Transforming problem insights into actionable design opportunities — HMW questions derived from POV statements, JTBD analysis, pain points, and research findings across all personas.
How Might We (HMW) questions reframe problems into design opportunities.
They should be:
Addressing the fundamental trust crisis in online reviews
| # | HMW Question | Derived From |
|---|---|---|
| HMW-1 | How might we make every review structurally impossible to fake, rather than difficult to fake? | Research: 0/12 competitors use prevention approach |
| HMW-2 | How might we verify purchase authenticity without creating friction that discourages genuine reviewers? | Pain Point: Verification vs ease-of-use tension |
| HMW-3 | How might we leverage India’s UPI infrastructure (491M+ users) for seamless purchase verification? | Opportunity: India-specific infrastructure advantage |
| HMW-4 | How might we make verification status instantly understandable for users with different tech literacy levels? | Persona: Kirana needs simple trust signals |
| HMW-5 | How might we build trust signals that cannot be replicated by fake reviewers? | Research: Verified badges currently gamed |
Addressing the missing dimension of time in reviews
| # | HMW Question | Derived From |
|---|---|---|
| HMW-6 | How might we show verified usage duration automatically? | JTBD: Need for usage context |
| HMW-7 | How might we differentiate Day-1 excitement reviews vs long-term experience reviews? | Quote: Mani — “Day-1 reviews are just unboxing excitement” |
| HMW-8 | How might we capture evolving opinions over time as product experiences change? | Diary Study: 50% users changed opinion |
| HMW-9 | How might we make review edit history transparent without confusing users? | Feature: Wikipedia-style edit history |
| HMW-10 | How might we prompt users to update reviews at meaningful intervals without being annoying? | Opportunity: Long-term experience capture |