There's a nuance here that is important to understand. Something we see a ton at @Amplitude_HQ .
Some teams get paralyzed wondering "what to track". Meanwhile other teams integrate this into how they work. It just happens (with very low effort).
What's the difference? (1/n)
Some teams get paralyzed wondering "what to track". Meanwhile other teams integrate this into how they work. It just happens (with very low effort).
What's the difference? (1/n)
https://twitter.com/shreyas/status/1387079786107863048
First it helps to have a setup (like @Amplitude_HQ ) which is "self-service" for *both* collecting the data & making it useful for insights. With modern event-based analytics you don't need to worry much about ETL ELT, etc.
Just track the event (2/n)
Just track the event (2/n)
...What this frees up teams to do is to identify actions of interest -- the nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs -- without the heavy burden of figuring out ahead of time how the data will be used for insights.
Ask: what will happen that I care about? What is the context? (3/n)
Ask: what will happen that I care about? What is the context? (3/n)
Teams that obsess over speccing their dashboards ahead of time -- to nailing down each and every metric -- will find it hard to integrate instrumentation into their day-to-day work.
It is much easier to ask...what will happen that I may care about? Start there.(4/n)
It is much easier to ask...what will happen that I may care about? Start there.(4/n)
This isn't an argument for tracking everything, rather... if you focus on events/actions, and have a reasonable system that is flexible...answering the question "what should we track" becomes much easier.
Which allows the habit @shreyas is talking about (5/end)
Which allows the habit @shreyas is talking about (5/end)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
