Every founder, product manager, or independent developer dreams of building something impactful. We envision a solution, feel a strong intuition, and then dive headfirst into development. This was my approach for my passion project, an app I was convinced would revolutionise a niche market. I built it on a ‘vibe’, a gut feeling that it was what people wanted. It failed. This experience taught me a profound lesson about the dangers of vibe coding and the indispensable value of user research and evidence-based development.
My journey from passionate creator to disillusioned founder is not unique. Many of us fall into the trap of building what we think users need, rather than what they actually do. We prioritise features over validation, and intuition over data. This article is for those who, like me, are driven by an urge to create, but need a more robust framework to ensure that creation actually matters to someone beyond themselves.
The Allure of Vibe Coding
The term ‘vibe coding’ perfectly encapsulates my initial approach. I had an idea, a strong sense of how it should work, and an almost artistic vision for its interface. I poured countless hours into development, polishing every detail, convinced that my innate understanding of the problem space was sufficient. There was no market research, no user interviews, and certainly no prototyping with actual potential users. My confidence stemmed from a deeply personal connection to the problem, believing my experience mirrored everyone else’s.
This approach felt efficient at the time. It bypassed the perceived ‘slowdown’ of external validation. It allowed me to stay in my creative flow, building rapidly. The app was aesthetically pleasing, technically sound, and, in my eyes, perfect. I launched it with great excitement, anticipating immediate adoption and glowing reviews. The silence that followed was deafening.
When Intuition Isn’t Enough
The app garnered a handful of downloads, mostly from friends and family. Engagement was minimal. Retention was non-existent. My perfect solution was solving a problem that, as it turned out, very few people actually had, or at least not in the way I had imagined. It became painfully clear that my ‘vibe’ was not a universal truth. My personal experience, while valid for me, did not translate into a widespread market need.
This is a common pitfall for passionate builders. We get so close to our ideas that we lose perspective. We confuse our own desires with those of a broader audience. The solution, I later realised, was not to abandon intuition entirely, but to temper it with objective evidence. Harvard Business Review consistently highlights the importance of understanding customer jobs-to-be-done, a concept I completely overlooked.
Embracing User Research and Evidence-Based Development
The failure of my first app was a brutal but necessary education. It forced me to confront my assumptions and adopt a fundamentally different approach to product development. I began to understand that building a successful product is less about brilliant ideas and more about rigorously validating them.
My transformation began with a deep dive into user research methodologies. I learned about:
- User Interviews: Talking directly to potential users to understand their pain points, needs, and existing behaviours. This goes beyond asking if they’d use your app; it’s about uncovering the underlying ‘job’ they are trying to get done.
- Surveys: Gathering quantitative data from a larger audience to identify patterns and validate hypotheses derived from interviews.
- Observational Studies: Watching users interact with existing solutions or even prototypes to see how they genuinely behave, rather than relying on what they say they do.
- Competitor Analysis: Understanding what other solutions exist, their strengths, weaknesses, and the gaps they leave unfilled.
This systematic approach shifted my mindset from ‘I have an idea, let’s build it’ to ‘What problem needs solving, and for whom?’ It’s a subtle but profound change that underpins successful product strategy.
The Power of Iteration and Validation
My subsequent projects adopted a cycle of hypothesise, build a minimal viable product (MVP), measure, and learn. Instead of building a complete, polished app based on a ‘vibe’, I focused on the smallest possible solution that could test a core hypothesis. This meant:
- Defining a Clear Hypothesis: What specific problem are we trying to solve, and for whom? What do we believe the solution will achieve?
- Building an MVP: Creating the simplest version of the product that can test that hypothesis. This could be a landing page, a clickable prototype, or a very basic functional app.
- Measuring User Behaviour: Tracking how users interact with the MVP, not just what they say. Are they completing the desired actions? Where do they drop off?
- Learning and Adapting: Using the data and feedback to refine the hypothesis, pivot the product, or even abandon the idea if the evidence suggests it’s not viable.
This iterative process drastically reduces the risk of building something nobody wants. It ensures that every development effort is guided by evidence, not just enthusiasm. The Lean Startup methodology, popularised by Eric Ries, became my new bible. Forbes frequently discusses the benefits of this agile approach, which prioritises learning over extensive planning.
Moving Beyond Vibe Coding
The transition from vibe coding to evidence-based development wasn’t easy. It required humility, a willingness to be wrong, and a significant shift in my creative process. It felt less ‘artistic’ at times, more scientific, but the results speak for themselves.
My current projects are developed with a constant feedback loop from potential users. Features are prioritised based on validated needs, not just interesting ideas. The initial excitement of a new concept is now tempered with the rigour of validation, ensuring that passion is channelled into genuinely valuable solutions. This approach doesn’t stifle innovation; it directs it towards impact.
For anyone building products, especially in the early stages, I urge you to challenge your own assumptions. Your ‘vibe’ might be a starting point, but it’s rarely a sufficient blueprint for success. Spend time understanding your users, not just imagining them. Validate your ideas before you commit significant resources. This shift will not only increase your chances of building something successful but also spare you the disappointment of creating something brilliant no one needs.
My failed app was a painful, expensive lesson. But it taught me that true innovation comes not from isolated genius, but from empathetic understanding and rigorous validation. Even a small number of user tests can yield significant insights, as research from the Nielsen Norman Group shows. Don’t let your ‘vibe’ lead you astray; let it guide you towards discovery, not just development.
