I have had exposure to a number of different SaaS verticals. There tend to be two schools of thought when it comes to competitor research; either you think of competitors as a sort of guinea pig that absorbs the risk of being a first mover and identifies potentially lucrative new niches or you use them to identity areas you avoid due to saturation. In both cases, having a comprehensive view of the landscape can only help you make better decisions. During the discovery phase of a product (or my onboarding in the case of an established product) I always do thorough research of the direct and indirect competitors. I map out business canvases to get a better understanding of the industry. I dissect both the product and their competitors’ (marketing, messaging, feature set, etc.) in order to discover their competitive edge and unearth potential veins of opportunities.

Product design is an iterative process, it requires a cycle of experimentation, refinement, feedback and testing which I find aligns better with the typical agile practice. In multi-stakeholder environments it is difficult to account for everyone's voice at once, especially early in the development pipeline. I have found that in most cases it is easier to work with smaller incremental steps that allow each feature to mature independently and maximize the period for input. This reduces the "idea traffic jam" that forms in many waterfall environments where a poorly defined vision is subject to competing priorities and in the end can satisfy none of them.

As humans, we often forget that our perception is limited. We rely heavily on patterns and heuristics to assist us when interacting with our products. When designing large products or scaling existing systems it's critical that we don't lose sight of how users will consume that information. In my teams, I look for a clear hierarchy of navigation, UI and visuals that categorizes features into well-defined buckets and provides a framework for adding capabilities. This approach leads to a much more cost-effective and maintainable product.

Design and Systems thinking plays a huge role in my process. This is where I identify and map out different personas base on the product’s targeted users. I also investigate and define the problem statement that impacts the product and explore different solutions that has been applied. Thereafter, I would ideate several option solutions and propose them with a list of pros and cons. I would often do this by either sketching out concept screens or storyboards, or reuse and composite existing UI assets to quickly convey key user flows and journeys. These solutions are often coupled with my understanding of modern human interaction behaviour and ergonomics that are familiar and easily learned by users. However as a non-expert in some of these specialised topics (i.e. medical, manufacturing supply chain etc..), I always collaborate together with key stakeholders ( engineers and product managers) to formulate realistic implementable solutions base on the given budget and resources.

I’m a firm believer of efficiency in order for the product to beat the market and not need to reinvent the wheel. I often take other people’s learnings and apply them to the product in a logical manner that is supported by research publications and statistical studies that have already been conducted. However, for solutions that are considered new and have not yet been explored extensively, I will prototype sections of the user flow to test ideas with targeted users. This helps me better understand their expecations and give me insights on how they perceive and interact with new features.

No feature can be considered “verified” without proper testing with users. To avoid bias from our own assumptions, I always design user research based on what I would like to uncover and test. These can range from new product ideas to usability tests based on a defined success metric. Each research test is usually customised based on the overarching theme and hypothesis to be verified. I then select test methods based on how well they will expose the desired metric (usability testing, on-site or video observation, survey, A/B testing, user interviews ). These will allow us to validate the value of the feature and help the product iterate based on those learnings.