second, it may be of great use in the future~~
●How to quickly: “When browsing Sina blogs, you can publish a Weibo by selecting the fragment”-this method is worth learning. In this process, the interactive process of classification, labeling, and annotation is added, and the storage behavior is diluted. Create a perfect feeling of “a piece of good knowledge has been on the cloud unknowingly”
●Easy to read: It is enough to make me comfortable to read these fragments in a certain way, such as webpage.
Layer 3: Love to use
Background: After meeting the basic requirements of “fast storage, effective indexing, and convenient reading without disturbing reading behavior”, the knowledge I have accumulated will continue to be stuffed into the cloud. If this product is used by my 100 other colleagues, our 101 fellows will unknowingly build a fat cloud, a cloud of knowledge about a certain topic.
Based on the background of the above two lines, the following scenarios will appear:
●First: All knowledge is screened by users, and it is basically all high-quality content.
●Second: Classification index, so that the content of the same subject can be effectively aggregated, and contains notes and sources.
●Third: With high-quality content and thematic aggregation, the desire for sharing arises spontaneously. I certainly hope to browse through the knowledge fragments recognized and collected by my colleagues.
Demand realization:
Existing tools:
●Onenote, EverNote, wiz. I tried WIZ, but the index and classification were not clear, and the storage was a bit slow. The other two have not been used, EVERNOET itself is 50M+, and the software itself is heavy enough and a little troublesome. As for the client, the biggest trouble is to install and manage it. One PC is one case, so you can’t take it with you.
● Reader, such as Google. You can collect and share content within a limited content source, but there is an essential difference between it and the demand itself: the reader is not a knowledge management tool, and it cannot effectively store, manage, and index the essence of the knowledge.
Method to realize:
●Clients-become one of the existing tools and join the competition. In addition, the client + web page approach also increases the user’s understanding and management costs. Content source: can take care of various content sources, including web pages, WORD, etc.
●Browser plug-in-lighter than the client, heavier than “the following way”. Content source: It is a circle smaller than the client and can take care of all web content.
● A certain reader digest function-the lightest, the smallest content source, limited to the content subscribed by the reader. It may deviate from the original requirements and become the second “existing tool”.
The final method: browser plug-in + cloud storage + web page display.
Is it reliable? Review needs
That is, to review whether the initial needs have been well met, it should be judged from the virtual scene whether the function captures the pain points of the user (analyze user needs: look for pain points in the scene):
●Scenario 1: I installed a browser plug-in, and no matter I read any content that is valuable to me in the future, I can “select the content-optional tags, categories, comments, and automatically record the source-complete cloud storage “.
●Scenario 2: If I need to review the network abstracts I have accumulated, I can “click the plug-in button on the browser-open the web page-read and browse according to the preset classification and tags”.
●Scenario 3: Undertaking scenario 2, I can also “click on public tags, public topic classifications-browse high-quality abstract content generated by others-follow a user and their abstract knowledge or click on the source of the abstract to browse directly to the source webpage or …”, the community is formed.
Question: 1. How strong is the user’s demand for “recording the essence and notes during the reading process, and using it as knowledge management and retrospective reading”? 2 How readable and shareable is the “fragmented abstracts and notes content” generated by users?
●The first question determines the “meaningfulness” of the product itself.
●The second question determines whether this product “is it to be a pure knowledge management tool, or to build a knowledge sharing community based on the use of users to generate high-quality content.” The analysis is
complete. My assessment of this idea, in the end, simply boils down to the above two questions. Of course, due to the limitations of personal ability and experience, my self-entertainment-style anatomy will produce various deviations or paranoia in the process.
Therefore, the best way is to invite other colleagues and colleagues to watch the dissection table together and comment on their ideas to ensure that the knife is accurate and the direction is correct, so that the training process of this needs analysis can be more intelligent and referenced by the masses. value.
