The post New Challenge: Managing Customer Expectations appeared first on Benoit Tremblay.

The post The focus can’t be on the feature list anymore appeared first on Benoit Tremblay.

The post Self-proclaimed Expert Vs Real Expert appeared first on Benoit Tremblay.

If I’d asked my customers what they wanted, they’d have said a faster horse

It is by far one of my favorite quote as it relates very well to the Internet industry and the whole customer-business relationship. It’s easy to take it very seriously and to think that what Ford meant with this quote is to ignore your customers and just do what you think is right, but it actually goes deeper.

I’m pretty sure that if Ford had asked his customers what they wanted, they’d have said something like faster horses and the reason is fairly simple: they couldn’t imagine anything else.

In fact, they didn’t want faster horses, they wanted a faster personal transportation method. It’s as simple as that. For Henry Ford, achieving this goal was absolutely impossible with a horse, so he came up with the idea of building a car that everybody could afford. Nobody knew they needed a car before they saw the Model-T (and knew they could afford it).

Twitter anybody? Twitter is the tool you never knew you needed before you had it: nobody wakes up in the morning with the needs for a tool like twitter, but the aggregation of different persons communication needs eventually led to the creation of twitter.

Twitter is the first obvious one that came to my mind, we can find plenty of other examples.

Customer needs on the web

How is this all related to customers needs on the Internet and to the whole customer-business relationship (note that the term customer is used in a very large context and can be your website’s visitors, readers, the people you build websites for, etc.)?

In fact it’s very simple:

Users will ask for tons of very precise features and it’s important to understand that they ask these features because it’s hard for them to think outside the constraints your product, website or service impose them.

What’s really important is to understand what lies behind these requests.

Do your website’s visitors ask for a certain feature because they simply want more exposure (egosystem)? In this case, you might think of a better or different idea than the feature they’re asking for. A feature that really answer their need and that is not limited by the external view users have on your product.

Do the customer you’re consulting for wants a certain feature on his website just to better communicate with his potential clients? If so, what the customer want is to better communicate: the feature he’s asking for might not be the best solution.

Innovation and feedback

The problem when you innovate and do things according to core customers needs and not feature requests is that you have no clue how it’s going to be received. That’s why you need feedback.

I posted a talk by Kevin Rose last week, and he said the worst thing you can do as a website owner is to pretend you really understand what your visitors want. To avoid this problem, he recommends to build features very quickly, release them and then test (feedback).

All in all, I guess the key is to act according to core customer needs (not feature requests) and put in place a good feedback loop so you can react quickly and make good decisions. Agree?

The post If I’d asked my customers what they wanted, they’d have said a faster horse appeared first on Benoit Tremblay.

“Web 2.0” refers to a perceived second generation of web development and design, that facilitates communication, secure information sharing, interoperability, and collaboration on the World Wide Web.

Then, I’ve always seen the Web as a platform evolving every minute to become smarter and more useful to the users. The way we use the Web changes every day and that’s why the term Web 2.0 was only a buzz word I avoided to use until recently. I refused to timestamp the Web.

Web 3.0

This morning, I read a very interesting article on ReadWriteWeb called Understanding the New Web Era: Web 3.0, Linked Data, Semantic Web which is basically a review of a 3 parts article by Greg Boutin on Web 3.0. It’s a very good read and I suggest you have a look if you’d like to learn more about what’s coming on the Web and all the challenges ahead. My first reaction to this “Web 3.0 article” was this (comment I posted):

Web 3.0. On top of the fact that I hate most definitions of the Web (including Web 2.0), We’re still trying to explain to businesses what Web 2.0 mean and how it can benefit them. I can only imagine the confusion when we’ll bring Web 3.0.

I understand the human need for formal definitions and everything, but I think there’s just one version of the Web, evolving every minute to become smarter and more useful.

Great article though on what’s coming and the challenges ahead. I don’t have much time at the moment to go through every reference in the article, but I will.

A collective Web agenda

That was it, classic reaction from me about Web 2.0/3.0. Then, Greg answered with this great comment:

Although the debate is welcome, I’m not sure how much value there is in disputing the term web 3.0, just like there was in disputing web 2.0. I agree it sounds a little tired, as I mentioned in my post, but I think there is value in trying to federate a collective web agenda around a term that has the merit of being integrative and breaking technological silos, to try and reassemble them around consumer needs.

I am aware there is at least a perceived difference of perspective and culture between the technology and business communities on this, and in fact trashing the terms Web x.0 has become a unifying force in some corners of the tech community (or perhaps more than “corners”, I don’t really know). But again, I think that blanket terms like web 3.0 are good at taking us beyond the technologies and help us reflect on what it all means for the user. It lets us gather at the web 3.0 conference which also helps break silos and incorporate new elements into the fabric of the semantic web.

Asking us to drop the term in favor of more “precise” definitions, with “precise” often defined as “narrower or more technical” feels to me a little aristocratic. So, while not being in love with the web 3.0 expression – I agree we could try and improve on it for the next version – I do see value in it and understand why RWW embraced it. It’s out there and we talk about it, so as tech commenters it’s normal that they tackle it.

The part that really got my attention was:

I think there is value in trying to federate a collective web agenda around a term that has the merit of being integrative and breaking technological silos, to try and reassemble them around consumer needs.

It’s about the businesses

Bringing everyone around a single term is exactly the benefit of using terms like Web 2.0 and Web 3.0 even if you don’t agree on the formal definition. It’s a buzzword yes, but a buzzword most people “understand” and it does break the technological silos. I see it as some sort of sales term and I explained it in my answer:

Greg, I agree with you on that. While I’m not in love with the terms Web 2.0 & Web 3.0, I think that from a business point of view it is important to set markers in time (Web 1.0, 2.0, 3.0) at specific moments where big shifts on the Web occurred.

Agreeing on a single term and promoting a more or less similar definition makes it easier for people outside of this Web 2.0/3.0 world to understand.

Honestly, I think it is more a “sales” term and a term everyone can understand and talk about. Most importantly, a term business owners can understand and then challenge their team on: “Is our business Web 2.0/3.0″?, even if they don’t necessarily understand everything Web 2.0/3.0 implies.

Then, this is where as consultants/advisers we become important: “How can you make my business Web 3.0?”

Final note, even though I don’t like the terms, I understand the benefits of gathering around the Web 2.0/3.0 terms. I use the term Web 2.0 everyday, it’s a term most people “understand”.

Whatever your position on the subject, I think using terms like Web 2.0 and Web 3.0 is a positive thing. Setting markers in time at specific moments where big shifts occurred on the Web doesn’t help the geeks we are, it helps customers and businesses. If you are a consultant, this is also a sales term as I stated in my comment. After thinking about it properly, it’s a good thing. But I still don’t like to timestamp the Web.

The post Web 2.0 and Web 3.0 : More than just timestamping the Web appeared first on Benoit Tremblay.