Should Our Concept Pages Be More Like PRDs?

Measuring design
1

Right now, we have two versions of Concept pages. They’re both solid (we think). They just optimize for different things.

Building off of @EricZ post earlier this week about PRDs, were wondering: what if our concept pages read more like Product Requirement Documents? Here’s how the content might change…

Version 1: The Playbook

This is our first version, which walks through:

  • Define goals

  • Choose metrics

  • Form hunches

  • Turn them into test questions

  • Calculate scores

  • Draw signals

It’s framework-first, and teaches someone how to run a Glare test. :backhand_index_pointing_right: See the Example

Version 2: The Research Brief

This was our second and newest version, which focuses on:

  • The design tested

  • What users needed

  • Which signals mattered

  • What the test revealed

  • Why this changes decisions

It’s insight-first, and shows the framework in action. :backhand_index_pointing_right: See the Example

What If They Were More Like PRDs?

A PRD-style Concept page might include:

  • Problem statement

  • User needs + business goal

  • Success criteria (metrics + targets)

  • Assumptions + risks

  • Results

  • Signals

  • Clear decision + next steps

Less “how to test”, and more “here’s what we’re solving and why this changes the roadmap.”

So the question is:

Should Concept pages…

  1. Teach the system

  2. Showcase insights

  3. Or function as lightweight decision documents?

Curious where people lean. Drop your thoughts below :backhand_index_pointing_down:

1 Like
2

I’m really liking the research brief. Would be super curious on what the PRD format would actually look like!

3

In particular, I’d love to hear what @sean_savage, @sol_mesz, and @Jake_Johnson make of this.

You all have experience leading teams, identifying metrics for project success, and I’m curious what you make of these pages and the PRD framing. Does this content matter to you?

2 Likes