Welcome to the Data Score newsletter, your go-to source for insights into the world of data-driven decision-making. Whether you're an insight seeker, a unique data company, a software-as-a-service provider, or an investor, this newsletter is for you. I'm Jason DeRise, a seasoned expert in the field of alternative data insights. As one of the first 10 members of UBS Evidence Lab, I was at the forefront of pioneering new ways to generate actionable insights from data. Before that, I successfully built a sell-side equity research franchise based on proprietary data and non-consensus insights. Through my extensive experience as a purchaser and creator of data, I have gained a unique perspective that allows me to collaborate with end-users to generate meaningful insights.
Product/market Fit1 is elusive in the alternative data sector. Prior entries in The Data Score newsletter explored the idea of working backward from outcomes needed by financial users of alternative data and designing the product to meet those needs.
Spending resources to scale and automate a data product that does not show product/market fit is way to build unwanted tech debt, which can hold back the ability to evolve the product along the roadmap to meet more client outcomes.
Stay in the iterative roundabout, or exit the process and begin scaling? Photo by Ádám Berkecz on Unsplash
In the beginning, the approach is handcrafted
At the time, I felt like “No one else is crazy enough to do all this manual work to get insights from data. They must be doing it with lots of technology.” But, I would later learn that this handcrafted work is a rite of passage in the scaling process.
As part of the Evidence Lab origin story, the first projects taken on in 2014 and 2015 by myself and my colleagues were not built as scalable solutions. We were looking to prove the concept of a centralized alternative data team as a critical driver of the sell-side research department’s revenue share. The handcrafted work on these early projects allowed us to find our product/market fit with our primary client, the UBS sell-side research analyst2. At the time, I felt like “no one else is crazy enough to do all this manual work to get insights from data. They must be doing it with lots of technology.” But, I would later learn that this handcrafted work is a rite of passage in the scaling process.
In May 2017, one of my all time favorite podcasts launched: https://mastersofscale.com/ which tells the story of how products and services rapidly scale. But, the first episode started in a different place.
“Do things that don’t scale” episode from Masters of Scale: https://mastersofscale.com/brian-chesky/ This is the very first episode of the podcast series, where Reid Hoffman interviews Airbnb’s Brian Chesky. From the podcast episode summary: " If you want your company to truly scale, you first have to do things that don’t scale. Handcraft the core experience. Serve your customers one by one, until you know exactly what they want. That’s what Brian Chesky did in the early days as co-founder and CEO of Airbnb. He shares their route to crafting what he calls an ‘11-star experience.’”
There are so many great concepts and quotable moments in the podcast. Here are just a few:
HOFFMAN: Build by hand until you can’t…. here’s the next thing to notice: they didn’t launch perfectly scaled services. They built everything by hand.
CHESKY: We had a saying that you would do everything by hand until it was painful. So Joe and I would photograph homes until it was painful, then we get other photographers. Then we’d manage them with spreadsheets until it was painful. Then we got an intern…. And then we’d automate the tools to make her more efficient…. Eventually a system does everything. We built a system where now the host comes, they press a button, it alerts our system which goes to a dispatch of photographers, so it’s all managed through technology. They get the job, they market through an app that we built, and then payment happens. The whole thing is automated now.
HOFFMAN: Note how they gradually worked out a solution. They didn’t guess at what users wanted. They reacted to what users asked for. Then they met the demand through a piecemeal process. And here we come to the true art of doing things that don’t scale. It’s not just a crude way of succeeding on a shoestring budget. It also gives your team the inspiration and urgency to build the features that users really want…
HOFFMAN: …Now it’s common for entrepreneurs to swap stories like this. And I think it’s worth dwelling on these early days of handcrafted work, because most entrepreneurs tend to have a funny reaction to these experiences. They may laugh about it later. They may call the work unglamorous. They may celebrate the day they could hire a helping hand or automate these chores out of existence. But thoughtful founders will never say, “What a complete waste of time.” They’ll often look back on this period as one of the most creative phases of their careers.
How will you know if product/market fit is achieved?
Some of the best thinking on product/market fit can be found in one of the most popular newsletters on Substack, “Lenny’s Newsletter,” where he consolidated his research on the topic into one post:
Customers clamor for your product (Covered in this article with practical examples)
People are using it even when it’s broken (Covered in this article with practical examples)
I will leave it for future newsletters to explain in detail how to apply each of these approaches in the context of alternative data products.
When to iterate?
Adoption of data products effectively requires your customers to change how they work to generate insights on an ongoing basis.
As handcrafted products are made available to customers, the feedback loop is critical. Adoption of data products effectively requires your customers to change how they work to generate insights on an ongoing basis. The data product has to solve a problem for the client in such a meaningful way that they are willing to change how they work, or the data product has to fit seamlessly into the current workflow. A product with feedback that is just “interesting” is not good enough. Even “nice to have” is not good enough. Only feedback that the feature or product is “critical” and “can’t live without” is acceptable feedback showing product market fit. Spend time with the users and find out what’s “just interesting”, but not useful. Go back to the product and iterate quickly. It doesn’t even need to be a live working version, a wireframe4 can be effective enough to show a new feature to get critical feedback… “Would this be useful if we did this?” “How would you use it?” “What would make it even better?” Going back to the Masters of Scale Brian Chesky episode… “What would make this an 11 star product?” Make those changes and get feedback again. Don’t overengineer this process of building and getting feedback.
If this process is not revealing a path to “critical,” “can’t live without” for a specific feature or product, it is time to pivot to other features and products that have better market fit.
Is iterating to find product market fit like being stuck in a roundabout? “Kids! Big Ben, Parliament, again.”
An example of finding product/market fit
One of the multiple leadership roles I had during the buildout of Evidence Lab was the head of the web-mined pricing and demand product area. We used advanced web mining techniques to monitor product pricing, inventory, and demand. The insight behind the product was that we could reverse engineer corporate strategy and execution by systematically harvesting available products and services from the web on a frequent basis and turning the data into fundamental metrics aligned with how each business and industry makes decisions. Ultimately, the price of goods and services is how a business generates its cash flow. Changes in the price and customers’ willingness to pay reveal deep fundamental insights as well as surprising near-term inflection points.
But how would that ability manifest into a product? In the early days, I worked directly with analysts in every sector globally where the investment debate could be addressed through the pricing and demand product areas. This was a very bespoke process where each analyst would have a nuanced approach to addressing the investment debate in the market, even though multiple analysts were working on nearly identical questions for their sector and geography. The work for each of them was highly customized.
Product/Market Fit Sign #1
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to The Data Score to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.
