Evaluation of ideas

Brainstorming is fun! In the first days of the new project, hundreds of ideas emerge, and these ideas inflame discussions in which new ideas are born. Probably, in this part of the site we will have a live chat, and here is a video tour, and we will also add a vote in the comments!

It is quite difficult to shorten the list of potential functions. If ideas appeared quite recently (which usually happens in my projects - brainstorming is carried out before we attract third-party consultants), people are often very attached to the idea that they love and which they don’t want to refuse.

I found that for me in such sessions to reduce ideas it’s best to have a framework on which I can rely. The established framework means that no one will try to convince me of the need for their idea; All ideas are evaluated in a relatively unemotional order, so we can choose which solutions should be left.


')
My framework was originally based on a Venn diagram with two circles: “What a business needs” and “What the user wants.” The search for features and content that are placed at the intersection of two circles is the basis of the basic model and many other excellent strategic approaches.

This is the same level of assessment that allows you to throw off such ideas as the “photo gallery of the company's golf tournament” (because no user has a task to watch photos of your team in strange hats and studded shoes).



I began to expand my Venn diagram. The third circle is called “What is relevant to the site,” and includes issues such as brand purpose, technology, and costs. A few years ago, we had a client who wanted to have a live chat on their website to resolve acute psychological issues - there were certified psychologists among their staff, the chat matched their mission perfectly, and it served the needs of their users. But (at that time) the technologies were not ready for this: third-party solutions did not include the necessary anonymous addressing and reporting capabilities, and there were not enough funds to create such a functional from scratch.

Another client wanted to create forums on his website, imitating the communication of people at the dinner table during monthly fees. This circle helped us hold a discussion about whether this is appropriate for the site — and since most of these events involve a physical presence, we decided that the forums on the site do not match this goal.



My fourth round is a love message to all content strategists, and it is called “What benefits the organization.” The weekly podcast plan, which lasts only a month, with lovingly compiled profiles of just two workers out of 28, the calendar of events in which the last event was held in 2013 — we all saw how such plans fall. This circle allows me to advance issues of time and energy, while not being too stubborn.

Also, this circle provides an opportunity to discuss current needs, such as photos, the use of internal or external development resources, and what happens if the person responsible for this complex taxonomy goes on maternity leave?

I found that combining the discussion of functions with these circles helped me to conduct much more effective negotiations with clients, and also gave clients a framework for further discussion of the value of functions when I am not around. At the same time, I realize that these four markers are based on the type of work that I perform, as well as on the format of my projects.

---