Personal devices that read our emotional states will need thorough concept and product testing in order to meet our needs
India has a thriving tech industry that out performs Silicon Valley. So when they make announcements like this, 'Artificial Intelligence-powered devices to read users' emotional state, says research by Gartner', then it really gives me pause.
First off. It's mind blowing that personal devices might soon be able to read our facial expressions, pick up tonality in our voice, and interpret our behaviour. But it also makes me think about implications for concept and product testing and knowing the difference between them.
India has a thriving tech industry that out performs Silicon Valley. So when they make announcements like this, 'Artificial Intelligence-powered devices to read users' emotional state, says research by Gartner', then it really gives me pause.
First off. It's mind blowing that personal devices might soon be able to read our facial expressions, pick up tonality in our voice, and interpret our behaviour. But it also makes me think about implications for concept and product testing and knowing the difference between them.
With so many digitalized products flooding our markets we need to not only improve the experience of using them, but also understand whether the concept being executed resonates with users as appealing or worthwhile. People's reluctance to use the new wave of personal devices may be overcome, but only if we understand what is driving that reluctance.
If a concept is validated by a target audience it should then progress to product development. But concept validation still doesn't guarantee the product will succeed. One single concept can fuel a myriad of product executions. The product execution you choose might be flawed and not be a good match to the concept. In which case your product may fail.
Take Google Glass. There was a mismatch between the concept of Google Glass (i.e. people liked the idea of wearing a smart device) and the product execution (no one liked wearing the glasses and functionality was poor). Even when you have concept validation at the level that Google Glass did (early adopters paid $1,500 each to get their hands on one) don't expect it to overcome rocky product execution.
If the product experience is too poor the only thing you'll create is an opportunity for a competitor with a better executed product to steal your market. Or if you're lucky, you'll have a chance to go back to the drawing board for another round of product execution. Which it looks like Google did last year by re-configuring Google Glass for businesses and their employees.
If a concept is validated by a target audience it should then progress to product development. But concept validation still doesn't guarantee the product will succeed. One single concept can fuel a myriad of product executions. The product execution you choose might be flawed and not be a good match to the concept. In which case your product may fail.
Take Google Glass. There was a mismatch between the concept of Google Glass (i.e. people liked the idea of wearing a smart device) and the product execution (no one liked wearing the glasses and functionality was poor). Even when you have concept validation at the level that Google Glass did (early adopters paid $1,500 each to get their hands on one) don't expect it to overcome rocky product execution.
If the product experience is too poor the only thing you'll create is an opportunity for a competitor with a better executed product to steal your market. Or if you're lucky, you'll have a chance to go back to the drawing board for another round of product execution. Which it looks like Google did last year by re-configuring Google Glass for businesses and their employees.
RSS Feed
