Large organizations often adhere strictly to plans, schedules, and roadmaps, which makes adopting an experimentation mindset challenging. This scenario becomes especially complicated when developers are already allocated to other projects, and you must justify the team’s time and resources without a guaranteed return on investment. Experimentation is inherently unpredictable—we can’t foresee outcomes or rely on rigid plans. Instead, we must adapt to customer feedback and new information, allowing our plans to evolve as we learn.
More rigid, standard plans and processes like the one below break down quickly when a project involves many unknowns and requires an experimental approach:
- Conduct customer interviews
- Summarize findings
- Design solution/prototype
- Test prototype with customers
- Scope MVP/final design
Due to constraints or a company’s reluctance or inability to invest in research, many designers often start at step 3: designing a solution or prototype. This plan also overlooks the iterative nature of steps 3 and 4, where designers optimally will cycle between designing, testing, and refining the solution based on feedback.
This linear plan assumes everything will go smoothly, providing the necessary information to validate a solution and scope an MVP. However, this is a cut and dry process that doesn't match what might actually happen as we learn more. In a more experimental approach, the process might involve different outcomes: scoping an MVP, conducting additional interviews, pivoting, or even abandoning the project altogether.
The idea of adapting to customer feedback and working in experimentation mode isn’t new, in fact it’s the cornerstone of good design, but it’s often difficult for large organizations to embrace. Startups, by contrast, are more naturally equipped for this approach; they thrive on being scrappy, moving forward amid uncertainty, and adapting their plans on the fly. In a large organization, working in an experimental mode can feel nearly impossible due to constraints on people and resources.
Embracing an experimental approach
Sometimes we need a more experimental approach—one that is flexible and suited to navigating unknowns, similar to the mindset often adopted by startups. In reality, the outcomes of the process could vary widely: we might scope an MVP, conduct additional interviews, pivot to a new direction, or even abandon the project entirely. This approach requires constant adaptation and a willingness to learn at every step. It acknowledges that product development is not a straight line from point A to point B but a continuous loop of learning, testing, and adjusting. It’s the collective effort and adaptability of our team that will make this approach successful.