Project Everest

Adopted Experiment

[FEB 19] [TIMOR] Channels - Blast Text Communication Test

by
William Eve
+1
William Eve | 5 months ago | in FarmEd - Timor-Leste

Is the use of blast texts an effective method of communication for farmers in Timor-Leste?

 

Introduction:

This experiment aims to establish whether or not blast texts is an effective method of communicating with current farmer stakeholders. The January team sent a blast text to the (48) farmers who signed MOU’s with previous FarmEd teams to inform them of delays in the launch of the app. This was a means to mitigate harm to these relationships as the December team had promised them the January team would return to them with the app at the start of the month. The blast text explained the delays, stated the app was expected to launch in coming weeks, and asked the receivers to respond ‘yes’ if they are still interested in subscribing. The team received only 2 responses to this CTA. The February team aims to use this experiment to establish whether or these texts were actually received by farmers by visiting a total of 10. Thereby confirming the feasibility of using blasts texts as a method of maintaining these relationships through delays in the app launch.

 

Lean phase:

Channels

 

Assumption:

Farmers received and understood the text, but didn’t respond for external reasons.

 

Time Box:

1-2 days

 

Success Metric:

Success will be determined by:

The number of farmers who received and understood the blast text sent out to them in January.

Green light:

If the success point is reached, it can be deduced that blast texts have the potential to be an effective communication channels, Actions on will be for further communications regarding app development through blast texting to keep stakeholders up to date and ensure these relationships are maintained.

Success point:

80-85% of farmers received and understood the blast text.

Orange light:

Actions on should an orange light be achieved are to empathise with farmers to establish why text wasn’t received/understood. Use these insights moving forward, potentially look at wording, translations, other potential blocks.

Failure point:

Less than 40% received/understood the blast text.

Red Light:

Look at other methods of communicating updates on app development. Potentially look into Facebook as a channel for this, or a more traditional, word of mouth method through community leaders.  

 

Experiment Build:

Metric:

The experiment is a quantitative analysis of 10 farmers response to the blast text sent out by the January team.

Method

Pre preparation:

  • Prepare by creating a document of pressing questions to ask during the farmer meetings.
  • Pre selecting an area where a large number of farmers would have received the blast text, reach out to a number of these farmers via the Hubspot contact list.
  • Preparing a back brief and risk assessment before stepping off to the farms
  • Reviewing the method of transport out to the farms for clarity and organisation

During:

  • Record notes from the meeting, documenting whether the blast text was received, whether the blast text was not understood.
  • Empathise with the farmers to maintain relationships and gage whether they are still interested in subscribing to app when it launches
  • Update on the app, explain the monthly goals and progress of the February FarmEd team

Post meeting:

  • Document all responses and summarise. From the results create a results crowdicity post.

Resources Required:

  • Pens
  • Notepad
  • Phones (for communication and note taking)
  • Battery packs for phones
  • Money for microlets, lunch and other costs (e.g. other transport)

 

Potential Problems and Blocks:

  • Farmers aren’t present at farm
  • Farmers don’t recall signing an MOU with FarmEd/didn’t understand what they were signing.
  • Potential transport complications in visiting the farms
  • Getting lost when trying to visit specific farms, as documented by previous Timor FarmEd teams, some of the farms are difficult to navigate

 

Link to Experiment Results:

https://projecteverest.crowdicity.com/post/956780 

Tagged users
edited on 20th February 2019, 00:02 by William Eve

Rose Gooding 5 months ago

Status label added: Proposed Experiment

Reply 0

Rose Gooding 5 months ago

What are the 'external reasons' you believe meant farmers didn't reply? Credit? cultural reasons?
How many farmers do you plan on seeing?
It would also be interesting to know if the blast texts that were sent in January were with or without the country code (+670) as this sometimes effects sending and receiving of texts in Timor.
Once your preparation document is complete please post link in comments

Reply 0

William Eve 5 months ago

Hey Rose, thanks for the comment!

Just to clarify, the purpose of external reasons being left unspecified is a result of the overall reasons of a lack of responses being unknown. The reasons as to which farmers didn't reply will be one of the major key points focused upon when empathising the farmers and is also a key metric being recorded. We deduce though that this could be a result of numerous reasons ranging from a lack of understanding the text itself to a lack of credit or willingness to use credit.

The total number of farmers being visited is 10 as stated in the experiment build metric, however I will restate this in the introduction of the experiment for further clarity.

It has also been confirmed that Timor's country code wasn’t utilised for the blast text, we will definitely take this into consideration as a potential reason why the message wasn't received.

Reply 1

Rose Gooding 5 months ago

Status label added: Experiment adopted

Status label removed: Proposed Experiment

Reply 0

Share