1/ In the early 2000s, @ideo pioneered a process for venture development referred to as the "3 Circles" of Desirability, Viability & Feasibility (ideou.com/blogs/inspirat…). #crypto has a long way to go across all, but right now it is really struggling with the first: Desirability.
2/ Desirability is the question of "Do people want it?" and asks, what is the unique value proposition? How do people hear about, learn, try, buy, use, love, and share it? What are its functional but also emotional benefits? How is it 10x better than the current user experience?
3/ Iterating to product-market fit requires testing & ultimately proving at each stage of development that all three are true (it's desirable, feasible & viable) and work together. In the early stages of a venture, this means building evidence that they will be true in the future
4/ Technical (feasibility) & cryptoeconomic (viability) experiments are worthwhile, but if we want crypto to succeed & have value (short & long term), far more effort, discipline & talent needs to be put into & towards understanding users and adoption experiments (desirability)
5/ It starts by answering what *should* vs. what could. *Should* (not could) it be decentralized? *Should* (not could) it have a token? *Should* (not could) it be built? Right now, there is too much focus in #crypto on what could vs. what should.
6/ It's also about creating things that are 10x better experiences for people. That presupposes the team has a detailed understanding of 3 things: (i) the user, (ii) existing experiences, & (iii) how their solution is 10x better. Unfortunately many #crypto projects have none.
7/ In the startup world, there is a saying that founders should "make painkillers, not vitamins." Many people (and therefore parts of the world) cannot live without painkillers, but most people don't take vitamins & live just fine. Too many #crypto projects today are vitamins.
8/ Finally, it's also about crypto projects doing things and ulitizing practices that have been proven and refined over decades by successful entrepreneurs in the non-crypto startup world. Such as...
9/ User research. Get out of the basement, lab, tower, and into the world with real people and not only listen to what they say but more importantly *watch what they do.* People will say they love and want what you're making & never buy or use it. Actions speak louder than words.
10/ Shipping the Minimum Viable Product (or in crypto's case, Minimum Viable Platform or Protocol). Your first users to build and prove adoption should be the extreme edges & early adopters. Too many crypto projects are trying to jump too fast to mainstream users and use cases.
11/ Rapid A/B Testing, Iteration & Pivoting. Since when did it become a thing to write a 200-pg paper about a thing, raise a decade of capital to build the thing, take a decade to build & ship that untested thing, then shut down that thing when it doesn't work (vs pivot earlier)?
12/ User Experience Journey Mapping. This involves mapping the end-to-end user experience (incl. today's solutions, interdependencies & painpoints) and figuring out exactly *Where to Play* (hint: not everywhere). To get big, crypto projects ironically need think smaller.
13/ User Growth Metrics (like CAC, Drop-Off, DAU, Retention, Viral Coefficient, LTV, etc). The act of thinking about the right metrics in the beginning help founders ask the right questions and design solutions for the right users and core needs (vs "build it and they will use").
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1/ For years, people have been waiting and hoping for crypto's "Netscape" moment. The gateway to the web that brought the internet to the main stream.
IMHO, looking for the Netscape for the #crypto space is not a relevant or applicable analogy. Here's why...
2/ The way people imagine crypto's "Netscape moment" is very literal: as a window, gateway, or browser (just like Netscape) to easily acquire, save, and use crypto and access the decentralized web.
3/ But that sounds a lot like a wallet and exchange, which already exists. And yet, even with these onramps and "browsers" into crypto, we haven't had that "Netscape moment" people are hoping for in terms of mass adoption.
1/ Should we be that surprised with what's going on right now with #ETH and ICOs generally? This is what happens when you have $10B+ raised via ICOs in the last 12 months, no treasury management, no product (or users), and liquid/publicly traded market caps and "shares" (tokens).
2/ #crypto is great for the digital world, but for now (and some time), teams and their employees need fiat to pay for real, non-digital things like rent, food, services, transportation, etc.
3/ I expect this decline to last for another 3-6 months as a growing pipeline of teams both (A) have their non-fiat runways cut by 60-80%, which, if they raised enough for 2 years, is now only 4-9 months, and (B) need to extend their fiat runways by another 12-24 months to ship.
There is a lot of excitement in “money tokens” and “privacy coins”, and while I agree that those are useful and valuable (to a point), my question is: how many different money and privacy coins does the world *actually* want and need? It’s greater than 1, but less than thousands.
2/ By comparison, today there are ~180 fiat currencies recognized by the U.N. representing ~$90 trillion, ~92% of which is digital.
3/ I’d love to hear other people’s thoughts, but I only see a few scenarios where we have more than 180 money tokens...
2/ In traditional markets, public announcements are often made only after material results and impact are delivered, whereas in the crypto markets, public announcements have been used as a means to raise money (to start to build, execute, and deliver)
3/ Crypto markets and investors have become so desensitized to public announcements and press releases about the intent to deliver future products and code, that announcements (even ones as significant as this one today) are bucketed into the "huh, that will be cool" category
1/ Protocols, funds, and large #crypto companies are either thinking about or are in the process of launching their own incubators and startup accelerators. Some will be protocol specific; others will be agnostic. Here's the case for why and when this will/won't make sense.
2/ First off, while this is a new trend, history rhymes, and we may have seen this movie (or at least a similar one) before: the rise, fall, and refactoring of corporate innovation labs and corporate accelerator programs over the last 10 years.
3/ While #crypto is certainly different and its properties as a open platform will enable new types of opportunities, specifically around collaboration, interoperability, and cross-chain asset exchange, there are still many learnings we can draw from corporate labs/accelerators.