Pondering the topic of contracts and creativity in yesterday’s post made me think about problem areas, how they’re identified and how they may be deconstructed. In simpler terms, the difference between the “what” and the “why”.
Take two regions in a country, one far more fertile and having a better overall economy than the other. Yet both areas face the same lack or unmet need. Take a product which fills this need. Yet it’s sales in the far more economically challenged area are more than double that of the first region. Why?
The numbers gave the company a means to identify a problem but are not able to provide any explanation for the discrepancy. It was these very same metrics that originally identified the first region as one which would be a good location to launch a product – average income was higher, unmet need was felt by almost 90% of the population, retail outlets were numerous etc.
This is where the need for exploratory user observations in the field, in order to understand the customer base and their behaviour made sense, as the company’s sales data (contradictory to initial performance estimates) needed explanation that only the people generating those same numbers could answer themselves.
Data, charts, graphs, metrics and numbers all have a role to play but when they are about human beings (and not just the number of cars per minute produced in an automated factory line) I believe that role is a supporting one, not the Oscar winning star of the show.