Digital Products — Research Backlog¶
Purpose¶
This document is the entry point for research work on the Digital Products backlog. It does not duplicate the per-item "Research questions" already listed in product-backlog.md — those remain the authoritative, item-specific list. Instead, this document collects cross-cutting research questions that span multiple backlog items or the venture as a whole, and states how research findings should be recorded.
All research conducted against any question here or in
product-backlog.md must follow
../../../docs/company/research-and-evidence-principles.md:
distinguish verified fact from hypothesis, cite sources with access dates,
state scope and limitations, and never fabricate market size, search
volume, marketplace demand, revenue, competitor pricing, or customer
quotes.
How per-item research is tracked¶
Each of the 28 items in product-backlog.md carries its own "Research
questions" and "Suggested research priority" fields. When research is
actually performed against an item, the finding should be recorded as a
dated research record (see
../../../templates/research-brief-template.md)
rather than edited directly into the backlog entry, so the backlog stays a
list of hypotheses and the research record stays a dated, sourced artifact.
Link the research record from the backlog item once it exists.
Cross-cutting research questions¶
These questions span multiple backlog categories and are not owned by any single product idea. None have been answered yet.
- Which backlog categories reflect genuine unmet demand versus an already saturated market of free or low-cost templates? Applies across all four categories; answering this well would materially change prioritization.
- What compatibility baseline do realistic target customers actually need (Excel version, Google Sheets, mobile Excel), as opposed to the broadest baseline that would be technically nice to support?
- Do customers in the personal finance category trust a third-party workbook enough to enter real financial data into it, or does that trust barrier make certain products (e.g. Net Worth Tracker, Household Cash Flow Planner) harder to sell than their complexity would suggest?
- What price point and packaging (single product vs. bundle vs. subscription-style update access) do comparable structured digital products actually achieve, based on real observed listings rather than assumption?
- How much does visual/aesthetic polish alone drive purchase decisions
in this market, versus demonstrated structural quality (auditable
calculations, documentation, support) — this affects how much
docs/standards/workbook-visual-design-standard.mdinvestment is justified relative to other standards. - Which marketing/operations category items are genuinely aimed at individual practitioners/small teams versus requiring an enterprise buyer this venture is not positioned to sell to?
- What support burden should be expected per product (return questions, formula troubleshooting, compatibility complaints), and does that burden scale differently across categories?
- Is there a common reusable core (e.g. a shared dashboard or configuration pattern) that would justify building 2-3 products together rather than sequentially, per the reusability-leverage dimension in prioritization-model.md?
Suggested research priority¶
No cross-cutting question above has been prioritized over another yet. Per prioritization-model.md, a product should not advance to the Definition stage of its lifecycle until it has at least medium problem clarity and real (not assumed) evidence of demand — the same discipline applies to these cross-cutting questions before they are used to justify a venture-wide decision.