Persona Focus Waterfall
Narrow product focus in layers without alienating adjacent users.
- Difficulty
- Advanced
- Time to result
- ~weeks to results
- Steps
- 6
- Confidence
- 99%
The Persona Focus Waterfall narrows a horizontal platform through a sequence of decisions. First, choose the broad primary group, such as technical or nontechnical users. Second, protect an important adjacent group from unnecessary harm without attempting to optimize the product around it. Third, divide the primary group by desired outcome—for example, building a business versus improving workplace productivity. Fourth, examine specific jobs-to-be-done and decide which categories deserve end-to-end product investment, which are better served through partnerships, and which should be excluded for now. This creates actionable focus while preserving the platform's broader accessibility. Each layer constrains investment more precisely without requiring the company to reject every user outside the current priority.
Origin
Elena Verna described the waterfall Lovable used to move from technical versus nontechnical users to solopreneurs, team players, specific jobs, partnerships, and explicit non-goals.
Core principles
- 01Make broad market choices before narrow feature choices.
- 02Choose a primary persona while protecting valuable adjacent users.
- 03Separate use cases by the outcome customers seek.
- 04Use jobs-to-be-done to decide where to build, partner, or abstain.
- 05Focus added value without unnecessarily restricting platform access.
How to run it
- 1
Choose the broad primary user
Make the most polarizing top-level decision about whom the product will optimize for.
Pro tip Use differences in required product treatment, not just market size.
Watch out Trying to optimize equally for fundamentally conflicting users produces an incoherent experience.
- 2
Protect an adjacent persona
Identify a valuable secondary group and define what the product must avoid doing to alienate it.
Pro tip Offer escape hatches, integrations, or advanced access without shifting primary focus.
Watch out Do-no-harm is not the same as promising feature parity.
- 3
Split by desired outcome
Divide the primary group according to what users are trying to accomplish, such as business creation or productivity improvement.
Pro tip Prefer outcome differences over demographic distinctions.
Watch out Users with similar titles may still pursue very different outcomes.
- 4
Map jobs-to-be-done
List the concrete jobs within each outcome and assess their importance, complexity, and strategic fit.
Pro tip Use observed demand to prioritize the map.
Watch out A long job list does not require the company to serve every job.
- 5
Choose build, partner, or abstain
Build end to end where the company can add distinctive value, integrate where a strong incumbent already excels, and explicitly defer low-fit categories.
Pro tip Revisit abstentions as capabilities and markets change.
Watch out Competing reflexively with established specialists can waste focus.
- 6
Preserve horizontal access
Ensure focused investment adds value for target users without unnecessarily preventing other users from succeeding.
Pro tip Separate roadmap priority from product eligibility.
Watch out Broad accessibility must not become an excuse to avoid prioritization.
In the wild
Lovable first chooses nontechnical users while avoiding an allergic reaction from engineers through developer mode and GitHub integration. It then distinguishes solopreneurs building products from company employees building prototypes or internal tools. At the job level, it avoids recreating Shopify and prefers integration for commerce storefronts.
→ The roadmap gains specific priorities without closing the platform to engineers or other builders.
Common mistakes
Starting with tiny personas
Choosing narrow demographic personas before resolving major product-treatment conflicts obscures the strategic decision.
Confusing adjacent with primary
Protecting a secondary persona does not require competing for every feature that persona expects.
Competing where partnership wins
Rebuilding a strong incumbent's complete product can consume resources without creating distinctive value.
Is it for you?
Best for
It is best for platforms that can serve many user types but need a coherent roadmap and differentiated value proposition.
Not ideal for
It is not ideal for products with one obvious user and one narrow job where a multi-level segmentation process adds little value.
From the transcript
“So we first decision that we thought is are we building for technical or non-technical users?”
“We've identified two that we're focusing on right now, which is one is the solopreneur that are coming in and building a product versus the…”
“So we kind of went down that waterfall decision tree of uh where is it that we want to focus? Who is it that we…”
From the episode
Inside the $130M AI Startup Growing Faster Than ChatGPT