As a product-first company, new product launches are a core part of Intercom\u2019s DNA – which means there\u2019s always an abundance of juicy launches for us product marketers to work on.<\/p>\n
Given our cadence of launches and updates, we\u2019ve developed a pretty well-oiled launch machine over the past few years. Yet, as we\u2019ve grown, we\u2019re having to evolve our approach to deal with new challenges:<\/p>\n
We\u2019ve talked in the past about <\/span>our rubric for launches<\/span><\/a>. It\u2019s a simple framework for defining the tier of a launch where P1 refers to the biggest launches, P4 refers to small updates or improvements and P2 and P3 cover everything in between. These tiers helped to define what activities we’d do around launches and this could include everything from updating the\u00a0changelog<\/a> to posting on social media, creating video content and more.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Initially, this was a very successful framework for us. It helped us set expectations about the “size” of a launch and made sure we were prioritizing the highest impact announcements rather than inundating our customers with updates. It also served as a good checklist for Product Marketing<\/a> Managers (PMMs) \u2013 especially those new to the team \u2013 to help them understand what was needed for each launch.<\/span><\/p>\n In addition to the list, each time we\u2019d try a new tactic or two. This could be something small, like a new type of display ad or a new video style for LinkedIn, or something bigger, like a live launch announcement. These then ended up becoming part of the de-facto list of launch activities, so the list began to grow.<\/p>\n “We found ourselves falling into a trap of ever-bigger ‘cookie cutter’ launches”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n You can probably tell where this is going. As we grew, we found ourselves falling into a trap of ever-bigger “cookie cutter” launches. Not only had product launches become a Herculean task, we\u2019d lost sight of why<\/em> we were doing particular activities. Don\u2019t get me wrong, these launches were generally successful \u2013 but we didn\u2019t know why or which activities were having the most impact. That meant we were spending time and energy on less-impactful activities at the expense of higher-impact ones, as well as struggling to show how our efforts tied into our higher-level marketing goals.<\/p>\n Clearly, this wasn\u2019t sustainable. Nor did it align with how we\u2019d started to think about our target audiences and goals. Following a significant project to better define our target customer segments, we now have clear, differentiated goals for each of those segments \u2013\u00a0as well as a deeper understanding of each segment\u2019s needs and behaviors \u2013 to align our marketing strategy and activities around.<\/span><\/p>\n So, over the past few quarters, we have taken a step back to rethink how we do launches. We\u2019re still reworking our framework and recognize that it will never be “done\u2019” per se, but here are three tips based on what we\u2019ve learned so far:<\/p>\n The first part of the framework that you should tackle is the rubric to determine the tier and the amount of resources you need to put into a launch. The aim is to focus more on the business impact of a new feature or product, so you have a better idea of the return on any resources put into marketing it.<\/p>\n You should start by asking yourselves some questions to understand the impact. Some of the questions we have asked ourselves are:<\/p>\n Based on these responses, the launch gets a score, which translates into a tier (1-4). We\u2019ve built this as a nifty little automated “app” in Coda<\/a>, but you could do it manually too. Features or products that land in Tier 1 are those we expect to be most impactful and generally are going to be tied to a direct revenue goal. Those in Tier 4 tend to be smaller updates or improvements that are relevant to a subset of our customers.<\/p>\n3 tips for a successful product launch plan<\/h2>\n
1. Prioritize based on impact<\/h3>\n
\n