To better understand what positioning will work best for the Safe Network as well as what marketing initiatives to prioritize, I would like to hold some focus groups/interviews. I have divided target participants in the Safe Network ecosystem into 4 groups:
Developers: People who build dApps &/or work on decentralized platforms
Farmers/Earners: People who mine/stake crypto projects
dWeb & dApp Users: People who use dWeb browsers, platforms, and dApps
Investors/Traders: People who invest in/trade crypto
There will be overlap across these four groups (e.g. Developers may also be Farmers, Farmers may also be Investors, etc.) However, each of these 4 groups will have unique priorities. As such the value prop will (likely) be different for each.
Iām looking for help in recruiting people who fit the descriptions for any of the target groups above and who would be willing to talk for 10-15 minutes or provide a written response to some questions. If you know anyone who fits the bill, please have them send me a DM on twitter (@sotros25) or an email (contact me and Iāll share the address with you).
You can include yourselves. Iāll be keeping track of which interviewees are familiar with MaidSafe vs those who arenāt. Ideally, Iād like to talk to/get responses from both people who are and arenāt familiar with MaidSafe. It will be helpful to understand how the desired value prop may differ.
Iām not on twitter but happy to participate.
Id mainly put myself into the farmers / earners and investors / traders categories.
Id be happy to chat, but written response would probably be easier now Iām back at work.
Edit.
After a little thought, Iād guess Iād be better in the investor/ trader category, as although I plan to farm, investing / trading is probably what Iāve done most of.
Doing interviews and focus groups, then analysis and synthesis is super time consuming and has logistics challenges. Still valuable though. Iād suggest doing some stuff via typeform or the like. This is attitudinal research. Qual/Quant survey data comes out structured and easier to analyse for insights. Do you have a set of questions drafted yet?
Yeah, all the questions by target group are in that deck I shared. I can also DM you questions for a specific target group and you can answer the questions in your reply. Let me know which of the four groups would be most relevant to you.
Right now responses are coming back in written form, so itāll be a lot easier to go through them (no nightmarish transcripts!).
Iād love to follow up the qual with quant, but itād be expensive to get to a statistically signifiant n. I raised this point in the deck too, but maybe once weāve shortlisted candidates for the umbrella statement and the derivative, target-group-specific messaging, we can do a quant test on those items.
TLDR: I would start as wide as possible and explain that SAFE will achieve UN sustainable development goals (no. 9,12, possibly more).
I am doing a PhD on a different topic than SAFE. But one of my findings is (not surprising) that change is hard. Especially when the change is or relies on creative destruction and/or needs to overcome a resistance to change in the status quo. (SAFE fits in here).
I find power in UN Sustainable Development Goals SDG in creating 1) agency for change in enough people, and that 2) increasing the utilization of the underlying object is the way to achieve SDG. 3) achieving these two things requires a technology: SAFE.
For example, private cars are only utilized around 4% in my country. But they cost a years salary and they have substantial amounts of embodied emissions. Increasing utilization makes sense. Cars are a resource with 96% free capacity and is what makes autonomous cars so tantalizing.
I am pretty sure all my computers and gadgets have similar utilization rates to private cars. SAFE increases the utilization at marginal costs. The increased utilization reduces demand for the alternative (data centers). This effect is multiplied by SAFEās deduplication feature. And in addition we get all the the societal and environmental effects that are mentioned many places in this forum (which may tick many of the SDG boxes too).
What do you think we should plan for - a revolution that takes over the world in a few years or a long process that lasts for decades? A medium option, everything is happening faster now because of the ubiquitous connectivity?
Maybe linking to creative destruction gave the wrong emphasis here. Schumpeter argues there is inertia or āresistance to changeā in economic and social systems. Think of it as all the norms, rules, regulations and institutions that underpin the status quo in society. It acts like the activation energy required to start a chemical reaction.
What I thinkā¦ Well, I am interested in finding catalysts that can minimize the activation energy required for the reaction to take place: How to successfully implement changes that involve new technology and necessary re-organization in complex systems.
