Product Discovery – Building the Right Things: Insights from a Grey Literature Review

Context: In recent years companies have faced challenges by high market dynamics, rapidly evolving technologies and shifting user expectations. Together with the adaption of lean and agile practices, it is increasingly difficult to predict upfront which products, features or services will satisfy the needs of the customers and the organization. Currently, many new products fail to produce a significant financial return. One reason is that companies are not doing enough product discovery activities. Product discovery aims at tackling the various risks before the implementation of a product starts. The academic literature only provides little guidance for conducting product discovery in practice. Objective: In order to gain a better understanding of product discovery activities in practice, this paper aims at identifying motivations, approaches, challenges, risks, and pitfalls of product discovery reported in the grey literature. Method: We performed a grey literature review (GLR) according to the guidelines to Garousi et al. Results: The study shows that the main motivation for conducting product discovery activities is to reduce the uncertainty to a level that makes it possible to start building a solution that provides value for the customers and the business. Several product discovery approaches are reported in the grey literature which include different phases such as alignment, problem exploration, ideation, and validation. Main challenges are, among others, the lack of clarity of the problem to be solved, the prescription of concrete solutions through management or experts, and the lack of cross-functional collaboration.

[1]  Marjo Kauppinen,et al.  Integrating analysis of customers' processes into roadmapping: The value-creation perspective , 2011, 2011 IEEE 19th International Requirements Engineering Conference.

[2]  Michael Hoerger,et al.  Measure what matters: How Google, Bono, and the Gates Foundation rock the world with OKRs by J. Doerr , 2020 .

[3]  Jan Bosch,et al.  Building Products as Innovation Experiment Systems , 2012, ICSOB.

[4]  Vahid Garousi,et al.  Guidelines for including the grey literature and conducting multivocal literature reviews in software engineering , 2017, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[5]  Jürgen Münch,et al.  Raising the odds of success: the current state of experimentation in product development , 2016, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[6]  Jürgen Münch,et al.  The Product Roadmap Maturity Model DEEP: Validation of a Method for Assessing the Product Roadmap Capabilities of Organizations , 2019, ICSOB.

[7]  Jürgen Münch,et al.  DEEP: the product roadmap maturity model: a method for assessing the product roadmapping capabilities of organizations , 2019, IWSiB@ESEC/SIGSOFT FSE.

[8]  Jürgen Münch,et al.  Continuous Experimentation in the B2B Domain: A Case Study , 2014, 2015 IEEE/ACM 2nd International Workshop on Rapid Continuous Software Engineering.

[9]  Jan Bosch,et al.  From Opinions to Data-Driven Software R&D: A Multi-case Study on How to Close the 'Open Loop' Problem , 2014, 2014 40th EUROMICRO Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications.

[10]  Jürgen Münch,et al.  The RIGHT Model for Continuous Experimentation , 2017, Software Engineering.

[11]  Fabian Fagerholm,et al.  Building blocks for continuous experimentation , 2014, RCoSE 2014.