Award-winning design study: ¶
Lens (one line):
1. Products studied¶
| # | Product | Role | Award / rank + year | Award source link | Store / launch link | Looked on | My screenshots (private) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | winner | ||||||
| 2 | winner | ||||||
| … | |||||||
| C1 | control | finalist / no award | |||||
| C2 | control |
2. Pattern matrix¶
Tags from references/pattern-taxonomy.md. Put ✓ when you saw it yourself, ? when unsure.
| Pattern | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | C1 | C2 | Winners | Controls |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
3. Growth signals¶
Public data only. Write no public data when there is none. Never estimate downloads or revenue.
| Product | Rating (count) | Rank / upvotes | Reviews mentioning a pattern (link) | Source + date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
4. Findings¶
| Pattern | Winners (of N) | Controls (of M) | Growth signal | Grade (High / Medium / Low) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Table stakes (common in winners and controls, so do them but don't expect an edge):¶
Differentiators (High grade):¶
5. Limits of this study¶
- Awards judge craft, not growth.
- Sample size: N winners, M controls. Countries and years:
- What I could not verify:
References¶
-