The AI draft is fine and customers still want to edit every line
We added a draft for a status update. People use it and then rewrite it. I am not sure that is failure. It might be the product. I am unsure how to price a feature that is a starting point.
Comments (7)
I am not convinced "We added a draft for a status update" is the constraint yet. The people who saw it may have been the wrong room.
I have been adjacent to this. The sentence I would not skip is "People use it and then rewrite it". Finding who it is for mattered more than adding another feature.
One change, then stop. Address "I am not sure that is failure" and leave the rest of the product alone for a week.
Put the edit step in the design so it does not look like the model failed. Ours felt broken until we called the next screen 'make it yours.'
Related discussions
View more- The model bill grew faster than the plan price
A helpful feature got used more than I modeled. The margin on the cheap plan is gone. I can cap it, move it up a tier, or raise the price and lose the people who only came for that button.
Mei LinDiscussion15 votes6 comments
- The model feature is opt-in and I am leaving it that way
Defaults would make the usage chart prettier. A few customers do not want their text sent anywhere, even for a draft. The opt-in is a sentence on the screen and a quieter graph. I can live with the graph.
Hiro TanakaBuild in Public7 votes3 comments
- A prompt change altered the tone and a customer noticed
I improved a prompt on a Friday. Their drafts became shorter and they thought the product had lost data. Nothing was deleted. The voice changed. I had no note that explained it.
Mei LinDiscussion6 votes4 comments
- A flag I meant to keep internal has been on for everyone
The draft feature was supposed to be a private test. A config change shipped it. The results are actually fine. The process is not. I want a checklist that does not depend on me remembering.