本集简介
双语字幕
仅展示文本字幕，不包含中文音频；想边听边看，请使用 Bayt 播客 App。
特蕾莎·托雷斯是一位演讲者、教师、顾问、产品教练，也是《持续发现习惯》一书的作者，这本书是我邮件通讯Slack社群中被推荐最多的书籍。
Teresa Torres is a speaker, teacher, a consultant, a product coach, and also the author of Continuous Discovery Habits, which is the number one most recommended book in my newsletter Slack community.
我也非常确信，特蕾莎在与之合作、教导并产生影响的产品经理数量上，位列全球前五。
I'm also pretty sure Teresa is in the top five people in the world when it comes to the number of product managers that she's worked with, taught, and impacted.
在我们的对话中，我们深入探讨了两个主题。
In our chat, we get deep into two topics.
机会解决方案树框架，这是一个一旦掌握就非常简单却极其强大的框架。
The opportunity solution tree framework, which is a really simple but incredibly powerful framework once you know it.
第二，我们深入探讨了如何在你的团队中建立一套系统，让你能定期与客户交流。
And two, we go deep into how to create a system within your team where you're talking to customers regularly.
我们讨论了如何论证花更多时间与客户交流和进行用户研究的必要性，人们在访谈中常犯的错误，以及如何更好地采访客户、如何自动化这一过程以节省大量时间，还有许多其他方法能让你和你的组织更贴近客户。
We talk about ways to make a case for spending more time talking to customers and doing user research, the most common mistakes people make with interviewing and generally how to interview customers better, how to automate this process so that you don't spend a bunch of time, and so many other ways to bring you and your organization closer to your customers.
特蕾莎非常出色，我迫不及待想让你从她身上学习。
Teresa is amazing, and I can't wait for you to learn from her.
本集由Persona赞助播出。
This episode is brought to you by Persona.
Persona 帮助创始人、产品经理和工程师轻松解决任何与身份相关的问题，包括处理 KYC、AML 以及各种身份欺诈行为。
Persona helps founders, product managers, and engineers easily solve any identity related problem, including handling KYC, AML, and basically all manner of identity fraud.
你可以在一个下午内集成 Persona，并使用其 SDK 定制你的流程，以在任何设备上与用户无缝对接。
You can integrate Persona in an afternoon and personalize your flows using their SDK to meet your users on any device.
Persona 的身份构建模块让你能够管理整个端到端的注册流程，验证每个新用户及其数据的真实性。
Persona's identity building blocks allow you to manage your entire end to end onboarding flow, verifying that each new user and their data are legitimate.
Persona 被初创公司和全球最大的企业所信赖，包括 Square、BlockFi、Gusto 和 Udemy。
Persona is trusted by both startups and the world's largest companies, including Square, BlockFi, Gusto, and Udemy.
而且在有限时间内，Persona 为本播客的听众提供免费的端到端 KYC 和 AML 解决方案，你可以收集用户的政府身份证或自拍，并自动验证这两项数据的真实性。
And for a limited time, Persona is offering listeners of this podcast a free end to end KYC and AML solution where you can collect a user's government ID and or their selfie and automatically verify that those two pieces of data are legitimate.
你还可以丰富这些信息，自动检查该人员是否出现在各种监控名单上。
You can also enrich that information to automatically see if the person exists on various watchlists.
请前往 withpersona.com/leni 开始使用。
Just go to withpersona.com/leni to get started.
许多产品经理实际上都被当成了项目经理。
So many product managers are basically treated like project managers.
你入职时以为自己会深入参与产品战略和愿景，了解用户需求，结果却只是在组织他人工作、优化待办列表、打磨微不足道的功能。
You get hired thinking that you'll be deep in product strategy and vision getting to know your customers, only to wind up organizing other people's work and refining backlogs and optimizing tiny, tiny features.
如果这听起来很熟悉，那你需要Dovetail。
If this sounds familiar, you need Dovetail.
因为Dovetail深知，产品管理的核心在于理解用户想要什么、为什么想要，以及如何提供给他们。
Because Dovetail gets that the true heart of product management is understanding what customers want, why they want it, and how to give it to them.
正因如此，Dovetail打造了一整套用户研究工具，帮助你深入洞察用户真正的需求和动机。
That's why Dovetail built a suite of user research products that help you get to the core of what your customers really want and why they want it.
Dovetail提供一系列强大的分析工具，助你从用户访谈中识别主题、模式和洞察，从而更明智地决定下一步该开发哪些功能。
Dovetail offers a suite of powerful analysis tools to help you identify themes, patterns, and insights in your customer interviews, allowing you to make better data informed decisions about what solutions you should build next.
全球众多企业，如Atlassian、Canva、Datadog、GitLab、Sketch、尼尔森诺曼集团和德勤，都在使用Dovetail来更深入地理解用户，打造更好的产品。
Organizations all over the world, like Atlassian, Canva, Datadog, GitLab, Sketch, Nielsen Norman Group, and Deloitte use Dovetail to get a better understanding of their customers and build better products.
你可以免费试用Dovetail的产品，时长随你所需。
Try Dovetail's products free for as long as you need.
现在就注册，立即前往dovetailapp.com/lenny开始体验。
You can sign up right now and dive right in at dovetailapp.com/lenny.
特蕾莎。
Teresa,
非常感谢你来到这里。
thank you so much for being here.
我不知道你是否知道，你的书在我的Slack社区中 consistently 是被推荐最多的书。
I don't know if you know this, but your book is consistently the number one most recommended book in my Slack community.
此外，我通过你的文章、推文以及你分享的种种经验，从你身上学到了很多。
Also, I've personally learned so much from you from your writing and just your tweets and all the ways that you share your lessons.
因此，我非常期待深入探讨持续性发现以及你所教授的全部内容。
And so I'm really excited to delve into Continuous Discovery and all the things that you teach.
再次感谢你来到这里，欢迎。
And so again, thank you for being here and welcome.
谢谢你，Lovey。
Thanks, Lovey.
我很高兴能来到这里。
I'm excited to be here.
通过你的咨询和课程，你总共合作过多少位产品经理？能给我们一个大概的数字吗？
How many PMs would you say that you've worked with through your consulting and through your courses, just to give us a ballpark?
这是个好问题。
That's a good question.
通过Product Talk学院，我们目前的学生人数大约是11,000人。
I know through Product Talk Academy, we're just at about 11,000 students.
我不太擅长更新我们主页上的数字。
I'm not very good at updating the number on our homepage.
我想上面可能还写着8,500左右。
I think it still says something like 8,500.
但严格来说，我们刚刚要突破11,000大关，这让我有点震惊，但也非常有趣。
But, officially, I think we're just about to cross the 11,000 mark, which is a little bit mind blowing to me and a ton of fun.
至于辅导方面，人数是几百人，而不是上千人。
And then on the coaching side, it's in the hundreds, not in the thousands.
显然，因为辅导是完全不同的另一回事。
Obviously, because coaching is a little bit of a different beast.
所以，是的，我大概会说有12,000人左右。
So, yeah, I'd probably say maybe 12,000.
这太惊人了。
That's incredible.
你是否认为，这可能让你跻身于最顶尖的五位产品经理导师或影响者之列，因为你接触过最多的产品经理？
Would you say that that maybe puts you in the top five PM teacher influencer types that have worked with maybe the most PMs just roughly?
只是为了让人们有一点背景了解。
Just to give people a little context.
我都不知道该怎么评估这一点。
I don't even know how to evaluate that.
我仍然会想到那些早期对我产生影响的人，看到现在他们竟然推荐我的书。
I still think about some of the really early people that had an influence on me and to see that some of them now recommend my book.
这真的让人难以置信。
It's just kind of mind boggling.
这真的很酷。
It's pretty cool.
是的
Yeah.
我写通讯时也常有同样的感受。
I feel the same way sometimes with my newsletter.
我会想，天啊，我一向敬仰的那位传奇人物，现在居然在分享我的内容。
I'm like, okay, this person that I always looked up to as a legend is now sharing my stuff.
这太不可思议了。
It's crazy.
在深入正题之前，先快速推广一下你的网站，让大家了解你都在做些什么。
Before we get into the meat of the chat, just real quick to plug your site and kind of where to discover all the things that you do.
我们聊天时，大家能去哪个网站查看你的内容呢？
What's the site people can check out while we chat?
对。
Yeah.
我的网站是 producttalk.org。
So my site is producttalk.org.
此外，我的博客也在 producttalk.org/blog 上。
And then there's a few things like my blog at producttalk.org/blog.
我们每月发布两篇文章，还有一系列关于产品发现的课程，位于 learn.producttalk.org。
We put out two articles a month, and then we have a whole bunch of courses related to discovery at learn dot ProductTalk dot org.
太棒了。
Awesome.
我们稍后会再深入聊聊这个。
We'll chat a bit more about that at the end.
在我们的对话中，我希望能涵盖两个主要话题，这些是我多年来从你那里学到的最重要的内容。
So in our chat, I was hoping we'd cover kind of two main topics, things that I've maybe learned most from you over the years.
一个是机会解决方案树框架。
One is the opportunity solution tree framework.
第二个是持续发现这一总体理念，以及实现它的各种方法。
And then two is just the general idea of continuous discovery and all the ways to approach that.
这样安排好吗？
Does that sound good?
是的，听起来很棒。
Yeah, that sounds great.
好的。
Okay.
所以从机会解决方案树框架开始，这是一种简单却非常强大的方式，用于可视化你的策略、杠杆点、如何优先排序、获得他人支持，并让所有人达成共识。
So starting with the opportunity solution tree framework, it's such a simple but such a powerful way to visualize your strategy, your levers, how to prioritize, get buy in from people, get everyone on the same page.
这可能是我向别人分享你所发布内容中最频繁的一部分。
It's probably the thing I share most of what you've put out with people.
所以我想先请你简单介绍一下，这个框架到底是什么？
So I'd love to maybe start with just like, what is this framework?
它为人们解决了什么问题？
What problem does it solve for people?
人们该如何将其应用到自己的产品问题中？
And how can people apply it to their product problems?
是的，这是个非常好的问题。
Yeah, really good question.
首先，这只是一个非常简单的视觉呈现。
So first of all, it's just a really simple visual.
看起来它很简单，这有点好笑，因为实际使用起来其实非常复杂。
Like, it's kind of funny how simple it looks, because using it in practice is really complex.
但通过反复教授它，并观察人们在哪里遇到困难，我确实对它有了新的理解。
But I definitely have a new appreciation for that trying to teach it over and over again, and sort of seeing where people struggle.
所以这是一种树状图。
So it's a tree visual.
它就像一个决策树。
So it's just like a decision tree.
它从树根处的一个结果开始，然后分支进入机会空间，再进一步分支为解决方案，甚至可能延伸到假设验证。
It starts with an outcome at the root of the tree, and then it branches into the opportunity space, and then it branches into solutions, and maybe even assumption tests from there.
它的目的是，我意识到，尽管整个行业有些公司正从注重产出转向注重结果，但大多数产品团队并不知道如何应对从结果出发、决定该构建什么这一复杂问题。
And the purpose of it is I recognize that, like, while as an industry, some companies are moving from this output focus to an outcome focus, most product teams don't really know how to manage this really complex problem of how do I start from an outcome and figure out what to build.
这是一个非常无结构、开放性强且困难的问题。
It's a really unstructured, wide open, hard problem.
很多团队在开发产品时，是通过被要求‘开发这些功能’来学习如何工作的。
And a lot of teams, they learn how to do their jobs building products by being told, Build these features.
这是一个非常结构化的问题，就是不断产出工作而已。
That's a really structured, okay, just churn out some work kind of problem.
因此，我们要求团队从事一种完全不同的工作类型。
And so we're asking teams to fundamentally do a really different type of job.
我认为团队需要一些支持框架，来帮助他们完成这种转变。
And I think teams needed some scaffolding for how do you make that shift.
因此，机会解决方案树的目的就是：如何为这个宽泛而混乱的问题增添一些结构？
And so that was the purpose of the opportunity solution tree is how do I add some structure to this wide open messy problem?
现在，它看起来简单但实际操作起来很难的原因是：什么是机会？
Now the reason why it looks simple, but it's really hard in practice is like, well, what's an opportunity?
我该如何构建机会空间？
And how do I structure the opportunity space?
我可以告诉你，机会是未被满足的需求、痛点或愿望，这很好。
And I can tell you that opportunity is an unmet need, pain point, or desire, and that's great.
但我可以告诉你，98%写机会的人实际上写的是解决方案。
But I can tell you that 98% of people that write opportunities write them as solutions.
所以我们往往很难区分问题空间和解决方案空间。
So we tend to just really struggle with this distinction between the problem space and the solution space.
我认为优秀产品的核心，其实是让人能够安心地停留在问题空间或机会空间，花时间把问题定义清楚，真正理解需求，而不是急于跳到解决方案。
And I think that the heart of good product is really getting comfortable in the problem space or the opportunity space, really taking the time to frame a problem well, and to really get into what's needed before we jump to solutions.
但这恰恰与我们大脑的本能反应相反。
But it's like the opposite of how our brains are wired.
因此，教人们适应这种停留在原地的不适感，是非常困难的。
And so teaching people to be comfortable with that discomfort of staying there is hard.
我看到有人写博客文章说他们如何使用机会解决方案树，但看到他们的机会空间全是解决方案时，我都会有点想哭。
And I think I mean, I see blog posts written about how they're using the opportunity solution tree, and I cry a little bit because their opportunity space is all solutions.
我不希望贬低任何人的博客文章。
And I don't wanna knock down somebody's blog post.
但我也不能容忍这种错误的范例在世界上流传，而我正努力教大家如何正确地做这件事。
But I also don't want this bad example out there in the world when I'm trying to teach how do we do this well.
所以，我还没找到合适的表达方式，除了我会写一些关于好例子的博客。
So I haven't found the right line there yet other than I'm going to blog about good examples.
有没有一个具体的例子，能更直观地说明你曾经合作过的公司或产品所使用的树状结构？
Is there an example of a tree that to make it even more concrete for a company or product that you've worked with or that you think about?
是的。
Yeah.
我常以流媒体娱乐为例，因为世界上几乎每个人都知道Netflix。
So I like to use streaming entertainment as my examples because literally everybody in the world is familiar with Netflix.
如果我思考他们的机会空间，我会建议团队用体验地图来组织机会空间，比如从你的目标出发。
If I think about their opportunity space, I recommend teams structure the opportunity space using an experience map, like if you take your outcome.
以Netflix为例，如果你思考如何让我更频繁地使用Netflix的体验。
So if we start with Netflix, if you think about the experience of like, you're trying to get me to engage with Netflix more.
我想了解人们使用流媒体娱乐来消遣时的体验是怎样的。
I wanna understand what's the experience of somebody using streaming entertainment to entertain themselves.
甚至可以比Netflix的范围更广一些。
Maybe even broader than Netflix.
比如你观看YouTube TV，这对我的学习和理解来说可能仍然相关。
Like if you watch YouTube TV, that's probably still relevant for me to learn about and understand.
因此，我构建机会空间的方式是，关注作为流媒体娱乐时，人们试图自我娱乐的整体体验。
And so the way that I'm going to structure my opportunity space is I'm going to look at what's the overall experience of trying to entertain yourself as streaming entertainment.
这可能包括：首先，有一个触发点，即我需要决定看些什么。
And that might look like, well, first, there's this trigger of I needed to decide to watch something.
然后是关于我如何选择要看的内容的体验。
And then there's this experience of, like, how am I deciding what to watch?
而通常这还伴随着我是在哪个平台上观看的问题。
And usually wrapped up in that is, like, what platform am I watching it on?
这些因素有时是交织在一起的。
Those are sometimes intermixed.
因为也许你决定要看《权力的游戏》，这会直接把你导向HBO Max。
Because maybe you're deciding I wanna watch Game of Thrones, and that's right away sending you to HBO Max.
或者你可能只是想看部电影，那就可以在任何平台上观看。
Or maybe you're like, well, I wanna watch a movie, and I could be on any platform.
对吧？
Right?
然后是评估过程，比如这部电影好不好？
And then there's sort of the evaluation process of like, is this movie good or not?
它看起来像我想看的东西吗？
Does it look like something I wanna watch?
然后我想说的是，好吧。
And then I wanna get into, okay.
我准备好了，要看了。
I'm ready to watch.
观看体验好吗？
Is it a good viewing experience?
对于许多平台来说，还有一种观看后的体验，比如你会不会鼓励我继续看下去？
And then for a lot of these platforms, there's also this sort of post viewing experience of like, am I going to encourage you to keep watching?
诸如此类的事情。
Things like that.
这就是我如何构建这个机会空间的方式。
So that's how I would structure that opportunity space.
这些时刻是截然分明的。
It's just there's these distinct moments in time.
而我所捕捉的是，在每一个时刻之下，出现了哪些需求、痛点和愿望？
And then what I'm capturing is below each of those, what are the needs and pain points and desires that arise?
如果我们只关注关于‘我该如何决定看什么’这一点上的话。
So if we just focus on that one around, like, how do I decide what to watch?
会涌现出各种各样的需求。
There's all sorts of needs that come up.
有些是非常实际的，比如我心里有一个电影名字，但就是找不到。
Some are really tactical, like, I have a movie title in mind, and I just don't know how to find it.
对吧？
Right?
这就是一个痛点。
That's a pain point.
或者，嘿。
Or, hey.
我正在看一部剧。
I was watching a show.
我该怎么回到那里？
How do I get back to it?
这也是一个痛点。
It's also a pain point.
但还有这些大的媒体机会。
But then there's also these big media opportunities.
比如，我无法判断这部剧好不好。
Like, I can't tell if the show is good or not.
我刚才说的所有这些，里面都没有解决方案。
And so everything that I just said, there was no solutions in there.
事实上，无论我是为Netflix工作还是为Hulu工作，我们的机会空间可能看起来都很相似。
In fact, whether I work at Netflix or I work at Hulu, our opportunity spaces probably look pretty similar.
现在，我们选择去解决哪些问题以及如何解决它们，可能会非常不同。
Now the ones we choose to go after and how we solve them might look really different.
但无论我们如何娱乐自己，核心的人类需求——体验本身——是相当相似的。
But the core human needs of what's your experience as we go about our lives entertaining ourselves is pretty similar.
我认为，那些打造出优秀产品的公司，无论是直觉上还是明确地，都会花时间深入理解这段旅程是什么样子，这些需求和痛点是什么，以及如何创造一种极其流畅的体验？
And I think the companies that build really good products, they either intuitively or explicitly take the time to really understand what does that journey look like and what are those needs and pain points and how do we create a really seamless experience?
我们会在节目笔记中附上一篇博客文章和几个示例，以便大家能更直观地看到这些内容，因为我知道我们正在用语言来描述它们。
We're going to link to a blog post and a few examples in the show notes so people can look at this kind of visually because I know we're trying to describe it through words.
一个快速的后续问题。
A quick follow-up question.
所以你有一个以结果为树干的结构，比如‘让用户观看更多Netflix’。
So you have this kind of tree with the outcomes say, get people to watch more Netflix.
我猜你建议在下面设置三到五个关键杠杆。
I imagine you recommend max like three to five levers below that.
对吗？
Is that right?
然后其他的就只是放在别处吗？
And then the rest just kind of sit somewhere else?
是的，这是个非常好的问题。
Yeah, that's a really good question.
所以在最高层级，我通常把这些机会映射到体验地图的各个步骤上。
So at the top level, I tend to map those opportunities to steps in that experience map.
以Netflix为例，那就是触发点：我想看东西、决定看什么、观看体验。
So in that Netflix example, it'd be the trigger of I want to watch something, deciding what to watch, the viewing experience.
我发现，这会不会像米勒的魔数？
I do find that, oh, is it like Miller's magic number?
那个正负七的规则挺不错的。
The, like, plus or minus seven rule is pretty good.
我觉得九个可能就太多了。
I would say nine is probably a lot.
所以我会说，大概在三到七个之间。
So I would say maybe in that, like, three to seven range.
这仅仅是因为你可以从认知上更好地处理你的树状结构。
And that's just because you could cognitively, like, process your tree.
所以，另一个我经常探讨的是，当你沿着树状结构向下移动时，你的机会会变得越来越小。
So, like, the other thing that I get into is as you move vertically down the tree, your opportunities are getting smaller and smaller.
这对于我们实现持续的节奏至关重要。
This is a really key to helping us unlock a continuous cadence.
所以，如果我从‘我无法决定看什么’这个例子开始，这是一个非常庞大且持久的难题。
So if I start with that example of I can't decide what to watch, it's a really big hard evergreen problem.
只要Netflix还在运营，他们很可能一直会有人关注这个问题。
As long as Netflix is in business, they're probably gonna have people focus on that problem.
但我们可以将其分解，比如，我找不到想看的东西，可能是因为我不知道这部剧好不好。
But we can deconstruct it like, maybe I can't find something to watch because I don't know if this show is any good.
然后我们可以研究人们是如何评价剧集的。
Then we can learn about how do people evaluate shows.
也许其中有一个小机会，比如‘主演是谁？’
And maybe there's a small opportunity in there of like, who's the cast?
这是我评估一部剧的方式之一。
It's one of the ways I evaluate a show.
现在我们进入了真正可以解决的机会。
Now we're getting into an opportunity that we can actually solve.
对吧？
Right?
所以，这是我们沿着树状结构向下推进时的另一个好处。
So that's one of the other benefits as we work our way down the tree.
我们面对的是越来越小的机会。
We get to smaller and smaller opportunities.
我们接触到的是真正能够应对的问题。
We get to things that we can actually address.
我们仍然在为那个更大、更难的问题做出贡献。
We're still contributing to that bigger, harder problem.
因此，它让我们能够从宏观角度看待我们可能参与的领域，从而更战略性地决定我们真正想投入的方向。
And so what it's allowing us to do is get this big picture view of where we could play, and then we can make more strategic decisions about where do we actually want to play.
而且它非常以客户为中心，因为核心就在于，你知道的，此刻你的需求是什么？
And then it's very customer focused because it's really all about, you know, what's your need in this moment?
我该如何帮助你满足这个需求？
How can I help satisfy that?
你想减少注册流程中的摩擦吗？
Do you wanna reduce friction in your onboarding flow?
那让我来给你介绍一下 Stytch，就是拼写为 S-t-y-t-c-h 的 Stytch。
Then let me tell you about Stytch, and that's Stytch with a y.
Stytch 的使命是消除互联网上的所有摩擦。
Stytch is on a mission to eliminate friction from the Internet.
他们首先致力于让用户认证和注册流程更加顺畅和安全。
They're starting by making user authentication and onboarding more seamless and more secure.
他们为各种规模的公司提供极其灵活、开箱即用的认证解决方案，从邮件魔链、短信验证码、一键社交登录，到生物识别，Stytch 是你一站式认证平台。
They offer super flexible, out of the box authentication solutions for companies of all sizes, From email magic links to SMS passcodes, one tap social logins, to even biometrics, Stytch is your all in one platform for authentication.
Stytch 的客户在仅花一天时间集成后，转化率就提升了超过 60%。
Stytch customers have been able to increase conversion by over 60% after spending just one day integrating.
通过他们的 API 和 SDK，您可以在提升用户转化率、留存率和安全性的同时，节省宝贵的工程时间。
And with their API and SDKs, you can improve user conversion and retention and security, all while saving valuable engineering time.
你的工程师会因为使用 Stytch 而感谢你，因为 Stytch 让你无需自行构建身份验证系统，而且集成过程非常快速顺畅。
Your engineers will come and thank you for using Stytch because Stytch keeps you from having to build authentication in house, and the integration process is super fast and super smooth.
要获得 1000 美元的免费额度，请访问 stitch.com，注意是 stitch with a y，注册时提到是我介绍的即可。
To get $1,000 in free credits, just go to stitch.com, and that's stitchwithay, and sign up and just mention that I sent you.
对于产品经理，也许还有正在聆听的创业者来说，这听起来非常有用。
For PMs and just maybe founders that are listening and they're like, this sounds really useful.
我想为自己创建一个属于自己的机会解决方案树。
I wanna create my own little opportunity solution tree.
我知道这是个大问题，但你是如何确定每个步骤该包含什么内容的呢？哪怕简要地给出一些指导也好。
I know this is big question, but how do you go about figuring out what kinda goes into each of these steps However briefly, you can give people some guidance.
是的。
Yeah.
之所以这么难，是因为它听起来其实很简单。
So the reason why this is so hard is that I mean, it sounds really simple.
对吧？
Right?
但这就是为什么它很难的原因。
But here's why it's hard.
机会来自于我们客户的经历。
Opportunities emerge from our customers' stories.
我认为大多数人在做访谈时，并不会收集故事。
I don't think most people when they're interviewing, they collect stories.
所以，伦尼，如果我要就你的奈飞经历采访你，绝大多数产品团队会问类似这样的问题：嘿，伦尼。
So if, Lenny, I was gonna interview you about your Netflix experience, the vast majority of product teams are saying things like, hey, Lenny.
你在奈飞上喜欢看什么？
What do you like to watch on Netflix?
你怎么决定看什么？
How do you decide what to watch?
对吧？
Right?
我们脱离了上下文提出这些直接的问题。
We're asking these direct questions out of context.
问题是，根据人类心理学和认知心理学，我们在脱离上下文的情况下并不擅长回答这些问题。
And the challenge with that is we know from human psychology and cognitive psychology that we're not very good at answering those questions out of context.
实际上，这听起来很奇怪。
Actually, it sounds weird.
但我们其实很擅长回答这些问题。
We're very good at answering them.
你的大脑会迅速给出一个答案，但这个答案不一定反映你的实际行为，而且会遗漏背景和细节。
Your brain will come up with a fast answer, but that answer doesn't necessarily reflect your behavior, and it misses context and nuance.
比如，你可以告诉我，我就喜欢动作片。
Like, you can tell me, like, I just like action movies.
我总是找动作片看。
I always look for action movies.
我无法想象你的体验。
I can't visualize your experience.
我不清楚你观看动作片时的真实体验。
Like, I don't know what your experience is watching action movies.
我只是收集了一个关于你的事实。
I just collected a fact about you.
但如果我问你，比如，谈谈你最近一次看电影的经历，我就能了解到你当时在哪里、和谁在一起、当时的场景是怎样的、发生了什么、以及你是如何选择那部电影的。
But if I ask you, like, tell me about the last time you watched a movie, now I can collect things like where were you and who were you with and set the scene for me and what happened first and how did you choose that.
我会得到所有这些直接问题的答案，但这些答案都基于这个具体的实例。
And I'm gonna get answers to all those direct questions, but it's grounded in this specific instance.
这样得到的答案会可靠得多。
It's gonna be a lot more reliable.
我还会开始听到你未被满足的需求、痛点和愿望。
And I'm gonna start to hear unmet needs, pain points, and desires.
而真正有力的是，我可能会听到连你自己都没意识到的需求。
And the really powerful thing is I might hear needs that you're not even aware of.
对吧？
Right?
我们太习惯于一切都很平庸了。
We're so used to, like, everything being mediocre.
我们甚至没有意识到自己有这么多需求。
We're not even aware of a lot of these needs that we have.
但当我们讲述自己的故事时，尤其是如果你开始训练自己去留意，你就会听到这些需求。
But when we tell our stories, especially if you start to train your ear for this, you start to hear those needs.
所以，这第一个难点是你必须进行良好的访谈。
So the first thing that makes this hard is you have to interview well.
我认为访谈是一项被严重低估的技能。
And I think interviewing is a grossly underestimated skill.
被严重低估的技能。
Grossly underestimated skill.
所以第一点是，如果你在访谈中没有收集到丰富的故事，就很难发现机会。
So that's the first thing is that if you're not collecting rich stories in your interviews, it's gonna be really hard to identify opportunities.
第二点是，你必须能够听出这些机会。
Then the second thing is that you have to be able to hear those opportunities.
如果你仍然分不清什么是机会、什么是解决方案，那就有点困难了。
And if you're still stuck with what's an opportunity versus what's a solution, it's kind of tough.
第三点是机会的表述方式。
And then the third thing is this opportunity framing.
我相信机会应该是非常具体的。
I believe opportunities should be really specific.
一个在流媒体领域非常棒的机会。
A really great opportunity in the streaming spaces.
很难输入我的密码。
It's hard to enter my password.
使用苹果电视遥控器在屏幕上选择特定的字母。
Select specific letters on the screen with the Apple TV remote.
如果有人用过苹果电视，尤其是老款遥控器，就知道它并不是一个精准的设备。
If anybody has had an Apple TV, especially the old remote, it's not a very precision device.
在那个愚蠢的屏幕键盘上选择那些字母，是一个极其痛苦的问题。
Selecting those letters on the stupid on screen keyboard is a horrible pain point.
当我们输入密码时，这个问题就会出现。
It comes up when we're entering our passwords.
当我们搜索电影标题时，这个问题也会出现。
It comes up when we're searching for movie titles.
这是一个非常具体的机会。
That's a really specific opportunity.
而它的价值在于，我们可以解决它。
And the value of that is we can solve it.
然而，团队往往倾向于将机会表述为：我希望这个产品更容易使用。
Whereas teams tend to wanna frame opportunities as like, I wish this was easier to use.
好的。
Okay.
那是什么？
Well, what?
我们可能会花一辈子时间让这个产品更容易使用。
Like, we could spend our lives making this product easier to use.
你为谁解决什么问题？
What are you solving for who?
所以我们正在技能叠加。
And so we're skill stacking.
然后，没错，我们必须做好访谈。
And then, right, we gotta interview well.
我们必须能够听出机会。
We gotta be able to hear opportunities.
我们必须能够很好地定义它们。
We gotta be able to frame them well.
为了结构化机会空间，我们必须能够从看似独特的故事中提炼出共同的经验地图结构。
And then in order to structure the opportunity space, we have to be able to come pull out this common experience map structure across seemingly unique stories.
因此，这涉及很多技能。
So there's a lot of skill involved.
真希望我能直接说，嘿，伦尼。
I wish I could just say, hey, Lenny.
这非常简单。
It's super easy.
每个人都应该这么做。
Everybody should do it.
我觉得这非常有力，我也看到它为团队带来了颠覆性的改变。
I think it's really powerful, and I've seen it be a game changer for teams.
这很难。
It's hard.
当我上课教的时候，我会告诉我的团队：听着，我们要专注于梳理你们的机会空间，我可能会让你们思考得比在工作中任何时候都更深入。
And I tell my teams, like, when I teach it in class, I say, look, we're gonna focus on structuring your opportunity space, and I'm probably gonna make you think harder than you've ever had to think in your job.
对吧？
Right?
因为我们在工作中根本没怎么深入思考。
Because, like, we don't think that much at work.
我们从一个会议赶往另一个会议。
We go from meeting to meeting.
我们经常停留在表面层次。
We stay surface level a lot.
而我却带着这个非常困难的批判性思维练习出现了。
And here I am coming in with this, like, really hard critical thinking exercise.
但我已经看到，那些愿意付出这种努力的团队，这真的能改变局面。
But I've just seen from teams that are willing to put in that work, it really is a game changer.
你能更深入地理解客户的需求，从而打造出更好的产品。
You have a deeper understanding of what your customers need, and you build better products.
天啊，深入思考。
Man, thinking deeply.
是的。
Yeah.
虽然没意思，但非常重要。
No fun, but so important.
我想聊聊面谈，以及你关于如何面谈的所有建议。
I wanna chat about interviewing and all the advice you have about just how to interview.
但在我们进入那个话题之前，还有一个关于机会-解决方案工作的问题。
But before we get to that, one last question around the opportunity solution kind of work.
整个理念是以成果为导向进行思考。
So the whole idea is to think outcome oriented.
正如你所说，很多公司的产品团队只是简单地被要求：‘为我们开发这些功能。’
And to your point, a lot of companies have product teams that are just like, build these things for us.
别管我们为什么要做这些。
Don't worry about why we're doing these.
如果你的公司属于后一种类型，更像是一个功能工厂，你能用这个框架推动团队和公司向以成果为导向的方向转变吗？还是说有更直接的方法来解决这个问题？
If your company is of that latter sort, more of like a feature factory, can you use this framework to push the team and the company in a direction of thinking outcome oriented, or is there a more direct approach to address that problem?
是的。
Yeah.
好的。
Okay.
让我们根据角色来讨论这个问题。
Let's talk about this based on the role.
如果你是一名普通员工，而且你所在的公司不是只有10个人，我建议你不要试图强行推动组织变革。
If you're an individual contributor and you're not at a 10 person company, I would say don't try to force the organizational change.
组织变革是一个非常困难且混乱的问题。
Organizational change is such a hard and messy problem.
我觉得在这种情况下，我会改变自己个人的工作方式。
I feel like what I would do in that situation is I would just change the way that I individually worked.
这一直都是我在每份工作中所做的事情。
This is what I always did in every job.
我的确在试图改变组织时犯了很多错误，但我也为自己找到了一种这样工作的途径。
I mean, I made a lot of mistakes trying to change the organization, but I also just carved out a way for me to work this way.
我认为我们常常低估了自己实现这一点的能力。
And I think we underestimate how much ability we have to do that.
所以，即使你被分配了一个固定的路线图，你仍然可以找到客户去交流。
So, like, even if you're being prescribed a fixed road map, you still can find customers to talk to.
我经常听到有人说，我不愿意去和客户交流。
And I hear from people all the time and say I'm not willing to talk to customers.
我说，好吧。
I go, okay.
你的公司并不拥有你在工作之外的时间，我打赌你认识一些像你客户那样的人。
Well, your company doesn't own you when you're not at work, and I bet you know people like your customers.
你为什么不从这里开始呢？
Why don't you just start there?
对吧？
Right?
所以我们想得太复杂了。
So, like, we overthink it.
我们以为必须走那些正式的流程，必须得到销售部门的许可。
We think we have to go through these proper channels, and we have to get permission from sales.
而我们很多人，尤其是做消费者产品的人，直接去找一个像你用户那样的人就行了。
And a lot of us, especially if we work on a consumer product, like, just go find somebody that's like your user.
但我也在B2B环境中见过一些例子，比如我曾与一个团队合作，他们负责医疗领域的身份标识，就是护士和医生用来解锁他们记录数据的工作站的标识。
But I've also seen instances in b to b environments where, like, I worked with that team that worked on badges for health care, like the badges that nurses and doctors use to, like, unlock a workstation that they chart in.
这个团队花了好几个星期，一直找不到客户来交谈。
And this team, like, for weeks ran into problems finding a customer to talk to.
我就说，嘿。
And I just said, hey.
你们个人关系网里有没有认识的医生或护士？
Do any of you know doctors or nurses in your personal network?
产品经理说，有。
And the product manager was like, yeah.
我有两个叔叔是医生。
I have two uncles that are doctors.
也许我们可以就从这里开始。
Maybe we could just start there.
去跟某个人聊聊吧。
Like, go talk to somebody.
对吧？
Right?
我认为，即使你没有被赋予明确的目标，只要你努力理解哪些目标对你的业务、你的产品至关重要，那很可能要从你的商业模式开始。
And I think that even if you aren't being tasked with an outcome, if you do the work to understand these are the outcomes that matter to your business, to your product, it's probably gonna start with your business model.
然后进一步理解你所做的工作如何为这些目标做出贡献。
And then work to understand how the work that you're doing contributes to that.
你会意识到，我们每天做的那些微小决定，即使你被要求采用现成的解决方案，也能做出更好的决策。
You'll all those little teeny tiny decisions we make every day, even if you're being prescribed solutions, you'll make better decisions.
对吧？
Right?
因为你对你的业务需求有了更全面的了解。
Because you have a fuller context of what your business needs.
你对你的客户需求也有了更全面的了解。
You have a fuller context of what your customer needs.
所以我认为，对我们大多数人来说，你处于个人贡献者的角色，只需专注于培养自己的习惯。
So I think for most of us, like, you're in an individual contributor role, just focus on developing the habits yourself.
我总是感到惊讶。
And I'm always amazed.
我总是惊讶于，只要忽略周围人怎么做，自己找到方法，我能完成这么多事情。
Like, I was always amazed at how much I could do by just kinda ignoring everybody around me and how they were working and finding a way to do it.
我喜欢这一点，因为它让你能够自我赋能，而不是等待许可或找借口，这无论对什么角色都是成功的绝佳秘诀，尤其对那些对公司运作方式感到不满的产品经理来说。
I love that because it lets you empower yourself and not wait for permission for excuses, and that is always such a recipe for success for any role, especially PMs that are annoyed by how maybe their company works.
这很好地引出了我们第二个话题：持续探索。
This is a really good segue to our second topic around continuous discovery.
我们已经讨论了很多关于访谈、理解痛点等内容。
And we've been touching on a lot of the elements of interviewing and understanding pain points and all that.
所以，为了打下一点基础，什么是持续探索？
And so maybe just to set a little bit of foundation, what is Continuous Discovery?
你的书就是以它命名的。
Your book is named after it.
你还有关于这方面的课程。
You have courses on this.
持续探索的核心理念到底是什么？
What's kind of like the general idea of continuous discovery?
是的，我们从头开始吧。
Yeah, let's just start at the beginning.
我们经常把探索和交付对比来看。
So we often talk about discovery in contrast with delivery.
探索就是用来描述我们决定要构建什么所进行的工作。
Discovery is just used to describe the work we're doing to decide what to build.
对吧？
Right?
每个人，每家公司都在进行探索。
So everybody, every company is doing discovery.
每个人都在决定要构建什么。
Everybody is making decisions about what to build.
在过去二十年里，我们见证了一些缓慢演变的趋势。
We have a few trends that have been evolving very slowly over the last twenty years.
其中之一是，我们逐渐意识到，如果我们想做出关于要构建什么的明智决策，很可能应该在过程中纳入客户。
One of which is we're recognizing that if we want to make good decisions about what to build, we probably should include the customer somewhere in that process.
对吧？
Right?
所以我教授的是以客户为中心的探索方法。
So I teach a customer centric view of discovery.
让我们在过程中加入一些反馈循环，来检验我们是否做出了正确的决策？
Let's build in some feedback loops of are we making the right decisions?
我们是否做出了好的决策？
Are we making good decisions?
因为这里可能根本不存在绝对正确的决策。
Because there probably aren't right decisions here.
所以第二个普遍趋势是，我们意识到数字产品永远没有完成的一天。
So then there's a second trend that we're seeing across the board, which is we're recognizing that digital products are never done.
就像奈飞团队不会某天来上班时说：嘿。
It's not like the Netflix team is gonna show up to work one day and be like, hey.
我们的产品已经够好了。
Our product's good enough.
展开剩余字幕（还有 445 条）
我们总是在迭代。
We're always iterating.
我们总是在改进。
We're always improving.
客户的需求总是在变化。
Customer needs are always evolving.
我们总还有更多可以做的。
There's always more we could do.
因此，我们正看到一种转变，从那种在产品只需上架销售的时代有效的项目思维。
And so we're seeing a shift from, like, this project mindset that worked in a world where we were just trying to get products on a store shelf.
对吧？
Right?
比如，我们设计了它们。
Like, we designed them.
我们开发了它们。
We built them.
我们制造了它们。
We manufactured them.
我们把它们摆上了货架。
We put them on the store shelf.
我们就完成了。
We were done.
我们接着去做下一件事。
We moved on to the next thing.
但对于数字产品来说，没有完成这一说。
But with digital products, there's no done.
因此，我们看到这种转变，转向了一种持续性的思维模式。
So we're seeing this shift to more of a continuous mindset.
我们持续地改进我们的产品，这意味着我们持续地做出关于要开发什么的决定。
We're continuously evolving our products, which means we're continuously making decisions about what to build.
因此，我认为我们需要持续地让客户参与到这个过程中。
And therefore, I think we need to continuously include the customer in that process.
所以对我来说，持续发现就是建立这些持续的反馈循环。
So for me, I define continuous discovery as building in those continuous feedback loops.
太棒了。
Awesome.
这种思维方式简单又清晰，因为确实，从广义上讲，这是一个新术语，人们需要时间去适应。
That's such a simple, clear way of thinking about this because, yeah, broadly, it's like a new term people have to get used to.
我想你可能看到我在推特上发起过一个请求，让别人问我关于持续发现的问题。
And I think you saw I made a call on Twitter for people to ask me to ask you questions about continuous discovery.
所以我会尽量在这次对话中融入尽可能多的这些问题。
So I'm gonna try to get as many of those in there in this chat as I can.
其中有一个问题其实是：当你的领导告诉你没有时间做发现时，你会怎么做？
And one actually was around what do you do when your leaders tell you there's no time for discovery?
是的。
Yeah.
这是一个棘手的问题。
This is a tough one.
我认为这源于传统的基于项目的研究方法。
I think this comes from old project based research methods.
所以大多数时候，我们没有时间停下当前的工作去进行研究。
So we don't most of the time have time to stop what we're doing and go do some research.
我并不是在贬低研究。
And I'm not poo pooing research.
我的意思是，我曾经做过用户研究员。
I mean, I've worked as a user researcher.
研究至关重要。
Research is critical.
如果我们有时间做长期的纵向研究，我们可能会打造出更好的产品。
And if we had the luxury of doing long longitudinal studies, we would probably build better products.
但这不是我们的商业环境。
That's not our business environment.
我们的企业期望我们持续提供价值。
Our businesses are expecting us to deliver continuous value.
所以我们需要思考如何匹配这种节奏。
So we need to look at how do we match that cadence.
我认为持续发现真正棒的地方在于，你每周只需进行一次访谈，就能完成机会发现的工作。
What I think is really nice about continuous discovery, you can do it in as little as an interview a week on the interviewing side, on the discovering opportunities side.
关于假设验证，人们总是问我：我应该花多少时间在假设验证上？
Assumption testing, people always ask me, like, how much time should I be spending on assumption testing?
我无法回答这个问题，因为对我来说，假设验证和交付是同一项工作。
Don't I know how to answer that question because for me, assumption testing and delivery are the same work.
对吧？
Right?
假设验证其实就是交付的起点。
Like, assumption testing is the start of your delivery.
我不知道它们从哪里开始、在哪里结束，这在概念上有点难理清，但也许我们可以用一个例子来讨论。
Like, I don't know where one starts and one ends, which is a little bit hard to conceptually work through, but maybe we can talk through an example.
所以当有人说没时间做发现时，我认为他们真正想表达的是：我没时间做基于项目的调研，我同意这一点。
So when somebody says, don't have time for discovery, I think what they're really saying is I don't have time for project based research, and I agree with that.
我们没有时间做基于项目的调研。
We don't have time for project based research.
所以当我遇到这种反对意见时，我想看看，好吧。
So if I'm getting that pushback, I wanna look for, okay.
我绝对不认同这种错误观点：我们不应该把没有经过充分探索的内容放入待办事项列表。
I definitely don't like, people make this mistake of we shouldn't put something in our backlog that hasn't been properly discovered.
这并不正确。
It's not true.
对吧？
Right?
我们的待办事项列表中的每一件事都是一个假设。
Like, everything in our backlog is a bet.
每一件事。
Everything.
无论我们是否进行探索，每一件事都是一个假设。
Whether we do discovery or not, everything is a bet.
探索帮助我们做出更好的判断。
Discovery is helping us make a better bet.
在我们的组织中，有时我们需要进行大量探索，尽可能做出最好的判断。
Now sometimes in our organizations, we need to do a lot of discovery and make as good of a bet as we can.
但也有其他时候，我们可以做出有风险的判断。
But there's other times we can make a risky bet.
比如，在商业中，有时候做出有风险的判断是合理的。
Like, there's times in business where it makes sense to make a risky bet.
如果你所在的地方所有判断都充满风险，因为你根本不做任何探索，那么最能扼杀探索意愿的做法就是说：‘在我们完成探索之前，先别做任何判断了。’
If you work somewhere where all of your bets have been risky because you're doing zero discovery, the best way to kill any appetite for discovery is to say, let's stop making bets until we discover.
不。
No.
别这么做。
Don't do that.
继续做出判断。
Keep making bets.
同时，开始做一些探索，这样最终这些决策会变得更好。
In parallel, start doing some discovery so that eventually those bets get better.
我认为人们犯这个错误的原因是，他们把这看作是阶段性的。
And I think the reason why people make this mistake is they think about it as phases.
首先，我进行探索，然后才交付。
First, I discover, and then I deliver.
不。
No.
你始终在交付，同时也始终在探索。
You're always delivering, and you're always discovering.
你培养的探索习惯越多，随着时间推移，这些决策就会变得越好。
And the more you build this discovery habit, the better those bets are gonna get with time.
所以并不是说你要先做其中一个，再做另一个。
So it's not that you do one first and then the other.
而是你始终在同时进行两者。
It's you're always doing both.
始终同时进行这两者的益处是，随着时间推移，你会做出更好的判断。
And the benefit of always doing both is with time you make better bets.
你说过，你可以用一次会议来完成，比如每周一小时。
You said that you could do this with one meeting, like an hour a week.
我知道你有一套推荐的系统，可以帮助人们实现自动化，这样你就不会不停地打扰客户。
And I know you have kind of a system that you recommend for people to make this kind of automated so you're not just constantly pinging your customers.
嘿。
Hey.
这周能和你聊一聊吗？
Can I chat with you this week?
你能分享一下吗？
Can you just share that?
是的。
Yeah.
在我的书《持续发现习惯》中，我分享了一些自动化招募流程的最常见方法。
So in my book, Continuous Discovery Habits, I do share some of the most common ways to automate the recruiting process.
这个想法源于几年前《助推》这本书刚出版时我刚读完，作者是塞勒和桑斯坦。
So this idea came from I had just read Nudge by Thaler and Sunstein when it came out a few years ago.
他们提出了一个观点：在设计选择架构时，如何让人们更容易采纳你希望的行为，而不是不采纳？
And I they had this idea of like when you're designing a choice architecture, how do you make it easier to adopt the behavior you wanna see than to not adopt the behavior?
于是，我开始思考这个观点在访谈场景中的应用。
So I started thinking about this in the context of interviewing.
我希望看到产品团队每周都进行访谈。
Like, I wanna see product teams interview every week.
那么，我该如何让团队更容易做到这一点，而不是不去做？
So how do I make it easier for them to do that than to not do that?
好吧，我们很多人都有每周固定安排的会议，因为它们已经列在日历上了。
Okay, well, a lot of us have recurring meetings that we go to every week because they're on our calendar.
所以我开始思考：如何把访谈变成一个固定会议？
So I just started to think about how do I make an interview a recurring meeting?
比如，能否做到当你周一早上醒来时，日历上已经安排好了一场访谈，而你根本不需要做任何事来安排它？
Like, can I make it so that when you wake up on Monday morning, there's an interview on your calendar and you literally did nothing to get it there?
所以，有几种方式可以思考这个问题。
And so there's a few ways to think about this.
最常见的策略是允许用户在使用你的产品或服务时自行选择加入。
The most common strategy is to allow your customers to opt in while they're using your product or service.
就像几乎每个人都见过嵌入在产品中的NPS调查，这种做法现在非常普遍。
So just like almost everybody's seen an NPS survey embedded in a product, that's pretty prevalent now.
同样的思路，但不是问‘你是否会向朋友或同事推荐我们的产品或服务’，而是问‘你是否有二十分钟和我们聊聊？’
Same idea, but instead of saying, would you recommend our product or service to a friend or colleague, it says, do you have twenty minutes to talk to us?
对吧？
Right?
如果他们说好，你就发送一个日程安排工具给他们。
If they say yes, you send them some scheduling software.
他们可以在你的日历上选择一个时间，就这样，面试就安排好了。
They pick a time on your calendar, and voila, you've got an interview scheduled.
当然，你可以做得更高级一些。
You obviously can get more advanced.
你在哪里展示它？
Where do you show it?
你给谁展示它？
Who do you show it to?
你调整多少？
How much do you tailor it?
你如何定位它？
How do you position it?
但核心理念是在你已经吸引他们注意力的时候，让他们自主选择参与。
But the core idea is to let people opt in while you already have their attention.
这对消费者和B2B终端用户都非常有效。
That works really well for consumers and b to b end users.
如果你试图联系买家和决策者，思路相同，但可以利用你那些已经与这些人通话的内部团队。
If you're trying to get in touch with buyers and decision makers, same idea, but use your internal teams that are already on the phone with those folks.
比如销售人员、客户经理，或者客服人员。
So that sales people, account managers, maybe support folks.
他们每天全天都在和这些人通话。
They're literally on the phone with those people all day every day.
与其用你的产品来招募，不如让这些团队来帮忙招募。
Instead of using your product to recruit, you can use those teams to recruit.
我做的就是让团队每周定义一个触发条件。
What I do is I just have teams define a trigger every week.
比如，嘿，这周我们要找那些正在经历这种需求或痛点的人。
Like, hey, this week, we're looking to talk to somebody who's experiencing this need or pain point.
如果你恰好在和一个有这种需求的人通话，那就直接使用预约软件。
If you happen to be on the phone with someone who's experiencing that, again, just go ahead and use scheduling software.
把时间安排到我们的日历上。
Put it on our calendar.
目标是让产品团队完全不需要参与。
The goal is for the product team to not be involved at all.
他们只需要准时到场并进行访谈即可。
They literally just have to show up and conduct the interview.
这太棒了。
That's amazing.
你有推荐什么即插即用的工具，能让这个过程更简单吗？
Are there tools that you recommend that are just, like, plug and play that make this easy?
我知道Calendly可能是其中一部分。
I know Calendly is probably a part of this.
有太多了。
There's so many.
对吧？
Right?
在日程安排方面，我认为Calendly在这个领域进行了创新，但还有很多快速跟进者。
So even on the on the scheduling side, I think Calendly innovated in that space, but there's so many fast followers.
我觉得Outlook现在也能做这个了。
Like, I think Outlook does this now.
我觉得Google现在也有这样的工具。
I think Google has a tool that does this now.
我认为就连Salesforce现在也有了这样的工具。
I think even Salesforce has a tool that does this now.
所以如果你的销售团队通过Salesforce安排日程的话。
So if you're doing your schedule if your sales team is scheduling through Salesforce.
在拦截方面，比如你是如何提出这些问题的？
And then on the, like, intercept side, like, how are you asking those?
我们有调查工具，我认为Qualaroo在这个领域率先创新，然后Ethnio是后来的追随者。
We have survey tools and Qualaroo, I think, innovated in this space, and then I think Ethnio was a fast follower.
但Intercom也提供这个功能。
But Intercom does this.
Usabilla也提供这个功能。
Usabilla does this.
Chameleon也提供这个功能。
Chameleon does this.
Hotjar甚至也可能提供这个功能。
Hotjar might even do this.
我们有这么多用户研究工具，现在它们都支持这种功能了。
We have so many user research tools that they're all now enabling this type of thing.
太棒了。
Awesome.
在实际进行访谈时，我们收到了一些特蕾莎粉丝的问题。
For when you're actually doing the interviewing, we had a couple questions from some Teresa fans.
一个是，当你已经知道解决方案应该是什么时，如何保持自律，保持开放的心态，继续寻找可能更好的方案？
One is when you know what the solution should be, how do you kind of stay disciplined and keep an open mind and keep searching for maybe something even better?
是的。
Yeah.
首先，你并不总是必须这么做。
First of all, you don't always have to do that.
对吧？
Right?
并不是所有解决方案都需要大量探索。
Not all solutions need a lot of discovery.
我认为这是一个常见的误解。
That's like a common misunderstanding, I think.
我认为对于那些属于我们核心产品体验或将成为差异化优势的部分，我们需要进行扎实而深入的探索。
I think we need to do really robust good discovery on the things that are part of our core product experience or gonna be differentiators.
如果忘记密码的流程运行良好，而且没有人把它当作痛点反馈，我们其实不需要在这方面做非常深入的核心探索。
We don't really have to do really amazing core discovery on, like, the forgot password flow if it's working fine and you're not hearing about it as a pain point.
对吧？
Right?
不过说真的，Slack 在忘记密码流程中使用了神奇链接，做了一件很酷的事。
Now to be fair, Slack with their magic link did kind of a cool thing with the forgot password flow.
那是一个不错的创新，我认为推动了整个行业的发展。
And that was a nice innovative thing that I think moved the industry forward.
所以，如果你想在这方面做探索，那当然很好。
So like, if you wanna do discovery on that, great.
但你很可能并不需要这么做。
But you'd probably don't have to.
对吧？
Right?
所以我认为首先要评估的是，我们正在下注。
So I think the first thing to assess is we're making a bet.
这个赌注涉及多大的风险，以及我们需要缓解多少风险？
How much risk is involved in this bet, and how much of that risk do we need to mitigate?
现在大多数公司认为任何赌注都没有风险，因此他们不做任何探索。
Now most companies think there's no risk in any bets, and they do zero discovery.
如果你没有对产品进行数据埋点，也没有真正衡量这些解决方案的影响，你可能根本察觉不到其实存在很大风险。
And if you're not instrumenting your product and actually measuring the impact of those solutions, you may not be catching that there actually was a lot of risk.
所以我认为你确实需要对产品进行数据埋点。
So I think you do need to instrument your product.
你需要衡量你发布的一切内容的影响，这样才能逐步培养出对风险和想法的判断力。
You do need to measure the impact of everything that you release so you can start honing your judgment on where is their risk and ideas.
当你刚开始接触探索时，我建议你过度投入一些探索，以便更好地培养对风险的判断能力。
And when you're new to discovery, I recommend you over index on doing a little too much discovery so that you start honing your judgment of that risk.
但如果你正在处理一个对产品功能至关重要的机会，那它就是一种差异化优势。
But if you're working on an opportunity that's really core to your product functionality, it is a differentiator.
这是你需要确保拥有强大且优秀解决方案的地方。
It's where you wanna make sure you have a really robust, good solution.
我认为，防止你认为显而易见的解决方案的最好方法，是为同一个机会探索多个方案。
I think the best way to guard against what you think is the obvious solution is to work with multiple solutions for the same opportunity.
比较和对比。
Compare and contrast.
对吧？
Right?
我们其实已经本能地知道这一点了。
We already know this intuitively.
比如，当你在找住处时，不会只看一套公寓或房子。
Like, when you're looking for a place to live, you don't look at one apartment or house.
你会看多个。
You look at multiple.
你要进行比较和分析。
You compare and contrast.
找工作的時候，你不會只跟一家公司談。
When you're looking for a job, you don't talk to one company.
我們都知道，要想做出好的決定，就需要有多種選擇，並評估每種選擇的優缺點。
We know if we wanna make good decisions, we need options, and we need to evaluate the pros and cons of each.
在產品領域也是如此。
And the same is true in the product world.
所以，如果你覺得這個方案必須非常出色，但我們遇到了一些困難，並且過度專注於一個方案，那你就需要增加更多的選擇。
So if you're feeling like this needs to be a really good solution and we're having some challenges, we're overcommitting to one, that's why you need to increase your options.
我想聽聽你的看法：作為一名產品經理，理論上你應該保持一點中立，給他人機會來改變你的想法，提出可能與你意見相左的構想。
I'd love your insight on, as a PM, how much In theory, you should be a little bit unbiased and giving people a chance to change your mind and come up with ideas that maybe disagree with.
但另一方面，作為產品經理，你總是有自己對正確答案的看法。
On the other hand, as a PM, you always have opinions about what the right answer is.
就像在產品經理的職能中，你對最終決策的影響力應該有多大？
Just like in the PM function, do you have a perspective on how much more say a PM should have maybe over what ends up being decided?
是的。
Yeah.
这是一个棘手的问题。
This is a tough question.
我的意思是，关于这个问题有非常强烈的观点。
I mean, there's such strong opinions about this.
我觉得有人把产品经理比作决策者，是产品的CEO。
I mean, I see analogies of like, the product manager is the decider and they're the CEO of the product.
我个人认为，这源于一种有害的商业文化。
I think this is coming from toxic business culture personally.
商业文化教会我们每个人都有自己的角色。
Business has taught us we all play a role.
我们有各自的功能壁垒。
We have our functional silos.
我有我的地盘。
I have territory.
你也有自己的地盘。
You have territory.
然后我们就要玩起内部办公室政治的游戏。
And we're gonna play the internal office politics game.
我需要保卫我的地盘，你也需要保卫你的地盘。
And I need to defend my territory, and you need to defend your territory.
结果就是我们根本不会真正合作。
And the outcome is that we don't really collaborate.
当我们不合作时，我认为我们无法打造出优秀的产品。
And when we don't collaborate, I don't think we build very good products.
所以，如果我们回到现实生活，当你和朋友在一起想要完成某件事时，我举的例子是，当你还是个小孩在玩耍时，你不会先停下来问：我的角色是什么？
So if we just go back to real life and when you're hanging out with friends and you're trying to accomplish something, the example I give is when you're a little kid and you're playing, you don't first stop and say, what's my role?
你的角色是什么？
What's your role?
我想这并不是人类互动的方式。
I guess it's not how humans interact.
我们都合作，并且都是直觉性地去做。
We all collaborate and we all do it intuitively.
但商业环境让我们有了不同的认知。
And business has taught us otherwise.
我会暂时忘记那个研究者，但有一个非常有趣的棉花糖实验。
I'm gonna forget the researcher, but there's a really cool the marshmallow test experiment.
你听说过这个实验吗？
Are you familiar with this?
给团队提供意大利面、一些胶带和绳子，以及一颗棉花糖。
Where teams are given spaghetti sticks and some tape and some string and a marshmallow.
然后让他们建造一个结构，把棉花糖尽可能高地撑起来。
And they're told to build a structure to get the marshmallow as high as possible.
这个实验已经被做了无数次。
And a study has been done so many times.
它已经被重复了上百万次，涉及许多不同的团队。
It's been replicated a million times with lots of different groups.
这是一个非常有趣的故事，因为幼儿园孩子的表现几乎超越了所有成年人群体，包括MBA学生。
And it's a really cool story because kindergarteners outperform almost every adult group, including MBA students.
这真的很有说明性。
And it's really telling.
为什么会这样呢？
And why is this?
幼儿园的孩子们直接就开始动手做。
Kindergartners just start doing.
他们不在乎自己的角色。
They don't worry about their roles.
他们也不在乎谁是负责人。
They don't worry about who's in charge.
他们只是靠反复试错来硬碰硬地解决。
They just brute force trial and error.
MBA学生会怎么做？
What do MBA students do?
人们会摆架子，纠结谁有权力、谁是决策者、谁是对的。
There's posturing, like who has power and who's the decision maker and who's right?
我们得制定计划，要有策略，但他们却花了全部时间在谈判这种政治和社会空间上，而不是直接行动。
And we need a plan and we need to have a strategy, and they spend the whole time negotiating this political social space instead of just doing.
我真的认为我们必须学会重新回归到直接行动上来。
And I really think we gotta learn how to get back to just doing.
所以人们觉得我对这个想法太过天真乐观，但我确实参与过以这种方式运作的团队，也指导过这样的团队，三人组真的能做出决定。
And so people think that I'm, like, Pollyanna naive about this, but I've worked on teams that work this way, and I've coached teams that work this way where the trio really does decide.
这三人组指的是产品经理、设计师和软件工程师。
So the trio is the product manager, the designer, the software engineer.
如果你从未在运作良好的三人组中工作过，这种模式会让人难以理解，因为他们会问：‘如果我们意见不一致怎么办？’
And if you've never worked in a well functioning trio, this breaks people's brains because they say, well, what are we gonna do when we disagree?
你们会找到一个大家都不反对的方案。
You're gonna find an option where you don't disagree.
对吧？
Right?
关键是，如果你只在孤立且效率低下的团队中工作过，听起来这简直是个噩梦。
And the thing is if you only worked on a silo dysfunctional team, that sounds like a nightmare.
但如果你在一支高效协作、善于共同探索的团队中工作过，你们是基于共同的理解在行动。
But if you worked on a well functioning team that's doing discovery well together, you're working from a shared understanding.
因此，你们的分歧会立刻大幅减少，因为你们基于共同的理解在工作。
So your disagreements right away are gonna go way down because you're working from a shared understanding.
当你出现分歧时，你会意识到：好吧。
And when you disagree, you recognize, okay.
我们意见不一致。
We don't agree.
我们还没有找到最佳方案，那就继续寻找更好的方案。
We don't have the best option yet, and you keep looking for that better option.
谈论这个的难点在于，我完全理解，行业内可能有98%的人从未在高效的产品三人组中工作过，这个想法听起来很疯狂。
And what's hard about talking about this is I fully understand probably 98% of the industry has never worked on a well functioning product trio, and this idea sounds crazy.
但我已经多次在真正优秀的团队中亲眼见证过，这其中有一种奇妙的力量。
But I've also seen it in practice over and over again on really good teams, and There's something magical about it.
我会继续推广它。
I'm going to keep promoting it.
我希望最终我们能从2%提升到3%，这就是我为这个世界留下的小小贡献。
I'm going to hope that eventually we get from 2% to 3%, and that'll be my little debt I put in the universe.
是的。
Yeah.
我只是想说，你正在帮助推动这种改变，我很期待这种方式成为人们的常态。
I was just going to say that you're helping make that change, and I'm excited for that to be the way that people operate.
所以也许一个启示是，如果你在某件事上花费了大量时间，并且因此感到很大压力，那很可能意味着你所在的公司或团队并不理想。
So maybe one takeaway is if that's something that you're spending a lot of time on and it's causing you a lot of stress, probably means you're working at a company or a team that maybe isn't optimal.
我并不是想说你或你的队友有什么问题。
And I don't mean that to say there's something wrong with you or your teammates.
对吧？
Right?
这其实是商业文化的一种表现。
Like, this is a symptom of business culture.
这是我们被教导的工作方式。
It's how we've been taught to work.
所以我们必须摆脱这种模式。
So we have to unlearn that.
我们需要学习新的工作方式。
We have to learn new ways of working.
我们在课程中就是这样做的。
And we do this in our courses.
我们在课程中强制人们组队工作，有些人真的很讨厌这样。
We force people to work in teams in our courses, and some people really hate it.
但我认为，学会在团队中良好合作，尤其是在有不同观点、存在分歧时如何调和，是产品工作中的重要部分。
But I think learning to work well in a team, especially when there's different perspectives and you disagree and how do you reconcile that, is a really important part of product work.
太棒了。
Awesome.
回到探索和访谈，我确实想问问你，关于访谈有什么两三个建议或最佳实践？或者人们常犯的两三个错误，应该尽量避免？
Going back to discovery and interviewing, I definitely wanted to ask you what are, like, I don't know, two or three tips and best practices for interviewing slash what are, like, two or three things people usually do wrong that they should try to avoid?
是的
Yeah.
第一个是他们提出的问题。
The first one is the questions they're asking.
很多人会写一大堆问题，比如谁、什么、为什么、怎么样，长达50个问题，这会导致访谈节奏变得不自然，不像对话。
So many people write these, like, who, what, why, how, 50 question long, like interview protocols, and it leads to a cadence of the interview that is not a natural conversation.
所以我要提醒大家的第一点是：你只是在和一个普通人聊天。
So I think the first thing to remember is that you're just talking to a human.
我实际上会告诉人们，如果你的访谈感觉像是和朋友一起喝啤酒，那就是个好迹象。
I actually tell people, if your interview feels like you're having a beer with a buddy, that's a good sign.
访谈就应该这么随意、这么自然。
It should be that casual and that conversational.
但如果我不断抛给你50个问题，我们是达不到这种状态的。
But we're not gonna get there if I pepper you with 50 questions.
对吧？
Right?
我们会通过收集你的故事来达到这个目标。
We're gonna get there by I'm gonna collect your story.
我会非常好奇地倾听。
I'm gonna be really curious.
我可能还是得问你五十个问题才能听到你的故事。
I might still have to pepper you with 50 questions to get your story.
对吧？
Right?
因为有一种对话的默契：我说一句，你回一句。
Because there's sort of this conversational norm of I say something, you say something.
所以我得教你，我想听你的完整故事，并帮助你敞开心扉。
So I gotta teach you that I want your whole story and help you open up.
所以这是其中一部分。
So that's one piece of it.
对话的节奏真的应该像一场自然的交谈。
It's just the cadence of the conversation really should feel like a natural conversation.
第二部分是，我们该如何做到这一点？
And then the second piece of it is how do we do that?
也就是说，这个技巧是什么？
Like, what's the skill?
我们该如何引出这个故事？
How do we elicit that story?
在我们的访谈课上，我教的是，你其实根本不需要费心去想该问什么。
And I I teach in our interviewing class, you really don't have to think about what to ask.
事实上，你只需要问一个问题，就能完成整个访谈。
Like, you could run an entire interview by asking them one question.
实际上，我们来模拟一下这个过程。
In fact, let's role play this a little bit.
伦尼，跟我讲讲你上一次在流媒体平台上观看内容的经历。
Lenny, tell me about the last time you watched something on a streaming entertainment service.
就在昨晚，我正在Disney+上看《欧比旺·克诺比》。
Just last night, I was watching Obi Wan Kenobi on Disney plus.
好的。
Okay.
对。
Yeah.
太好了。
Great.
好的。
Okay.
所以是昨晚。
So it was last night.
给我描述一下当时的场景。
Set the scene for me.
你在哪里？
Where were you?
我在家里的沙发上躺着。
I was at home on my couch just lounging.
好的。
Okay.
告诉我你是怎么决定要看点什么的那一刻。
And tell me about the moment where you decided you wanted to watch something.
那时候大概是早上八点，我觉得该看点东西了。
It was, like, 08:00, and I'm like, it's time to watch something.
好的。
Okay.
这是你日常惯例的一部分吗？
Is that part of your normal routine?
是的。
Yeah.
晚上看东西是很好的放松方式，能让我的大脑稍微休息一下。
In the evenings, it's a good way to unwind and let my brain relax a little bit.
好的。
Okay.
所以你正坐在沙发上。
So you're sitting on the couch.
你决定该看点东西了。
You decided it's time to watch something.
接下来你做了什么？
What did you do next?
打开电视，打开Netflix，但没找到想看的。
Turned on the TV, went to Netflix, didn't find anything.
又去了Prime，还是没找到想看的。
Went to Prime, didn't find anything.
然后我想，哦，对了。
And I'm like, oh, yeah.
欧比旺。
Obi Wan.
去看看这个吧。
Let's check that out.
好的。
Okay.
所以，我完全可以只通过不断说‘你打开了Netflix’来完成整个采访。
So I literally could continue this entire interview by just saying, oh, you opened Netflix.
接下来发生了什么？
What happened next?
哦，你没找到任何东西。
Oh, you didn't find anything.
为什么呢？
How come?
对吧？
Right?
我只是对你经历感到好奇，而我提出的问题只是帮你梳理时间线。
Like, all I have to do is just be curious about your experience, and what I'm doing with my questions is just helping you tell the timeline.
对吧？
Right?
来，描述一下场景。
Like, set the scene.
我正在帮你回到那一刻。
I'm situating you back in that moment.
让我们回想一下你实际做了什么。
Like, let's remember what you actually did.
晚饭后，你坐在沙发上，接下来发生了什么？
It was after dinner, you're sitting on the couch, what happened next?
对吧？
Right?
我可以一遍又一遍地这样做。
I can do that over and over again.
所以我们 interviewing 技能变差的原因之一，就是太担心下一个问题，而停止了倾听受访者。
And so one of the reasons why we get bad at interviewing, we're so worried about asking the next question, we stop listening to the interviewee.
我们完全错过了他们告诉我们的所有内容。
We just missed everything we were told.
我们错过了那些像‘哦，有点摩擦’的时刻。
We missed those moments of like, oh, there's some friction.
你找不到想看的东西。
You couldn't find something to watch.
跟我说说那件事。
Tell me about that.
你在Netflix上考虑过哪些节目？
What did you consider on Netflix?
让我们深入聊聊这个。
Like, let's dig into that.
如果我所在的团队正试图帮你找到想看的节目，那这简直就是宝藏。
And if I work in a team that's trying to help you find something to watch, that's a gold mine.
对吧？
Right?
你刚告诉我你上了Netflix。
Like, you just told me you went on Netflix.
你去了Prime。
You went on Prime.
你当时在看什么？为什么没吸引到你？
Like, what were you looking at and what didn't resonate?
是因为你把所有内容都看完了？
And is it because you'd watched everything?
还是因为内容根本不符合你的兴趣标签？
Is it because it just didn't match your profile?
对吧？
Right?
那里其实有很多可以挖掘的地方。
Like, there's so much to explore there.
但我看到大多数团队都停留在很浅的层面。
But what I see most teams do is they stay really shallow.
哦，明白了。
Oh, okay.
所以你看了Prime上的《欧比旺》。
So you watched Obi Wan on Prime.
很好。
Great.
给我讲另一个故事吧。
Tell me another story.
对吧？
Right?
然后我们就失去了所有价值。
And we just lost all the value.
所以其中一部分只是放慢节奏，几乎像五岁孩子一样。
And so some of it is just slowing down and almost being like a five year old.
对吧？
Right?
你其实不应该直接问为什么？
You really instead of saying, why?
为什么？
Why?
为什么？
Why?
你可以说，后来发生了什么？
You can say, what happened next?
后来发生了什么？
What happened next?
现在有一种技巧，就是总结你听到的内容，表明你在认真听，把对方拉回到你想获取更多细节的那个时刻。
Now there's this technique of, like, summarize what you heard, show that you're listening to them, bring them back to the moment where you want a little more detail.
但，是的，这真是一个改变游戏规则的方法。
But, yeah, it's a game changer.
当你收集故事时，你会听到一些你根本想不到要去问的事情。
What happens when you collect stories is you hear about things you would have never thought to ask about.
而且分享起来也真的很有趣，因为我会想，哦，这真有意思。
And it's also really fun to share because I'm like, oh, this is fun.
你只是在说我的工作内容。
You're just talking about what I do.
我喜欢你这么说，因为人们总是担心。
I love that you just said that because people worry.
你听过多少次有人这么说：你去问销售代表，嘿。
Like, how many times have you heard somebody say, like, you asked a sales rep, hey.
我要去和你的客户聊聊，但他们却说，我不愿麻烦他们。
I'm gonna talk to your customer, and they're like, I don't wanna ask them a favor.
好吧。
Okay.
事实证明，如果你在访谈中收集故事，客户会非常喜欢。
It turns out if you collect stories in your interviews, customers love it.
事实上，大多数时候，判断你是否进行了一次成功访谈的标志是，客户会说：哇。
Most of the time, in fact, the sign you ran a good interview is your customer is gonna say, wow.
我们什么时候再做一次？
When can we do this again?
哇。
Wow.
我喜欢这一点。
I love that.
你没提到的另一点是，大家非常关注你已经做过的事情，是的。
The other piece of this that you haven't mentioned is there's a lot of focus on what you've done Yeah.
而不是关注你将会做什么或可以做什么。
Not on, like, what you would do or you could do.
是的。
Yeah.
我猜想这是这一部分中非常重要的一环。
I imagine that's an important part of this.
产品人员的工作是改变行为，理解和改变行为。
Product people are in the business of changing behavior, understanding and changing behavior.
我认为团队常犯的一个重大错误是，无论是在原型测试还是在访谈中，他们都专注于人们会做什么、人们怎么想、以及他们为什么认为自己会这么做，但这些都极其不可靠。
And I think that's a really big mistake that teams make is they both in their prototype tests and in their interviews, they focus on what people would do, on what people think, on why they think they do something, and it's all really unreliable.
这是一种垃圾进、垃圾出的情况。
It's a garbage in, garbage out kind of situation.
真正的衡量标准是：告诉我你的行为。
The real measure is, tell me about your behavior.
你实际上做了什么？
What did you actually do?
我们必须帮助人们做到这一点。
And we have to help people do that.
还有人问了另一个我想探讨的问题：随着公司从早期阶段发展到后期阶段，这个过程会如何变化？
Something else someone asked that I really wanted to cover is, how does this process change as your company grows from, like, early stage to later stage?
是的。
Yeah.
在理想情况下，它不会改变，原因如下。
You know, in an ideal world, it doesn't change because here's why.
比如，如果我有一个三人小组，他们有一个目标，并且有权实现这个目标，每周都进行用户访谈，通过假设验证来评估解决方案，寻找要开发的内容，并推动目标达成，那就是一个非常成功的团队。
Like, if I have a trio and they have an outcome and they're empowered to reach that outcome and they're interviewing every week and they're assumption testing to evaluate solutions and they're finding things to build and they're driving their outcome, that's a really successful team.
他们可以在三人公司里做到这一点，也可以在十万人的公司里做到这一点。
And they could do that in a three person company, or they could do that in a 100,000 person company.
主要区别在于，三人公司里没有相邻的团队。
The primary difference is in a three person company, there's no adjacent teams.
对吧？
Right?
而在十万人的公司里，有很多相邻团队，因此你可能需要管理一些依赖关系。
In a 100,000 person company, there's a lot of adjacent teams, and so you probably have some dependencies to manage.
但你仍然应该从一个成果出发，拥有实现它的自主权，并有权提出自己的解决方案。
But you still should start with an outcome, be empowered to go after it, be empowered to come up with your own solutions.
在十万人的公司里，不同的是你可能需要依赖一些设计模式和库，以确保用户体验的一致性。
What's going to be different in that 100,000 person company is you probably have like design patterns and libraries you got to rely on for a coherent user experience.
而且你很可能有一个与你相邻的团队，你需要与他们分享你的调研成果，并了解他们在做什么，因为你确实需要打造一个连贯的产品。
And you probably have another team that's working adjacent to you that you need to share your discovery work and be aware of what they're working on because you do need to build a coherent product.
因此，随着公司规模扩大，我们需要进行大量这种协作性工作，以确保我们仍在打造一个连贯的产品。
And so as our companies get bigger, we have a lot of that collateral collaboration we have to do to make sure we're still building a coherent product.
但我认为最基本的核心单元是保持不变的。
But I think the fundamental, like, base unit stays the same.
我注意到在大公司中，尤其是公司成长过程中，人们对用户研究产生了一点 cynicism，特别是因为你们只访谈了很少的人，却据此做出决策。
Something that I've seen happen with larger companies, especially as companies grow, is a little bit of cynicism of user research, specifically how few people you talk to and how that leads to you making a decision.
你如何回应这类担忧？
How do respond to those kinds of concerns?
我非常喜欢这个问题。
I love this.
我不明白为什么产品团队突然被施加了其他团队都没有的高标准。
I don't know why product teams suddenly are held to a standard that nobody else is held to.
当有人问，‘仅凭一次访谈就做决定，怎么可能是可靠的？’
When somebody says something like, why is it reliable to make a decision based on one interview?
我只是把这个问题反过来问。
I just flipped the question around.
告诉我你上周做了哪些决策。
Tell me about the decisions you made last week.
你和多少客户聊过？
How many customers did you talk to?
你用了什么数据？
What data did you use?
每个做决策的商业人士都是在零数据的情况下做决定的，所以我宁愿选一个也比零好。
Every human in business is making decisions with zero data, so I'm gonna go with one is better than zero.
这回答可能有点轻率，但确实如此。
Like, that's a little bit of a flippant answer, but it's true.
对吧？
Right?
当这个问题被提出来时，真正发生的是这样。
Like, here's what's happening when that question comes up.
我有一个和你不同的观点。
I have an opinion that's different than yours.
我不喜欢你的结论，所以我才挑刺。
I don't like your conclusion, so I'm gonna nitpick it.
对吧？
Right?
在产品领域，不幸的是，企业里的每个人都有意见，认为我们应该开发什么。
And in the product world, unfortunately, everybody in business has an opinion about what we should be building.
所以我们面对这种情况，并被要求达到这个标准。
And so that's how we face that and we get held to this standard.
我有充分的理由说明为什么我们可以基于少量数据做决策。
I have a real reason why we can make decisions based on small data.
我们的业务是改变行为，而不是寻求新知识，而且我们有非常有效的反馈机制。
We're in the business of changing behavior, not seeking new knowledge, and we have really good feedback loops.
因此，我们可以基于小规模实验做决策，因为随着时间推移，我们会持续获得更大、更可靠的反馈数据。
And so we can make decisions based on small experiments because we're gonna continue to get bigger feedback loops and more reliable data over time.
尤其是当我们交付产品并进行实时生产原型测试时，实际上能够获取大规模数据。
And especially as we deliver and we do live production prototyping, we actually can get large scale data.
我不想从这里开始，因为那样我们永远都发布不了任何东西。
I don't wanna start there because we're never gonna ship anything.
所以，我们确实有正当理由可以基于小数据开展工作，但这个问题不公平，因为我们并没有用同样的标准要求其他行业的人。
So there is, like, legitimately a valid reason why we can work on small data, but it's sort of an unfair question because we're not holding anybody else in business to that standard.
与此相关，什么时候应该做实验，什么时候应该依赖用户研究？
Along those lines, when does it make sense to run an experiment versus rely on user research?
你有没有一个大致的思维模型来思考这个问题？
Do you have kind of a mental model for how you think about that?
我们对这方面的表述太糟糕了。
Our language around this is terrible.
简直太模糊了。
Like, it's so ambiguous.
什么叫实验？
Like, what's an experiment?
什么叫用户研究？
What's user research?
我觉得实验其实就是用户研究。
I would say experiments are user research.
我正试图极大地简化这个问题。
I'm trying to just dramatically simplify this.
我认为从探索的角度来看，我们有两项核心活动：定性访谈和假设验证。
I think from a discovery standpoint, we have two core activities, qualitative interviewing and assumption testing.
在定性访谈中，我们试图了解机会空间。
And so with qualitative interviewing, we're trying to learn about the opportunity space.
我们在哪里能看到未被满足的需求、痛点和愿望？
Where do we see unmet needs, pain points, and desires?
访谈并不是发现机会的唯一方式。
Interviewing is not the only way to identify opportunities.
观察实际上是一种更好的方法。
Observations are actually a better way.
我专注于访谈，因为这是我们能够每周持续进行的活动。
I focus on interviewing because it's something we can do sustainably week over week.
大多数团队没有能力每周观察他们的客户。
Most teams don't have the ability to observe their customers every week.
在假设验证方面，对我来说，任何帮助我们评估解决方案的方法，只要我们是从一个非常具体的假设出发，那就是一种假设测试。
On the assumption testing side, for me, anything that helps us evaluate a solution where we're starting with a very specific assumption is an assumption test.
因此，我们有一些实验，我甚至认为我们不该进行，因为它们在还没有任何依据证明这个想法是否稳固之前，就直接测试整个想法。
So we have experiments that I actually don't even think we should be running because they're testing the whole idea before we have any idea if that idea has a strong foundation.
它们耗时太长。
They're taking too long.
它们花费太多钱。
They cost too much money.
它们占用太多时间。
They're taking too much time.
那么，我该如何分解这个问题呢？
So how do I break this down?
首先，我们必须学会如何将一个想法拆解成其底层的假设。
Like, the first thing is we have to learn how to take an idea and break it into its underlying assumptions.
我们必须学会如何对这些假设进行优先级排序，然后学会设计足够小的测试，只针对某一个假设进行验证。
We have to learn how to prioritize those assumptions, and then we have to learn how to run tests that are small enough that they're just testing that assumption.
这一切都至关重要，因为它使得持续探索能够持续进行。
And this is all critical because it's what makes continuous discovery sustainable.
对吧？
Right?
我告诉人们同时处理三个想法，但团队甚至连一个想法都难以测试。
I tell people to work with three ideas at once, and teams are struggling to test even a single idea.
那怎么可能是可持续的呢？
So how's that sustainable?
那个连一个想法都难以测试的团队，仍然陷在基于项目的研发模式中。
Well, that team that's struggling to test a single idea is still stuck in project based research world.
他们进行的实验需要数周才能得到结果。
They're running experiments that take weeks to get results.
而当我谈到假设测试时，我所合作的团队每周能进行六到十二个假设测试，这些假设覆盖了三个想法。
Whereas when I talk about assumption testing, I'm working with a team that's running half a dozen to a dozen assumption tests in one week, and those assumptions span three ideas.
到了周末，他们就能开始比较和对比这些解决方案。
At the end of the week, they can start to compare and contrast those solutions.
所以我们必须改变我们的方法。
So we've got to shift our methods.
对吧？
Right?
持续发现是可持续的，前提是我们改变自己的行为和习惯。
Like, continuous discovery is sustainable if we change our behavior, if we change our habits.
对于想要了解更多关于假设测试、持续发现以及你刚才提到的所有内容的人，他们可以在哪里在线找到你和这些课程？
For folks that wanna learn more about assumption testing, continuous discovery, all the things that you've been chatting about, where can they find you online and find these courses online?
是的。
Yeah.
首先，我会提到这本书《持续发现的习惯》。
So first, I'll mention the book, Continuous Discovery Habits.
这本书在全球各地的书店都有售。
It's available at bookstores around the world.
它有EPUB、平装版和有声书版本。
It's in EPUB, paperback, and Audible.
然后我在 producttalk.org 上写博客讨论这些内容，我们的课程则在 learn.producttalk.org 上。
And then I do blog about all of this at producttalk.org, and our courses are at learn.producttalk.org.
太棒了。
Awesome.
我也喜欢问嘉宾：听众们能如何帮助你？
I also love to ask guests, how can listeners be useful to you?
自从这本书出版以来，反响出乎意料地热烈，也非常有趣。
Since the book has come out, the reaction has been unbelievably amazing and a lot of fun.
我有点被行业内那些从未接触过这种工作方式的人的怀疑态度压得喘不过气，他们觉得这根本不可能。
And I'm a little bit overwhelmed by people in the industry who have never been exposed to this way of working having a lot of skepticism that it's possible.
以下是听众们可以提供的帮助。
So here's how listeners can be helpful.
这种工作方式并不是我发明的。
I didn't make up this way of working.
对吧？
Right?
这种工作方式是从团队实践中逐渐演变而来的。
This way of working evolved from teams figuring this out.
我觉得我是在观察如何收集可持续的实践方法，让其他团队能够尽可能轻松地采用这种方式。
Like, I see it as I'm looking at how do I collect sustainable practices, making it as easy as possible for other teams to work this way.
所以我认为听众能帮助我的方式是：如果你从未接触过这种模式，但保持着健康的怀疑态度，那非常好。
So I think the way listeners can help me is if you've never been exposed to this and you have healthy skepticism, that's awesome.
不妨问问自己：假如这种方式真的可行，会怎么样？
And just ask yourself, imagine if this worked.
想象一下，如果这种工作方式真的可行，因为我真的厌倦了不断向人们解释：确实有团队在这样工作。
Imagine if this was possible because I get really tired of having to explain to people, there really are teams that work this way.
很抱歉你从未接触过这种模式，但确实有团队一直在这样工作。
I'm sorry that you've never been exposed to it, but there really are teams that have worked this way.
如果你从未接触过这种模式，那就去寻找一下吧。
If you've never been exposed to that, go look for it.
互联网上有很多这方面的实例。
There's lots of evidence of it on the Internet.
太棒了。
Amazing.
我希望我们的对话能帮助推动这种观念的转变。
I'm hoping our chat helps fight the fight for that changing of minds.
特蕾莎，非常感谢你来到这里。
Teresa, thank you so much for being here.
我玩得很开心。
I had a blast.
我学到了很多。
I learned a lot.
谢谢。
Thank you.
伦尼，非常感谢你邀请我。
Lenny, thanks so much for having me.
这真是一次愉快的交流。
This has been fun.
太棒了。
That was awesome.
谢谢你的收听。
Thank you for listening.
如果你喜欢这次对话，别忘了订阅这个播客。
If you enjoyed the chat, don't forget to subscribe to the podcast.
你也可以访问 lennyspodcast.com 了解更多信息。
You could also learn more at lennyspodcast.com.
我们下一期再见。
I'll see you in the next episode.
关于 Bayt 播客
Bayt 提供中文+原文双语音频和字幕，帮助你打破语言障碍，轻松听懂全球优质播客。