Target Customers and Three Question Stud (post #8)
Let’s review where we were at this point of the pre product process. Our initial idea was a mobile app for standardized exams (we were thinking professional licensing) in which there was a focus on micro-learning and mass customization. Micro-learning meant that there could be a slimmed down but full learning session in as little as five or ten minutes. This meant that a study session could exist while waiting in line at Starbucks or while taking the train to work. Mass customization meant that as the user answered questions we could figure out your strengths and weaknesses and customize the learning process accordingly. There was also technology that could aid in this process like GPS (picking locations where you wanted to be asked in now was a good time for question and hands free. More recently, the idea of including gamification had been brought up. The reference was to make it similar to a fitness app (challenges, badges, daily goals, points, etc.).
There were a lot of competitors. But the only direct competitors were Higher Learning Technologies (HLT), Pocket Prep, and Quizlet. HLT and Pocket Prep were both fairly young companies with apps for a lot of exams. However, neither of them were a well known brand, they didn’t really have any interesting technology, they didn’t focus on micro-learning, and they didn’t have any customization features.
Quizlet had a lot more users, was a more well known brand, had a different business model (free with ads), was more focused on technology and had interesting little gamification features, and utilized user generated content. Their product was focused on micro-learning, but they did not have any customization features.
Other larger players (YouTube, Kahn, Kaplan, Pearson, other publishers) tended to focus on only big exams and could be avoided for quite some time. YouTube and Kahn had video, micro-learning, and were free products but not as much question and feedback that users could test their knowledge on. Kaplan and Pearson had a lot of question and feedback content but their mobile products were poorly rated and there was no micro-learning. Nobody had any customization features that we could see (outside of offering tutoring in addition to a course).
From a customer development standpoint, our idea had been validated. Especially the part about using the app and having to study less at night or on the weekends. If the app could customize to them, then that would be great as well. We had picked the ASVAB in that it kept us away from the bigger competitors and offered a potential referral marketing campaign through YouTube.
Based on what we had found so far, it appeared that a product focused on mobile, micro-learning, and mass customization could have its own space in a seemingly crowded market. The customization piece had seemingly no competition in the education technology space.
Okay, lets look further at target customers. First, you have to figure out who you are targeting. Your target group will depend on whether you are pre-product or post-product. If pre-product, you are still in the stage of validation. What should go in it? Do people want it? Is there a market? We had put some work in to try to answer these questions before beginning the process of building an app, but there was still more work to do.
Three Question Stud:write down at least three types of potential customer groups. All products solve a problem. What problem does your product solve and who has this problem?
Draw a column with three columns and three rows. On top, write the customer groups. On the left side, write the three different criteria you are going to use to judge the groups.
The three criteria are size (market size), pain: payment (how much pain do they have associated with the problem? How likely are they to pay for your solution?) and accessibility (how easily can you get in contact with these people?)
Rate each criteria 1-10, add up the three ratings, and see which group has the highest number. That’s the group with the highest potential.
Our thought process here was to test out whether or not the ASVAB was really the best choice. While we had already put in a decent amount of work in customer development, it would pale in comparison to the amount of work it would take to build the actual app. The exams we picked to compare were the NCLEX (nursing certification) and the Elementary Education Praxis (elementary education teacher certification). Healthcare was and is a growing industry, and that’s the main reason we picked the NCLEX.
ASVAB: Market Size 10 Pain:Payment 6 Accessibility 10
NCLEX: Market Size 7 Pain:Payment 8 Accessibility 6
PRAXIS: Market Size 6 Pain:Payment 5 Accessibility 6
The ASVAB scored a 26, the NCLEX scored a 21, and the Praxis scored a 17. The ASVAB had more than double the number of exams taken annually as compared to the NCLEX and the Praxis. While it had been shown that there was a math issue (pain) for ASVAB students, there was also some concern about how much they wanted to pay to make that pain go away. Students studying for the NCLEX were college graduates and paying for an app was not going to be much of a concern. As proof of this, HLT was charging $30 for their NCLEX app and $15 for their ASVAB app. I rated the Praxis a little lower in that I was not sure that the pain level was all that high for them. This is to say that it was not clear how much students really had to study for this exam. The YouTube referral marketing strategy was not available for the NCLEX or the Praxis. Or for any other exam that we looked at. There was YouTube content for other exams, but that content was usually produced by competitors. We could still access them through App Store Ads, but it seemed that we would likely be paying much less per click through YouTube.