Viral Growth Loop Design
by @quochungto
Design and measure viral growth loops using the viral coefficient (K-factor), viral loop type taxonomy, and cycle time optimization. Use whenever a startup f...
Scenario: File-sharing SaaS adding a referral program
Trigger: "We're building Dropbox-for-teams. Want to add a referral program. How should it work?"
Process: (1) Loop type: Incentivized Virality fits (Dropbox's original model). Alternative: Collaborative Virality since teams use it together. Decision: combine both β team invites trigger collaborative flow, external referrals get storage credits. (2) Estimate K: assume i=2 (each user invites 2 on average), conversion 30% β K=0.6. Meaningful but not exponential. (3) Decompose: if click-through is 60% and signup is 50%, the weakest variable is signup β optimize that first. (4) 4 mistakes check: product is genuinely collaborative (not mistake 1), product works (not mistake 2), plan weekly A/B tests (not mistake 3), mechanics match how teams actually invite colleagues (not mistake 4). (5) Cycle time: trigger invite moment at "share file with external user" action (natural moment), reward appears at next login (fast).
Output: Clear implementation plan with incentive structure, estimated K baseline, and optimization priority on signup conversion.
Scenario: Consumer app with K=0.2 β is viral the channel?
Trigger: "We added a referral feature to our mobile game. Measured K over 30 days: K=0.2. What should we do?"
Process: (1) Loop type: check if current mechanics match the product. If users aren't naturally discussing the game with friends, the incentivized loop was bolted on. (2) K=0.2 is below the 0.5 threshold β viral is not a primary channel. (3) Decompose: low i (users aren't sending invites at all)? Low conversion (invitees click but don't install)? Decomposition reveals the problem. (4) 4 mistakes check: is the product inherently viral? For a mobile game, only if it's multiplayer or has leaderboards. If single-player, viral mechanics are fighting the product's nature. (5) Recommendation: return to Bullseye. Viral as supporting channel only, not primary.
Output: Honest assessment that viral isn't the channel, recommendation to re-run Bullseye with this data.
Scenario: B2B SaaS considering collaborative virality
Trigger: "We built a spreadsheet-like analytics tool. Think Figma for data. Should we make it viral?"
Process: (1) Loop type: Collaborative Virality is the clear fit β the product works alone but is 10x more valuable when shared with colleagues. (2) Baseline unknown, but plan the metrics: measure share action rate, external-user signup rate. (3) Decompose from day one: i, click-through, signup separately. (4) 4 mistakes check: product IS inherently collaborative β, product quality TBD, budget 2 engineers Γ 3 months, mechanics match how Figma does it (invite = real seat, not just a link). (5) Cycle time: optimize "share moment" UX so it happens naturally mid-workflow, not as a separate step.
Output: Loop type decision, Figma-inspired mechanics plan, instrumentation requirements for baseline measurement.
clawhub install bookforge-viral-growth-loop-design