\documentclass[12pt, letterpaper]{article}

\usepackage[margin=1in]{geometry}
\usepackage{booktabs}
\usepackage{array}
\usepackage{enumitem}
\usepackage{hyperref}
\usepackage{titlesec}
\usepackage{parskip}
\usepackage{caption}
\usepackage{float}

\titleformat{\section}{\large\bfseries}{}{0em}{}
\titleformat{\subsection}{\normalsize\bfseries}{}{0em}{}
\setlength{\parindent}{0pt}
\hypersetup{colorlinks=false}
\captionsetup{font=small, labelfont=bf, skip=6pt}

\begin{document}

\begin{center}
    {\LARGE\textbf{Feature Selection for Hinge}} \\[10pt]
    {\large A cleaned working file shared as part of a product application} \\[12pt]
    Alessandro Fiume \\[6pt]
    Spring 2026
\end{center}

\vspace{0.4cm}
\hrule
\vspace{0.5cm}

This document captures a feature-selection exercise on Hinge. The objective was straightforward:
identify the part of the user journey where the product was breaking most severely, generate
feature ideas against that bottleneck, and select the one most likely to improve real-world
outcomes.

The feature direction that won was the \textbf{48-Hour Date Challenge}.

\section{Context}

The underlying problem was not that users failed to match. It was that too many promising matches
never became dates.

The target users were relationship-minded people who had already invested time in the app and were
still getting stuck between three stages:

\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=1.5em]
    \item matching
    \item conversation
    \item meeting in person
\end{itemize}

Three unmet needs came up repeatedly:

\begin{enumerate}[leftmargin=1.5em]
    \item \textbf{From match to meet:} users need help committing to meet before interest fades.
    \item \textbf{Authentic self-expression:} users want to show values and communication style, not
    just surface personality.
    \item \textbf{Algorithm trust:} users want to believe the system is helping them succeed, not
    just keeping them active.
\end{enumerate}

\section{How the feature list was built}

Feature ideas were grouped around those three unmet needs.

\subsection{Unmet Need 1: From Match to Meet}

\begin{table}[H]
\centering
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.25}
\begin{tabular}{c l p{9cm}}
\toprule
\textbf{ID} & \textbf{Feature Name} & \textbf{Description} \\
\midrule
1 & Date Window Lock & Users pre-select availability windows so matches only surface when there is a realistic chance of meeting soon. \\
2 & 48-Hour Date Challenge & After a few messages, both users are nudged toward a date and taken directly into scheduling if they both agree. \\
3 & Conversation Expiration Timer & Conversations archive automatically after a set period unless a date is suggested. \\
4 & AI Date Concierge & The app proposes local date ideas based on both profiles and mutual availability. \\
5 & Ready This Week Mode & A high-intent toggle that filters for users who want to meet in the next 7 days. \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}

\subsection{Unmet Need 2: Authentic Self-Expression}

\begin{table}[H]
\centering
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.25}
\begin{tabular}{c l p{9cm}}
\toprule
\textbf{ID} & \textbf{Feature Name} & \textbf{Description} \\
\midrule
6 & Relationship Intent Badge & A clear signal about whether someone is seeking something long-term, casual, or undecided. \\
7 & Values Alignment Score & A visible read on alignment across life goals, beliefs, and lifestyle preferences. \\
8 & First-Date Expectations Card & An optional signal for preferred first-date style: coffee, dinner, activity, virtual. \\
9 & Emotional Availability Indicator & A light life-stage signal like recently single, career-focused, or ready to settle. \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}

\subsection{Unmet Need 3: Algorithm Trust}

\begin{table}[H]
\centering
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.25}
\begin{tabular}{c l p{9cm}}
\toprule
\textbf{ID} & \textbf{Feature Name} & \textbf{Description} \\
\midrule
10 & Why You're Seeing This & Lightweight match reasoning shown directly on the profile. \\
11 & Success Probability Indicator & A speculative indicator of likely date formation based on similar users. \\
12 & City-Level Success Heatmap & Neighborhood-level date success patterns. \\
13 & Post-Date Feedback Loop & A way to bring real-world feedback back into the matching system. \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}

\section{How the ideas were evaluated}

The ideas were prioritized using a simple RICE-style framework:

\[
\text{RICE Score} = \frac{\text{Reach} \times \text{Impact} \times \text{Confidence}}{\text{Effort}}
\]

The framework mattered less than the discipline behind it. The goal was to avoid falling in love
with the most novel feature and instead choose the one closest to the real bottleneck.

\section{Why the 48-Hour Date Challenge won}

The feature that kept rising to the top was the \textbf{48-Hour Date Challenge}.

It won for one simple reason: it directly targeted movement.

Other ideas improved clarity, trust, or self-expression. Those matter. But this one attacked the
place where too much user intent was being wasted. A match would feel promising, a conversation
would begin, and then the whole thing would quietly dissolve.

The 48-Hour Date Challenge tried to intervene exactly there.

\subsection{What it is}

After roughly 4 to 5 meaningful messages, the app prompts both users toward a date. If both say
yes, the interface moves them into scheduling with a suggested time structure and possible meeting
locations.

\subsection{Why it beat alternatives}

\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=1.5em]
    \item \textbf{Relationship Intent Badge:} useful, but mainly informational. It tells users
    something. It does not necessarily make them act.
    \item \textbf{Why You're Seeing This:} potentially helpful for trust, but still secondary if
    the core problem is that conversations do not become dates.
    \item \textbf{48-Hour Date Challenge:} directly targeted the structural leak between
    conversation and real-world action.
\end{itemize}

\section{What stayed with me}

The deeper lesson was not ``this exact feature should exist.''

It was that the strongest product direction came from admitting where the journey was actually
breaking. Once that bottleneck was made explicit, a lot of other clever ideas started to feel
secondary.

That is the part of the work that stayed with me. The best feature was really a product opinion:
the category already creates plenty of digital possibility. The harder and more valuable thing is
helping the right possibility become a real meeting before momentum disappears.

\vspace{0.4cm}

Best,\\
Alessandro Fiume

\end{document}
