One thing I learned is that while your vision should never change, you should keep trying different strategies until one works
And yet, the definition of a pivot, as given by the person that made the term widespread is very similar[1]:
A pivot is a change in strategy without a change in vision
And the author, at the end seems to actually agree with it:
But it's important to realize that taking different bites of the same apple is very different from biting into an entirely new pear or banana, and it seems like a lot of people are actually doing that
So I guess he is actually warning against one interpretation of a pivot, that is change in vision.
Our startup, bloc (www.bloc.io), pivoted four times in 8 months, and we're way happy with where we are now.
The vision, or core motivation, never did change though. There's a common thread through all four pivots. In fact the current product looks most similar to the very first. But it's different in important ways that weren't known during pivot 1.
I think Jared is a smart guy and I respect him a lot. However, I think that both Niroka and Officehours.TV could have eventually worked out in some form (they both seemed like credible products when they came out). I think that the key missing ingredient was probably time and some iteration in the solution space (rather than an entirely new product). With that said, I'm glad that you guys found something that worked for you.
TwitchTV is a rebranding. Hell, you guys still use the Justin.tv domain for payment. By far the biggest audience on JustinTV were those interested in watching games, so you honed in on that. What's the difference between JustinTV and TwitchTV besides UI/visuals?
Well, the common thread is still distribution of video content...that to me sounds like the "vision" with attempting different strategies to accomplish it?
I agree with the spirit of this article. After having changed focus 3 times in the last year I realized that I wasn't giving each project enough time to develop. There were other good reasons for shifting direction, but lack of traction shouldn't have been a factor.
I believe that a common reason for changing direction early is that founders learn a lot about their problem in the first three months. Sometimes they learn that it's the wrong problem for them to tackle. It could still be a great business, but not a good fit for the founders. Prior research can reduce the chance of a "gotcha," but often you must interact with customers to really understand the problem. Yeah, customer dev techniques can speed this up, but it's a process that takes time regardless.
For our start-up we made a major pivot but it complements the original concept and even expanded it. If a pivot requires significant change in direction and scrapping major elements of your original idea then one really has to think hard before taking the next step.
[+] [-] DanielRibeiro|14 years ago|reply
One thing I learned is that while your vision should never change, you should keep trying different strategies until one works
And yet, the definition of a pivot, as given by the person that made the term widespread is very similar[1]:
A pivot is a change in strategy without a change in vision
And the author, at the end seems to actually agree with it:
But it's important to realize that taking different bites of the same apple is very different from biting into an entirely new pear or banana, and it seems like a lot of people are actually doing that
So I guess he is actually warning against one interpretation of a pivot, that is change in vision.
[1] http://www.marywisemandesign.com/pivot-change-the-strategy-n...
[+] [-] cwp|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hanibash|14 years ago|reply
The vision, or core motivation, never did change though. There's a common thread through all four pivots. In fact the current product looks most similar to the very first. But it's different in important ways that weren't known during pivot 1.
Here's the full story http://jmtame.posterous.com/this-is-how-you-actually-teach-p...
[+] [-] dlevine|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] emmett|14 years ago|reply
SocialCam as well. Definitely a pivot for us.
[+] [-] RegEx|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] canterburry|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] colevscode|14 years ago|reply
I believe that a common reason for changing direction early is that founders learn a lot about their problem in the first three months. Sometimes they learn that it's the wrong problem for them to tackle. It could still be a great business, but not a good fit for the founders. Prior research can reduce the chance of a "gotcha," but often you must interact with customers to really understand the problem. Yeah, customer dev techniques can speed this up, but it's a process that takes time regardless.
[+] [-] raverbashing|14 years ago|reply
http://www.slideshare.net/fabulis/fab-2011-timeline
[+] [-] EREFUNDO|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] johnconroy|14 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] CesareBorgia|14 years ago|reply
[+] [-] canterburry|14 years ago|reply