MacKenzie Nelle

It seems to me that the framing of many of the posts that I have seen on here involves looking for "the one growth hack" that got traction for someone's product; but in reading the specifics, it often turns out that they simply did good old-fashioned marketing work: answered all the comments, personally on-boarded early users, wrote substantive content rather than promotional content. That's not hacking; that's marketing done well.

I find myself wondering whether the growth hacking framing is harming entrepreneurs in searching for a shortcut that allows them to avoid the boring work, when it is the boring work that actually brings traction.

The structure of our pricing page included three tiers, a comparison table consisting of fourteen rows, and a FAQ section underneath it where questions that nobody ever asked were answered. The conversion rate was 1.9% for five months.

Last month, I changed everything completely by reducing the number of tiers to one, changing the table into one paragraph, and putting there a sign-up button. This was supposed to be a temporary change, until I reconstructed the table. In this case, the conversion rate reached 3.4% and maintained at this level.

I ve run into this with longer agent runs and I m curious how others handle it.

The original issue might contain the scope, constraints and evidence required. But when another model or session picks up the work later, those conditions often get reduced to a summary.