Does this improve an actual expansion decision?

Recruit five relevant decision-makers

Start with owners of an established clinic who have considered, attempted or plan a second location within twelve months. Include different budgets and location formats. Record whether they actually control the location decision. Include one expansion adviser as a separate perspective; do not mix adviser responses into the five-owner decision rule.

Ask permission to take notes. Request aggregate business information only. Do not collect patient details, contact lists or confidential accounts in this prototype. Use participant aliases in the results log.

First 10 minutes: understand the problem

1. Recent behaviour: “Tell me about the last time you considered another location. What triggered it?” Ask for the sequence of decisions and who was involved.
2. Alternatives: “How did you find and compare areas and premises?” Ask what they paid for, whom they trusted and what spreadsheets or reports they used.
3. Cost of uncertainty: “Which part took longest or led to rework?” Ask for an example and approximate time, separating recalled estimates from recorded time.
4. What transfers: “What makes the first clinic work, and which parts would not transfer?” Probe referral dependence, clinical specialty, founder involvement, staffing and customer travel.
5. Deal breakers: “What would rule a site out before you looked at market data?” Capture occupancy costs, fit-out, access, parking and opening timing.
6. Street format: “Would this clinic rely on visibility and passing trade, or appointments, referrals and convenient parking?” Ask what evidence would support that choice.
7. Decision evidence: “What would you need to believe before paying for an investigation or signing a lease?” Do not introduce a price yet.

Next 7 minutes: a truthful live walkthrough

1. Current clinic: choose the Brunswick example or a saved mapped record. Explain that an unmatched address must be confirmed before comparing its catchment.
2. What works: ask the owner to choose up to three valued qualities. Let the conditional street and parking questions appear from those choices.
3. What comes next: set the customer profile, objective, budget, space and opening constraints. Leave genuine unknowns blank.
4. Confirm: review the brief and generate the demonstration report. Discuss whether the explanation reflects what the owner values.
5. Decide: inspect the first recommendation, trade-off and next verification task. Read the report’s comparison, real maps and fictional property facts.
6. Revise: lower the rent ceiling and observe the property shortlist change. Download the brief/run for the analyst; no entries are automatically submitted.

Next 5 minutes: let the customer drive

Give each task without coaching. Record completion, assistance and confusion. Use synthetic property data unless they have authorised an independent inventory.

1. “Describe what works at your first clinic and prepare a report. Explain why you would investigate its first area.”
2. “Find a premise that needs more evidence and tell me which missing fact matters.”
3. “Change a constraint and produce the current shortlist/report. Explain what changed.”

Ask: “What, if anything, would you do differently after seeing this?” Record their original and revised investigation list. A change is not automatically an improvement; ask why it is justified.

Final 3 minutes: test commercial intent

1. “What would you use instead, and what would that cost in time or money?”
2. “Which deliverable would you commission, from whom, and who would approve that spending?”
3. “What would be a reasonable budget for that work?” Record their unprompted answer first.
4. Only then describe the untested A$1,500–2,500 service-price hypothesis: one approved brief, a bounded market screen, up to 100 eligible premises assessed, up to ten shortlisted and detail on the top three, one revision and a discussion. Live data access and rights determine what can actually be delivered.
5. “Would you want a written scope for a paid pilot? What conditions would need to be met?” Record a requested next step, not politeness as a sale.

No payment collection, proposal sending or customer outreach is automated here.

Declare the test rule before interviews

For the first five qualified owner interviews, use these working gates: at least three describe a material location-selection pain rated 4–5/5; at least three complete all three tasks without help; and at least two request a written paid scope or make a stronger documented commitment. Record all contradictory evidence.

If fewer than five qualified owners are recorded, the result is “too early.” If a gate fails, inspect the objections before changing the product or audience. Meeting these gates supports another pilot; it is not product-market fit or a statistically representative result. Do not silently adjust the rule after seeing responses.