2. Value Proposition Hypotheses Problem Statement: Researchers are eager to have a tool that will help manage, share and reference their papers Technology/Market: Customers enjoy the current product but cost is the prohibiting factor in purchasing a premium account Competition: We need to displace Endnote, which currently claims 90% of the market share Product: MVP will import, organize and cite papers
3. Experiments Market Research Interviewed 10 current users and non-users from biomedical, neuroscience, psychology & legal Surveyed 200 existing users (~5% response rate) Product Marketing Demoed to paper management research group Refined messaging pitch via media training workshop Feedback meetings with BryanStolle & Konstantin Guericke More info on our blog: http://factnote.com/c/e245 Includes interview notes (must have a user account to view)
4. Key Findings Non-users are excited about the product and generally think it will save time and reduce frustration Biggest user adoption hurdles are energy spent learning interface & loading past papers, not price Tools/tips, interface usability needs to be reworked Pre-populate works cited in user’s own publications Critical mass – users ask labs to purchase for them, increase value of sharing & collaboration features Customers find high value in tagging and organizing papers, rivaling that of inserting citations Providing both makes our product more valuable than Endnote MVP will import and organize papers in an intuitive interface Pivot Opportunities: Customer Base, Personal Prestige, Material Citations
