Subscribe to MiladyOnchain
Subscribe to MiladyOnchain
Founders run on scarce time and mixed signals. The most damaging outcomes are poor prioritization, building for wrong user, and slow learning loops. Those lead to wasted engineering cycles, frustrated customers, and missed product-market fit. This article lists common founder pain points, explains why they matter, and gives a compact, repeatable playbook you can use this week to reduce uncertainty and make better product decisions. Key claims are grounded in startup post-mortems and practical discovery practice. CB Insights+1
CB Insights’ analysis of failed startups shows that lack of market need and poor product-market fit sit at the top of failure causes. Building quickly without testing assumptions compounds risk: teams add features, fragment the experience, and confuse customers about the core value. Founders need a simple system that surfaces the riskiest assumptions and turns them into testable bets. CB Insights
Team misalignment about priorities
When product, design, and engineering are not aligned, execution splinters. Meetings multiply and velocity drops. The hidden cost is opportunity cost: teams build the wrong things faster.
Feature creep and scope drift
Teams keep adding features without clear success criteria. Feature creep increases code complexity and dilutes the product’s focus. Definitions and guardrails help avoid this. ProdPad
Weak or delayed user insight
Many decisions are made on opinion rather than evidence. Without a steady input of customer signals, roadmaps become guesswork rather than a learning plan. Continuous discovery shows how weekly customer contact improves decision quality. Product Talk
Poor prioritization process
Founders get pulled in many directions. Without a transparent prioritization system, visible work is confused with important work. Good prioritization lets you say no early and clearly.
Mis-specified success metrics
If teams cannot define a measurable success criterion for a feature, they cannot learn from it. Shipping without defined outcomes turns releases into experiments without hypotheses.
This is a lightweight, repeatable plan. It assumes small teams and limited bandwidth.
Participants: founder, PM, design lead, engineering lead.
Goal: pick one business question for the next quarter. Example: “How do we increase new-user activation by 15 percent?” Use this agenda:
State single metric and why it matters (10 minutes)
List active initiatives that touch the metric (20 minutes)
For each initiative capture: key assumption, expected impact, owner, and evidence needed (30 minutes)
Rank by uncertainty and impact, pick top two experiments to run first (30 minutes)
Record outcomes in a shared doc. This makes tradeoffs explicit and reduces meeting churn.
Use this as the canonical source of truth for what you are testing.
Assumption Log template (paste into Notion or Google Docs)
Title
Metric we care about (event name and definition)
Assumption (one sentence)
Why this matters (one sentence)
Evidence we have today (links or quotes)
How we will test it (experiment plan)
Success criterion (exact threshold)
Owner
Status (proposed / running / confirmed / rejected)
Make this the gate for any new feature request: if a request does not contain an entry in log, it does not enter planning.
Commit to one hour per team member per week for discovery tasks. Discovery is the habit that keeps assumptions honest. Tasks include:
Three 20-minute user interviews per week
One rapid usability session on the latest prototype
One quantitative check on a funnel or event
Teresa Torres’ continuous discovery approach recommends regular, team-wide customer contact to keep roadmap driven by evidence rather than calendar. Product Talk
If you need a simple rule to say yes or no, use this scoring:
Impact (1-5)
Confidence (1-5)
Effort (1-5, reverse scored)
Score = (Impact * Confidence) / Effort
Require an entry in the Assumption Log and a minimum score threshold to move to sprint planning. This prevents output-oriented decisions.
Every experiment must have a stop rule. Example: stop if sample shows no lift after X days or if a negative signal rises (complaints, cancellations). Run experiments in 1 to 3-week windows when possible. Longer iterations obscure learning and increase cost.
What they did
Intercom rethought onboarding by breaking it into modular tasks and matching those tasks to job-to-be-done moments. They used small experiments and design prototypes to identify which onboarding steps correlated with long-term retention. The result was a cleaner onboarding path that targeted momentary user anxieties and shortened time-to-value. Intercom+1
Why it mattered
Intercom’s approach replaced opinion with tests and short interviews. By measuring the impact of each microtask on activation, they reduced churn in early cohorts and produced a repeatable onboarding playbook teams could reuse.
How to apply this pattern now
Map your onboarding as discrete microtasks.
Instrument each task as an event.
Run A/B tests on the order and wording of the first two tasks and follow with three quick interviews to understand the why.
What they did
Supacart found merchants were leaving due to a brittle upload flow and confusing errors. Team prioritized UX fixes, simplified navigation, and improved error messaging. After redesigning flow, they observed a sharp drop in churn from 8.2 percent to 2.2 percent. Work combined a small discovery phase with tight metrics and fast iteration. Brandhero Design
Why it mattered
This demonstrates how design-led fixes, guided by clear metrics, can reduce churn quickly. The change was not a large feature; it was focused on the riskiest flow and validated by a before-and-after with clear acceptance criteria.
How to apply this pattern now
Identify a high-churn flow.
Run a five-interview discovery focused on pain points.
Prototype the simplest solution and measure retention or task completion as the success metric.
Title
Hypothesis: If we change X, then Y will change by Z in T days because [reason].
Primary metric: [event name and definition]
Sample and segment: [who]
Prototype fidelity: [copy, client-side, server]
Measurement plan: [funnels, windows, MDE]
Stop rule: [example]
Owner and reviewers
Initiative name
Linked Assumption Log entry
Expected impact (numeric)
Confidence (high/med/low)
Effort estimate (S/M/L)
Decision: build / experiment / kill
“We do not have time for interviews.”
Response: three 20-minute calls per week per team member yields more insight than one large survey and prevents months of misdirected work. Continuous discovery is time-boxed, scalable, and fast. Product Talk
“We need features to sell to customers now.”
Response: sell with a prototype or staging flow once you have an experiment that increases leading metric. Building the wrong thing at scale is more expensive than launching a validated, smaller solution.
“How do we stop stakeholders from adding features?”
Response: require the Assumption Log entry and a prioritization score to reach planning. Make decision transparent and public.
Book 90-minute alignment meeting and bring the Assumption Log template.
Run one micro-experiment with a defined stop rule (use Quick experiment ticket).
Put weekly micro-discovery on calendar and commit to three short user calls.
Score every new feature request with the prioritization rubric before it moves to grooming.
Founders who build a simple, repeatable habit of testing assumptions will find they ship less but learn more. That trade changes a product from a collection of features into a coherent offering that meets a clear market need. Pick single assumption you fear most on your roadmap and test it this week.
Bookmark this for the future. See you next week!
Check out how we do it Chick.studio or DM me: LinkedIn • X
Founders run on scarce time and mixed signals. The most damaging outcomes are poor prioritization, building for wrong user, and slow learning loops. Those lead to wasted engineering cycles, frustrated customers, and missed product-market fit. This article lists common founder pain points, explains why they matter, and gives a compact, repeatable playbook you can use this week to reduce uncertainty and make better product decisions. Key claims are grounded in startup post-mortems and practical discovery practice. CB Insights+1
CB Insights’ analysis of failed startups shows that lack of market need and poor product-market fit sit at the top of failure causes. Building quickly without testing assumptions compounds risk: teams add features, fragment the experience, and confuse customers about the core value. Founders need a simple system that surfaces the riskiest assumptions and turns them into testable bets. CB Insights
Team misalignment about priorities
When product, design, and engineering are not aligned, execution splinters. Meetings multiply and velocity drops. The hidden cost is opportunity cost: teams build the wrong things faster.
Feature creep and scope drift
Teams keep adding features without clear success criteria. Feature creep increases code complexity and dilutes the product’s focus. Definitions and guardrails help avoid this. ProdPad
Weak or delayed user insight
Many decisions are made on opinion rather than evidence. Without a steady input of customer signals, roadmaps become guesswork rather than a learning plan. Continuous discovery shows how weekly customer contact improves decision quality. Product Talk
Poor prioritization process
Founders get pulled in many directions. Without a transparent prioritization system, visible work is confused with important work. Good prioritization lets you say no early and clearly.
Mis-specified success metrics
If teams cannot define a measurable success criterion for a feature, they cannot learn from it. Shipping without defined outcomes turns releases into experiments without hypotheses.
This is a lightweight, repeatable plan. It assumes small teams and limited bandwidth.
Participants: founder, PM, design lead, engineering lead.
Goal: pick one business question for the next quarter. Example: “How do we increase new-user activation by 15 percent?” Use this agenda:
State single metric and why it matters (10 minutes)
List active initiatives that touch the metric (20 minutes)
For each initiative capture: key assumption, expected impact, owner, and evidence needed (30 minutes)
Rank by uncertainty and impact, pick top two experiments to run first (30 minutes)
Record outcomes in a shared doc. This makes tradeoffs explicit and reduces meeting churn.
Use this as the canonical source of truth for what you are testing.
Assumption Log template (paste into Notion or Google Docs)
Title
Metric we care about (event name and definition)
Assumption (one sentence)
Why this matters (one sentence)
Evidence we have today (links or quotes)
How we will test it (experiment plan)
Success criterion (exact threshold)
Owner
Status (proposed / running / confirmed / rejected)
Make this the gate for any new feature request: if a request does not contain an entry in log, it does not enter planning.
Commit to one hour per team member per week for discovery tasks. Discovery is the habit that keeps assumptions honest. Tasks include:
Three 20-minute user interviews per week
One rapid usability session on the latest prototype
One quantitative check on a funnel or event
Teresa Torres’ continuous discovery approach recommends regular, team-wide customer contact to keep roadmap driven by evidence rather than calendar. Product Talk
If you need a simple rule to say yes or no, use this scoring:
Impact (1-5)
Confidence (1-5)
Effort (1-5, reverse scored)
Score = (Impact * Confidence) / Effort
Require an entry in the Assumption Log and a minimum score threshold to move to sprint planning. This prevents output-oriented decisions.
Every experiment must have a stop rule. Example: stop if sample shows no lift after X days or if a negative signal rises (complaints, cancellations). Run experiments in 1 to 3-week windows when possible. Longer iterations obscure learning and increase cost.
What they did
Intercom rethought onboarding by breaking it into modular tasks and matching those tasks to job-to-be-done moments. They used small experiments and design prototypes to identify which onboarding steps correlated with long-term retention. The result was a cleaner onboarding path that targeted momentary user anxieties and shortened time-to-value. Intercom+1
Why it mattered
Intercom’s approach replaced opinion with tests and short interviews. By measuring the impact of each microtask on activation, they reduced churn in early cohorts and produced a repeatable onboarding playbook teams could reuse.
How to apply this pattern now
Map your onboarding as discrete microtasks.
Instrument each task as an event.
Run A/B tests on the order and wording of the first two tasks and follow with three quick interviews to understand the why.
What they did
Supacart found merchants were leaving due to a brittle upload flow and confusing errors. Team prioritized UX fixes, simplified navigation, and improved error messaging. After redesigning flow, they observed a sharp drop in churn from 8.2 percent to 2.2 percent. Work combined a small discovery phase with tight metrics and fast iteration. Brandhero Design
Why it mattered
This demonstrates how design-led fixes, guided by clear metrics, can reduce churn quickly. The change was not a large feature; it was focused on the riskiest flow and validated by a before-and-after with clear acceptance criteria.
How to apply this pattern now
Identify a high-churn flow.
Run a five-interview discovery focused on pain points.
Prototype the simplest solution and measure retention or task completion as the success metric.
Title
Hypothesis: If we change X, then Y will change by Z in T days because [reason].
Primary metric: [event name and definition]
Sample and segment: [who]
Prototype fidelity: [copy, client-side, server]
Measurement plan: [funnels, windows, MDE]
Stop rule: [example]
Owner and reviewers
Initiative name
Linked Assumption Log entry
Expected impact (numeric)
Confidence (high/med/low)
Effort estimate (S/M/L)
Decision: build / experiment / kill
“We do not have time for interviews.”
Response: three 20-minute calls per week per team member yields more insight than one large survey and prevents months of misdirected work. Continuous discovery is time-boxed, scalable, and fast. Product Talk
“We need features to sell to customers now.”
Response: sell with a prototype or staging flow once you have an experiment that increases leading metric. Building the wrong thing at scale is more expensive than launching a validated, smaller solution.
“How do we stop stakeholders from adding features?”
Response: require the Assumption Log entry and a prioritization score to reach planning. Make decision transparent and public.
Book 90-minute alignment meeting and bring the Assumption Log template.
Run one micro-experiment with a defined stop rule (use Quick experiment ticket).
Put weekly micro-discovery on calendar and commit to three short user calls.
Score every new feature request with the prioritization rubric before it moves to grooming.
Founders who build a simple, repeatable habit of testing assumptions will find they ship less but learn more. That trade changes a product from a collection of features into a coherent offering that meets a clear market need. Pick single assumption you fear most on your roadmap and test it this week.
Bookmark this for the future. See you next week!
Check out how we do it Chick.studio or DM me: LinkedIn • X
<100 subscribers
<100 subscribers
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
No comments yet