banatie-strategy/research/passive-research-methodology.md

Banatie Passive Research: Methodology & Workflow

Created: November 1, 2025
Purpose: Guide for validating ICP hypotheses through passive research
For: Future research sessions with @men in new chats
Status: Battle-tested methodology

---

🎯 WHY Passive Research Before Interviews

Problem with going straight to interviews:

• Ask wrong questions → waste people's time
• Get polite, filtered answers → miss real pain
• Can't challenge assumptions → build wrong thing

Passive research gives us:

• Real pain points (people complain authentically online)
• Actual language people use (for messaging)
• Competitive intel (what exists, what fails)
• Confidence before talking to customers

"Don't ask people what they want. Observe what they complain about when they think you're not listening."

Flow: Passive research → Interview validation → Build confidence → Launch

---

🛠 Tools & Resources

Search Tools (MCP):

1. Brave Search MCP - Main search engine for Reddit/forums
2. Perplexity MCP - Secondary for synthesis

Project Knowledge Files:

1. banatie-research-directions-tracker.md - Core research directions (1-10)
2. banatie-research-directions-tracker-extension1.md - Additional research directions
3. Completed research - direction-1-strong-signals.md, direction-6-strong-signals.md, etc. (for comparison)

Important: Previous research files will be in Project Knowledge for reference.

---

🔄 The Workflow (Step-by-Step)

Phase 1: Session Start

@men loads context:

• Read: ROADMAP.md, INDEX.md, 12-the-current-tech-state.md (in /projects/my-projects/banatie-strategy/)
• Read: banatie-research-directions-tracker.md and banatie-research-directions-tracker-extension1.md (Project Knowledge)
• Review: Completed research files
• Confirm with Oleg: "Ready to start Direction N - [hypothesis]"

Phase 2: Planning Searches (Collaborative)

Pattern:

• Oleg: "Let's search Direction N" OR "Also try X"
• @men: Proposes 5-7 specific search queries
• Discuss → Adjust → Execute

Key: DISCUSS before searching, ADJUST on the fly

Phase 3: Execute Searches (Iterative)

Pattern:

1. Run search → Quickly scan → Share findings immediately
2. Discuss: "Dig deeper?" OR "Move on?" OR "Try different angle?"
3. Adjust strategy based on findings

Important: Multiple search variations per topic (3-5 variations to avoid false negatives)

Phase 4: Document Findings (Continuous)

Create downloadable file in chat: direction-N-strong-signals.md

Format:

# Direction N Research: Strong Signals Found

## 🟢 STRONG SIGNAL #1: [Title]
- **URL:** [exact link]
- **Quote:** "[exact quote]"
- **Context:** [why this matters]

## 🟡 MEDIUM SIGNAL #2: ...
## 🔴 WEAK/MISSING SIGNAL #3: ...

Update as you go - after every 2-3 searches using str_replace

Phase 5: Discussion & Decisions

After 5-7 searches OR when pattern emerges:

• @men summarizes: Found X signals, key insight, unexpected findings
• Oleg decides: Keep searching / Move to next direction / Pivot

Key: COLLABORATIVE decision-making

Phase 6: Wrap-Up

@men creates:

• Full research doc (English): direction-N-strong-signals.md

Oleg uploads to Project Knowledge for future sessions

---

🎨 The "Vibe" - How We Actually Work

Speed & Iteration:

• Discuss → Search → Find → Discuss → Adjust → Search again
• Real-time collaboration, quick pivots

Collaborative Discovery:

• Oleg challenges, adds ideas, spots patterns
• @men proposes strategy, interprets, suggests pivots
• Together: hunting for truth, not confirming biases

Hypothesis Testing:

• We WANT to be wrong (better to kill bad ideas in research)
• Try to DISPROVE hypotheses
• Celebrate negative findings

Documentation:

• Document EVERYTHING (signals, absences, questions)
• Exact quotes with URLs (proof)
• Note what's MISSING (absence = evidence)

---

📋 Quality Standards

Good Search Queries:

• ✅ Specific: site:reddit.com/r/webdev "client approval" placeholder images
• ❌ Too broad: website images problems

Strong Signal Indicators:

• 🟢 Multiple threads (3+ sources)
• 🟢 Specific examples, emotional language
• 🟢 Solutions attempted but failed
• 🟢 Willingness to pay mentioned

Weak Signals:

• 🔴 Single mention, vague complaints
• 🔴 No urgency, theoretical discussion

---

🚀 Starting a New Session

@men in new chat:

1. Read this methodology
2. Load: ROADMAP.md, INDEX.md, tracker, completed research
3. Confirm: "Ready to start Direction N - [hypothesis]"

Oleg:

1. Share this document
2. Wait for @men to load context
3. Start researching

---

📊 Success Metrics

Good session:

• ✅ Found 2-3 strong signals with proof
• ✅ Validated OR invalidated hypothesis
• ✅ Generated interview questions
• ✅ Clear decision: continue / pivot / kill

Poor session:

• ❌ Generic findings, no proof
• ❌ Confirmation bias
• ❌ Vague conclusions

---

🌟 Core Philosophy

"We're not trying to prove we're right. We're trying to discover what's true."

Goal: Find REAL problems → Validate quickly → Build confidence → Make data-driven decisions

Success = Truth discovered, whether it supports our idea or not.

---

Version: 1.0
Last Updated: November 1, 2025