# Context
When I was working for Panic Bear, my leader was planning to launch a MVP which had a full back-end system and design. The problem was, our product was a copied version of an existing player, so we wanted to enhance the usefulness and usability to differentiate from the competitor and optimize user experience as well.
My job was defining the gap between user needs and their product
Research question:
What is the problem that hasn't been solved or not solved good enough, which we can use to differentiate competitors and optimize user experience as well
Constraints
Why competitor analysis
Since we didn't have any research before, user interview might be a good method for exploration. But there was no research before so I had no idea about the target user
I decided to conduct competitor analysis for a couple reseason:
- By looking at who are our competitors and who is their target users, I can make at least a proto persona to define what problems need to be solved and validate these assumptions in the future
- With proto personas, I would have a sense of strengths and weaknesses of competitors to make up the idea of what should we build next.
Process
Collect data from competitors.
Competitor analysis is not all about what features they built, but the problems they are trying to solve and why they come up with the solutions. So I every information I found had to help me understand deeply about their products. I used Simon Sinek’s Golden Circle
Simon Sinek’s Golden Circle
I started by listing all existing products that might have the same or close to our value proposition. Then I accessed to their landing pages and see why they build this product (aka the problems need to be solved), how they deliver the value and what they build.
From the overall product understanding, I dived into their specific features by signing up and using them, then evaluate each feature. ! [https: //s3-us-west-2. amazonaws. com/secure. notion-static. com/a2dbee1d-aca1-4f94-9084-31a3230340d1/Frame_516. png](https: //s3-us-west-2. amazonaws. com/secure. notion-static. com/a2dbee1d-aca1-4f94-9084-31a3230340d1/Frame_516. png)
To compare these features I interpret them to use cases and job stories, so that I can compare different features which aim to solve the same problem. These job stories also helped me form proto personas later.
Quick and dirty user research
To have more realistic user personas, I collected every reviews, feedbacks from any review website I could find and used affinity diagram method to see the patterns of user needs, behaviors, pain points and
Affinity diagram I made in Figma
Proto user personas
From a ton of information I gathered, it might be hard for folks - who didn't join the project- to make sense and build empathy, thus user persona was the best tool to help everyone gain a perspective similar to the user, identify with the user they are designing for and have a direction for making design decisions.
There were 3 personas I made in this project.
User journey
To detect the most crucial problems which haven't been solved good or enough by any competitor, I made a simplified user journey (this idea came from design sprint map), it looked like this
Define the market gap hypothesis
Based on user needs, pain points and weaknesses from competitors' solution, I narrowed problem list down into a specific problem that was most crucial and underserved pain which we could focus on
The Five States of Customer “Pain” by Mike Boysen
What's next - Problem validation
Since the result came from assumptions with a quick-and-dirty research method. Obviously, It needs to be validated by user research to see if this is a real and valuable problem that worth to be solved before investing a ton of time, effort and cost
# Context
When I was working for Panic Bear, my leader was planning to launch
a
MVP which had a full back-
end
system and design. The
problem
was, our
product
was a copied version of an existing player,
so
we wanted to enhance the usefulness and usability to differentiate from the
competitor
and optimize
user
experience as
well
.
My job was defining the gap between
user
needs
and their product
Research question:
What is the
problem
that hasn't been
solved
or not
solved
good
enough
, which we can
use
to differentiate
competitors
and optimize
user
experience as
well
Constraints
Why
competitor
analysis
Since we didn't have any
research
before
,
user
interview might be a
good
method for exploration.
But
there was no
research
before
so
I had no
idea
about the target
user
I decided to conduct
competitor
analysis for a couple
reseason
:
-
By looking at who are our
competitors
and who is their target
users
, I can
make
at least a
proto
persona
to define what
problems
need
to be
solved
and validate these assumptions in the future
-
With
proto
personas
, I would have a sense of strengths and weaknesses of
competitors
to
make
up the
idea
of what should we build
next
.
Process
Collect data from competitors.
Competitor analysis is not all about what features they built,
but
the
problems
they are trying to solve and why they
come
up with the solutions.
So
I every information I found had to
help
me understand
deeply
about their
products
. I
used
Simon
Sinek
’s Golden
Circle
Simon
Sinek
’s Golden Circle
I
started
by listing all existing
products
that might have the same or close to our value proposition. Then I accessed to their landing pages and
see
why they build this
product
(aka the
problems
need
to be
solved)
, how they deliver the value and what they build.
From the
overall
product
understanding, I dived into their specific features by signing up and using them, then evaluate each
feature
. ! [
https
: //s3-us-west-2.
amazonaws
.
com
/secure.
notion-static
.
com
/a2dbee1d-aca1-4f94-9084-31a3230340d1/Frame_516.
png
](
https
: //s3-us-west-2.
amazonaws
.
com
/secure.
notion-static
.
com
/a2dbee1d-aca1-4f94-9084-31a3230340d1/Frame_516.
png
)
To compare these features I interpret them to
use
cases and job stories,
so
that I can compare
different
features which aim to solve the same
problem
. These job stories
also
helped
me form
proto
personas
later.
Quick and dirty
user
research
To have more realistic
user
personas
, I collected every
reviews
, feedbacks from any review website I could find and
used
affinity diagram method to
see
the patterns of
user
needs
, behaviors,
pain
points and
Affinity diagram I made in Figma
Proto
user
personas
From a ton of information I gathered, it might be
hard
for folks
-
who didn't
join
the project- to
make
sense and build empathy,
thus
user
persona
was the best tool to
help
everyone gain a perspective similar to the
user
, identify with the
user
they are designing for and have a direction for making design decisions.
There were 3
personas
I made in this project.
User journey
To detect the most crucial
problems
which haven't been
solved
good
or
enough
by any
competitor
, I made a simplified
user
journey (this
idea
came from design sprint map), it looked like this
Define the market gap hypothesis
Based on
user
needs
,
pain
points and weaknesses from competitors' solution, I narrowed
problem
list down into a specific
problem
that was most crucial and underserved
pain
which we could focus on
The Five States of Customer
“Pain”
by Mike
Boysen
What's
next
-
Problem
validation
Since
the result came from assumptions with a quick-and-dirty
research
method.
Obviously
, It
needs
to
be validated
by
user
research
to
see
if this is a real and valuable
problem
that worth to be
solved
before
investing a ton of time, effort and cost