Observations
“What You Can Learn About a New Market in Three Weeks”: A Framework for a Rapid Test
How Much Does a Strategic Mistake Cost? A decision to enter a new market based on incorrect assumptions can result in millions of wasted rubles and almost a year of lost time for a company. This is an expensive gamble for any business.
The traditional way to reduce risk is to commission a large marketing research study. However, this method is slow (taking three to four months), expensive, and often only provides answers to the question, “What do people say in surveys?” rather than “Are they ready to pay real money for this?”
Fortunately, there is a faster, cheaper, and most importantly, more honest way. Rather than studying the market from the outside for months, you can run a short “exploratory sprint” in three weeks and receive direct feedback. The goal of such a sprint is not sales. Its goal is learning. It replaces costly assumptions with invaluable facts.
In this article, we will examine the categories of knowledge you are guaranteed to obtain during such a sprint. You will see how a small investment of time and resources can yield a wealth of strategic information, allowing you to make balanced decisions about future growth.
The Reality of Customer “Pain” (Hypothesis Validation)
Any strategy for entering a new market starts with an assumption. You sit in a meeting room and say, “We believe that the new segment has problem X, and our product will solve it.” This is the starting point. However, it is also your most dangerous and untested assumption. Building an entire go-to-market strategy and investing millions in development and marketing based solely on this internal belief is a recipe for disaster.
Therefore, the most important lesson you must learn in three weeks is how to validate the reality of this problem. We must obtain an honest answer to the following questions: Does this problem actually exist? Do customers talk about it using the same words we do? Most importantly, is this problem acute enough to be among their top three current priorities?
How do we find this out? Through direct dialogue. As part of the sprint, we will conduct five to ten short “problem interviews” with representatives of the target segment. The key point is that we do not sell or pitch the product. We ask open-ended questions and listen. Some examples are: “Tell us how process X is currently set up for you,” “What difficulties do you encounter?” “How have you tried to solve this before?” and “If you had a magic wand, what would you change in this process?”
For example, one IT company assumed that the main pain point for retailers was a lack of predictive analytics. This sounded logical. However, after five interviews, it became clear that the retailers themselves did not speak this way. Their real concerns sounded like this: “We freeze millions in excess inventory and then are forced to run sales with zero margin.” This is an entirely different formulation that leads to a different value proposition. Moreover, it turned out that this was their fifth-biggest problem, while their first two problems were cash flow gaps and theft.
This is the first lesson. It either confirms that your go-to-market proposition is based on real, acute pain or forces you to stop before spending millions, which is even more valuable. It provides you with the language of your customers and an understanding of their priorities. This knowledge cannot be obtained from reports or theoretical conclusions.
Message Resonance (Positioning Validation)
You have confirmed that the pain is real. The next question is, “Are we able to communicate our solution in a way that will be heard and understood?” This lesson tests your value proposition and messaging in real market conditions.
How do we find this out? We launch a low-budget, hyper-targeted “validation sprint.” The campaign will lead to a landing page where we will formulate our new, adapted value proposition. We observe both quantitative and qualitative signals.
In the quantitative data, we look for signals of relevance. The main indicator is the landing page’s conversion rate. If three to five percent of visitors from the target list submit a request, this is a strong signal. The second indicator is the quality of those who clicked. We analyze the job titles and companies of those who interacted with the advertisement. If they are the exact decision-makers we need, then the message has hit the target.
We obtain qualitative data during the initial calls. We don’t just sell; we listen. How do customers react to our problem formulation? Do they use our words in their responses? For example, we believed that our main value was “time savings.” However, in every conversation, customers latched onto the phrase “reducing the number of errors.” This signals that our main message should be about reliability, not speed.
This lesson provides a validated, working message. You no longer have to guess which words “resonate” with your audience. You know this based on data.
Channel Economics (Unit Economics Validation)
The third lesson is the most pragmatic. It answers your CFO’s question, “There’s interest, but can we afford this market? But can we afford this market?” This is the first approximate, data-based validation of unit economics.
During the three-week sprint, we carefully record all costs and results. By the end, we will have two initial but critically important figures:
- The real cost of a qualified lead (CPL/MQL). We determine how much it costs to attract a relevant person who has shown interest.
- The second is the real cost of the first meeting (CPM — cost per meeting). This metric is even more important because it includes the work of the BDR or salesperson to convert a lead into a meeting.
You will receive the first financial model for the new market. Now, your conversations with investors or the board of directors are no longer based on assumptions. You can say: “According to the pilot data, the cost of one meeting in this niche is X, and to meet the goal of Y meetings, we need a budget of Z, which allows us to build a predictable financial plan for the year.”
The “Battlefield” Map (Sales Process Validation)
The fourth and final lesson provides qualitative intelligence that gives you an advantage in future sales. The goal is to understand the informal rules of the new niche. This information is collected from the same five to ten “problem interviews” conducted by your salesperson. What exactly will you learn?
- The real composition of the buying committee. For example, the CEO may be the formal decision-maker, but no deal will go through without informal approval from the system administrator.
- You will also learn about hidden fears and objections. For example, the client may say, “It is expensive,” but actually fear that employees will sabotage the implementation of new software.
- Internal politics. You must understand that your product could be used as a weapon in the battle between the IT and production departments for budget and influence.
This lesson provides a map of the minefield. You will know in advance which informal barriers your sales team will face and can prepare counterarguments and special materials.
From Belief to Knowledge in Three Weeks
Real pain, a resonant message, sound economics, and a map of hidden obstacles. These four types of knowledge are what you will gain when you invest in a three-week sprint. You exchange a small amount of risk and budget for a significant amount of strategic certainty.
This approach transforms the essence of business decision-making. Rather than spending months engaged in opinion-based negotiations, you can obtain direct, irrefutable answers from the ultimate source of truth—the market itself—in just 21 days.
