You’re using personas/user types. Right??

The essential tool that is often forgotten, and how to make it work.

Knowing for whom you build your product is key

Everyone involved in digital product development will acknowledge that knowing who we are trying to serve with our product, services and features, is an essential element in product development. This is as true for developing a new product as it is for developing additional features to existing products.

Knowing exactly for whom a new service — or product — is for is essential to know in order to make it fit with this user type’s need, and be able to solve an actual problem and deliver real value for the user.

Over the past couple of years, I have come across various organisations — ranging from smaller start-up like organisations to larger corporates — who have not articulated who their core users actually are, and how their product accommodates their users.

Your product and its intended user

What do I mean by articulated? I mean, that descriptions of the users are actually present in a writen or otherwise shareable format — could be video, presentations or the like.

Describing your core users is arguably valuable — maybe even essential — yet, why is a basic tool like describing user types (or personas) missing in many organisations?

In this article, I will address some of the pitfalls, and look at what and how to do, in order to make user types actionable.

Understanding different ways of segmenting

Most companies do segment their customer base in one way or another. However, the way the segmentation is done is often not very helpful from a product development perspective.

In order to understand what needs to be done, let’s uncover the various ways of segmenting — or perspectives for segmenting.

The reason for clarifying these different ways of segmenting is that it might hold the answer to why you are not yet successfully using ‘personas’ or ‘user archetypes’ in your organisation.

Because, you are most likely already talking about your users — and maybe even have some users that you are targeting — only, the way they are described doesn’t inform any design or product decisions — simply because they ‘inform’ on a different level.

Segmenting can crudely be categorized into three different buckets or perspectives:

Segmentation perspectives

These three different ways of segmenting are not mutually exclusive, and none of them are ‘wrong’, they are just different ways through which you can understand your business — different ‘lenses’ you might say.

Strategic segmentation — a business view

Strategic segmentation is a ‘business view’ on your users — or business. This is where your business people have categories your users according to various business metrics, in order to identify where you are making your money, where you have room to grow your business etc.

As an example, your business might have identified a core segment being your ‘high volume’, ‘high spenders’, which might be defined as customers who have purchased more than X products and spend more than Y dollars over a given time period.

Strategic segmentation – identifying your ‘high’, ‘high’ segment based on business metrics

Also, you can have the opposite. You might have a tail of freebie users or ‘low spenders’, who are using your product, but contribute very little in terms of revenue.

Examples of strategic or business segmentation includes:

  • High/low spenders
  • High/low volume — e.g., users that consume large/low quantities
  • High/low revenue
  • Freemium/premium
  • National/international

This way of segmenting users makes a lot of sense from a business perspective, and can be a great way to identify new revenue streams — e.g., by converting freemium into premium users, or making high-volume users more profitable. This might provide ideas to new features and inform future spins on your value proposition.

However, in many cases this business oriented way of segmenting is not very actionable from a product perspective. It might be a guiding star in terms of business strategy, and hence also impact your product strategy, but what to actually build and prioritize for whom, is still very unclear. When this is unclear, we run the risk of building something that does not actually fit with user needs, and hence waste time and effort.

Tactical segmentation — the messy middle!

In tactical segmentation, we are moving towards user needs — but we aren’t quite there yet.

Here we are talking about demographics, behaviours and other characteristics. It is the ‘messy middle’ as many different perspectives on the business and customer base arises here — and often both out-side-in and inside-out views.

Tactical segmentation — cutting across different strategic segments

Examples of tactical segmentation includes:

  • Young, family
  • Urban, country side
  • Low-income, affluent, wealthy
  • Omni-channel, single device users

Tactical segmentation serves very well as in terms of positioning — i.e., which users are you targeting from a marketing point of view. Maybe you are focussing on ‘young people’, or ‘families’. This makes sense, as your product might be offering something specific for these types of users, and this is where you have an edge to competitors.

This way of segmenting is often used to drive traffic to your product, and resonates very well with how marketers segment their users to drive traffic via search, social, retargeting etc.

From a marketing, product or sales perspective you might also have segmented your users based on current products purchased/used or use of channel/device. Examples could be ‘app users’ and ‘web users’, or ‘single device users’ and ‘omni-channel users’. This tends to end up as more of an ‘inside-out’ exercise where the company prescribes how it would like it’s customers to use and consume products and services, rather than what the actual needs of the users are.

Often the tactical segments cut across the segments identified in the strategic segmentation. As an example, your product might target ‘young people’ as a tactical segment, but from a strategic perspective ‘young people’ can be both ‘freemium’, ‘premium’, ‘high-spenders’, ‘low-spenders’.

Narrowing your focus and identifying your target group via a more tactical perspective does inform your choices in visual design and can allow you to build a user experience that caters more to the taste and perception of ‘young people’ than old.

However, from a product design perspective, it is very hard to develop and prioritise exactly which features to build for ‘affluent mums’ or ‘young people’.

When asking ‘so what characterises their needs?’, you end up with useless statements such as, ‘well, it has to be super simple to use’… ‘It has to give you that sense of just wanting to use it..’.

Oh dear — and here I thought our aim was to make super confusing and undesirable products.

Again, actual customer needs are too fluffy — we need to go deeper 🙂

Operational segmentation — user needs and desires

The operational segmentation categorizes users into different ‘archetypes’ and ‘impersonates’ characteristics of this type of user based on the motivationsdesiresneeds and pains that the user will hire your product to solve.

This way of describing users aligns very well with the need for developing use cases when developing products and features and is a common tool in the field of Product Management and User Experience design.

Whether we coin it ‘personas’, ‘user types’, ‘archetypes’, to me is less important. The important part is that we are able to identify an actual ‘job’ that the user is willing to invest in to have solved. (The investment from the user does not have to be monetary, but can simply be investment of the user’s time — e.g., the user will spend time to onboard).

Examples of user types — for a fashion ecommerce:

  • Functional upgrader: Looking for a specific clothing item to ‘functionally’ upgrade wardrobe — e.g., replace worn out jeans, buy rain clothes for kids
  • Self-spoiler: Looking impulsive for random items to please shopping need
  • Dreamer: Looking at high-end luxury items without actually buying

The above examples of user types all totally made up for the sole purpose of providing this article with examples that are not from my real work, which I am not entitled to disclosure.

Example of display of user type. Photo source: https://stocksnap.io/photo/CXVAJQHIMC

However, even with these brief descriptions, if working on an eCommerce in the fashion industry, you already get a ton of ideas on how to improve the product to make it fit better with the actual needs of the identified user types.

The operational segmentation inspires and informs you on how build your product to provide value for your core users. Which features will this type of user likely adopt to solve their needs and overcome their pains, how do we design onboarding to accomodate and guide the user to exactly the thing in our product that will be of value.

Disclaimer: The user types are not to be perceived as ‘static’ in the sense that one person will always fit just one user type. The type of user and underlying motivator varies according to context. The same person can show several behaviours — e.g., in one instance be looking as a parent to buy rain boots a child for the upcoming fall, whilst in the next moment look impulsive for stuff to spoil yourself with as a treat.

Remember: This way of segmenting your users does not make the other ways of segmenting users and your business wrong — they are just differentways, different lenses that serves different purposes.

Obstacles for segmenting into user types

So, why haven’t we implemented ‘operational segmentation’ — or user types — yet?

I have a few assumptions:

  • ‘Conflicts’ with other segments in the company
  • Fear of decision making
  • Lack of evidence
  • You forgot it..?
  • You forgot to tell about it?

Conflicting with other segments

My assumption is that professionals within product management and user experience are not fully aware of how user types ‘intersects’ with other ways of segmenting — as elaborated above.

Hence, we simply rely on the other types of segmentation that is being done elsewhere in the business (strategic and tactically), and try to use these segments in product development. We fail to do so, as they are not meant for us — they serve a different, yet rightful — purpose.

And, we might not be able to convince stakeholders across the business that we need an additional take on segmentation, and can’t argue the case — why spend valuable time and effort on this, when we already have plenty of ‘target audiences’ described…

Hopefully this article will sharpen your arguments. -And, as I will elaborate later, it won’t cause you to spend ‘additional time’.

Fear of decision making

‘Our product is for all users’. -A statement I have heard a couple of times. And though we don’t want to discriminate against certain users, the argument is simply not valid for keeping us from pinpointing and describing who your core users are, and how we serve them.

Segmenting users into user types and prioritising how best to serve them, what to prioritise for these users etc. does come with a dreadful downside. It forces us to focus and prioritise, because we can’t make everything for everyone at the same time. This is the whole purpose of doing this exercise in the first place!!

Lack of accepting to focus on a subset of the users at a time is simply poisonous for your product, and is a result of poor management/leadership. You will end up with a ‘jack of all trades’ product that is overly complicated and that no one finds attractive.

Focus on one thing at a time, but do it open-mindedly and be willing to trash your assumptions and move on.

Lack of evidence

Identifying your users’ core needs, motivations etc. is primarily a qualitative study. It is all about empathising with the users, and understanding them.

The qualitative approach can to some extent be in contrast to the more quantitative approach use when identifying strategic and tactical segments.

Hence, presenting your user types to other parts of the business, can be met with a certain skepticism as to whether your insights are valid or not.

‘How is your result valid when you based it on interviews with no more than 50 users?’

‘How are your user types actually represented in size on the platform?’

The questions are valid, but they don’t mean that we have to neglect a more qualitative approach to identifying who our users are. Again, this way of segmenting no more right that the strategic and tactical approaches — it is a different way of doing it, but necessary way from a product and UX perspective.

One way to make it more convincing it to use and show real statements from your users. This makes a very compelling case, especially if you can show some of your customers’ struggle from user testing videos etc. The pains become very real!

And, your qualitative ‘result’ can be supplemented with quantitative data analysis.

A first step is to make an assumption based analysis. Here you base the size of segment on assumptions of some of the key actions you envision your users have. In case of the ‘Dreamer’ from previous. If this person is mostly browsing around in high-end luxury items, but not really buying anything, how many actually show this behaviour on the platform?

This approach of course does not provide an exact scientific size of customer segment, but will serve as an indicator of the size, which will probably be sufficient.

To get more scientific, you can stitch your qualitative findings with actual data. One approach is to survey users with questions related to motivation, desires etc. that you identified as part of your qualitative inquiries, and identify these users and they behaviour via cookie-matching or similar. After which you — or most likely your data scientist — can run clustering algorithms to identify onsite behaviour, size of population and other existing stuff that will further inform your qualitative results.

You ‘forgot’ it…?

Sometimes the most obvious stuff gets in our way and we can’t see the forest for the trees.

It is easy to get carried away with smart business talk on the importance of this or that segment, and forget the basics of carving out who the users are, and what their needs are.
It happened to me as well — and it took an ‘outsider’ to get me back on track.

Ask yourself: ‘What are my users actually doing, and why are the hiring my product?’, ‘what is their context — what else are they doing as part of solving this need?’, ‘what do they want to achieve, and what are their pains and struggles?’.

If you can’t answer these questions, and if you can’t put your user in a specific context and use case, you have probably fallen into the ‘smart talk trap’, where you forgot to actually talk to and investigate your users. Everything related to your users has become a big blur, and you and your colleagues keep telling yourself that it is all very complicated, and that you can’t simplify such a complex context and multitude.

You can! -You just need to start working at it and start visiting your users!

You forgot to tell about it?

Maybe you have been visiting and talking to users. Maybe on your own, maybe with your team. But, everything resides in your head and unstructured notes.

A key element is to make the voice of the customer heard throughout the organisation, and you are the one to do it.

Don’t be afraid to communicate your findings, just because they aren’t complete yet. They never will be! You will always get smarter the more you talk to your user so don’t wait until you are done. Present your insights.

Use simple means of communication, condensate your findings and start sharing these at any occasion you get.

A bit too fluffy? Let’s get into how to structure all of your information!

How to build and implement user types across your organisation

Let’s look at what to do and how. It’s not that complicated — and it’s actually a lot of fun!

Use a standard framework to segment your user types

I’ll suggest that you use a standard, easy to use framework to get going.

The guys from Strategyzer have made a super, yet lightweight framework that everyone can use and understand. The framework is from the book Value Proposition Design that I will recommend everybody in this field to read (I have no affiliation, other than loving their books!).

The Value Proposition Canvas provides a frame for each of the two components that we are mostly interested in: 1) The value proposition we are offering, and 2) the needs of the user for whom the value proposition is intended.

https://www.strategyzer.com/canvas/value-proposition-canvas

I’ll leave out the left part for another article and elaborate briefly on the right hand side.

User type template

For each type of user that you have identified, gather and condensate their gains and pains, describe briefly who the user is, and what his/her context is.

Address the actual needs — or jobs — that the users needs solved.

Pains and gains will easily surface when simply taking to the users and or seeing then use your product in context — or inquiring about their context and workflow even before having your product.

Jobs to solve is a bit more tricky, as these can be broken into three different categories: Functional, Social and Emotional.

The functional job is what we most often focus most naturally on. If we use the purchase of a car as an example, you can argue that you purchase a car to be able to transport yourself from A to B. This is the functional job, which can be substituted by renting/leasing a car, getting a cab etc.

The social job of buying a car relates to the social aspect of owning the car and what this car signals. One could argue that a Toyota will take you from A to B just a well as a Mercedes, yet, people are willing to pay many times more the prices of a Toyota to drive a Merc. One element is the social job that this car solves — which can be that of signaling affluence and success.

The same goes for driving car types that resembles different lifestyles — e.g., the surfer that drives a pick-up. Maybe the surfboard would fit nicely into a sedan, but the pick-up signals and solves better the job of ‘appearing’ as a cool surfer dude.

The emotional job relates to the emotions that we hire products to solve. In the case of the car purchase, you might not only appear to be a surfer dude when driving a pick-up truck, you might also feel more like a cool surfer in such a vehicle. Likewise, some will choose an SUV not because they need the space but because it feels safer to drive in an SUV than in a smaller, — emotionally perceived — more exposed sedan. You want to feel safe, and hire this type of car to solve this need.

Talk to your users to carve them into archetypes

You need to talk to your users in order to get to know them. However, you probably already did to some extent.

1) Gather knowledge

If you start from a clean sheet, start talking to your users. Ask the users about why the use your product, what they use it for. Do ‘contextual interviews’ to tees out their routines and tasks.

2) Condensate and cluster

Once you have some knowledge of this — or if you think you already have some knowledge of this, start clustering the motivations of the different users and look for patterns and repeated statements, pains etc. Do this with your team and tons of post-its to really get your hands around the essential elements and identify what stands out. Use the user type template to frame your clustering.

3) Document

Fill the template digitally, and back it up with statements from user interviews.

Going back to the point about ‘Lack of evidence’, having an exhaustive material that backs up your claims and arguments will serve as really strong evidence, as well as serve as excellent onboarding when getting new members on your product or UX team.

4) Validate (repeat)

Once you have an idea of what your users look like, validate these findings by talking to even more users. This is an ongoing process, update the material and user type descriptions as you gain new insights.

Simple, integrated communication

Use the simple user type framework from above to collect, group and condensate your findings.

Keep a template per user type — you will probably end up with something like 2–6 different archetypes of users depending on your product, user base and complexity.

Whilst the user type framework serves very well as a tool for your team and others that require a bit more insight, I suggest an even lighter way of communicating.

Making simple posters, picture frames or cardboards of your users and placing these in plane sight throughout your organisation will make your users both more present, alive and visible in everyday life.

User types as cardboard figures

Choose a few, key sentences per user that clearly speaks to his/her motivation for using your product, you can always back it up with more info.

Use your user types as point of departure when writing epics and user stories for development.

In a wider perspective, view your product from the lens of each of your user types to look for skews in your product, and for generating new ideas and focus areas to bring to your product strategy.

Soon, your user types will become part of your company language and identity.

To summarize

  • Get started, it’s your job! 🙂
  • Have in mind the other perspectives on segmentation and seek to bridge perspectives
  • Use a simple framework to capture your knowledge
  • Talk to your users, condensate, cluster and continuously validate findings
  • Communicate in simple formats across your organisation
  • Don’t be afraid, you’ll get it right as you go along!

Thanks for reading! Comments are highly appreciated!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *