We know A/B testing is the key step before a startup's launch, in which:
- an unreleased product's features ares tested by real people in real environments
- Based on user personas, characteristics of the test are drawn
- Feature requests by testers are generated
- Incentives like rewards, early access to other products or appreciation can be in place.
- It's either public, or private, but in both cases can be used to segue into the official launch for early adopter access.
Fortunately trust and reputation systems are now growing to include time measures (e.g. timerepublik). Small problem: coordinative costs (for transaction to take place) are exacting in order to embody your exception scenarios for inspiration.
Besides verbose explaining, costs aren't always clear and the many unexplored gig territories have a 'craigslist' like doubt but from the seller's side.
To a founder, if a few use cases are qualitatively simulated well, he/she can be more confident developing their project philosophy. Use cases supplant the viability, diffusion points and critical mass of the concept.
A platform with features of micro non-disclosure agreements, reward mixes of: opportunity, monetary, information, or social impact currency and users can create 'scenarios'. Questions after the scenario can only be based on the instructions provided/'piece'.
Example 1: Person 1 has a desk, his laptop, a few books but knows if he could witness scenario A, that can be aimed at him, or be a proof for a small project aspect, he'd refuel his dive. User 2 accepts for 20min direct scenario in exchange for social impact point reward decision by 10th minute, or a monetary one by the 20th. Person 1 agrees, and is fully satisfied, decides by the 10th minute for the social impact points. User 2 can use this in other places with proof.
Example 2: App designer has already gone through all his research and prototypes, and use cases. Needs a picture perfect scenario to encourage the connections he's made between features and offline. He uses proximity tool after separately explaining to two users the scenario he needs and its requirements. One user agrees, and the second will only if the monetary side of the scenario - a 'lunch' is taken care of. The app designer puts together the scenario.
Example 3: An anxious student 1 prepared for a large presentation, and knows how he'd want it to go ideally. The Q&A parts will go well only if the first part does - to his audience. User 2 agrees to emulate pertinently a satisfied and focused jury, during the presentation, and ask questions based on it, with a specified tenor. User 2 requires a monetary reward.
Example 4: Program officer 1 would like some rational and justified encouragement on one part of his project. He suggests there's also an opportunity potential for this scenario.
While ideas are key to solve the enmeshed constraints growing from human activities, the inspiring exceptions supporting them are becoming 'if' narratives. Put shortly, we've become experts at illustrating the 'ifs' with atomic precision. And less at sourcing them in real time, to build solutions - whereas the instruments, beliefs and minimum privacy lack not.