Reading Notes From the Book "The Mum Test"

Now that I've build a clever AI image generation app, everybody will just jump on the chance to try it... Right?

As a developer, that's what I'd like to think.

I imagine sophisticated architectures, AI integrations, user accounts, databases, cloud infrastructure, clever AI image generation pipelines, system prompt and context engineering, and all the exciting technology that will solve users' problems.

Is that What the Users Want?

Maybe:

• They just want to browse a collection of garden makeover photos?
• They don't want to upload their own property photos? For privacy concerns?
• They don't want to wait 60 seconds for an AI-generated image?
• A simple gallery of before-and-after examples solves 90% of their problems?

As a developer, that's a surprisingly difficult thought to accept. After all, generating AI garden transformations sounds much more exciting than displaying a set of static images.

And that's exactly why it makes me uncomfortable. Because if a simple solution provides more value to users than a complicated one, then I've spent a lot of time solving the wrong problem.

A boring solution with real users is infinitely more valuable than a clever solution with none.

The Book "The Mum Test"

That's one reason I've started reading The Mom Test by Rob Fitzpatrick before launching my site.

The book challenges a mistake many founders make:

Asking people what they think of an idea instead of understanding what they already do.

Here are my notes in the key points:

Takeaway #1: Talk About Their Behaviour, Not Your Product

A homeowner might tell me:

"An AI garden design tool sounds useful."

But that's not the question that matters.

A better question is:

"What did you do the last time you wanted ideas for your garden?"

Maybe they browsed Instagram? Maybe they asked a question in a Facebook or Reddit gardening group. Or just ask their parents? Friends? Do they hire a landscape designer instead. What about gardening magazines? Or most people just buy plants without planning? Because they look good?

If that's how they currently solve the problem, then that's where I should start paying attention.

Takeaway #2: Past Actions Are More Valuable Than Future Promises

People often overestimate what they will do in the future. The Mom Test argues that future promises are weak evidence. Past behaviour is much stronger.

Instead of asking:

"Would you use an AI visualizer?"

I should be asking:

"How many hours did you spend looking for garden ideas last month?"

Or:

"Have you ever paid for landscaping advice?"

Those answers reveal whether the problem is important enough for people to spend time or money solving.

Takeaway #3: Look for Actions, Not Compliments

As developers, we love positive feedback. But compliments can be misleading. The strongest signals are actions:

• Do they reach out for advice?
• Do they checkout gardening materials?
• Do people share photos? And like makeover images?
• Do they bookmark examples?
• Do they trust the landscape/garden advice?

These behaviours tell a much clearer story than:

"That's a great idea."

Action Points for Me

Having these 3 takeaways in mind, I will start listing out the practical actions to take to understand the users more. I will share them in the next part of this series!