Building an Experimentation Knowledge Base for High-Velocity Growth Teams: The Knowledge Compounding Rate
A knowledge base doesn't just store past experiments — it's how data beats the HiPPO in decisions.
Know what to test, when to trust the result, and what to do next. Practical guides for analysts, growth teams, and founders.
A knowledge base doesn't just store past experiments — it's how data beats the HiPPO in decisions.
Running a lot of A/B tests isn't maturity. Maturity is when the tests start showing up in the P&L.
Meta-analysis isn't about combining experiments — it's about knowing when you have enough similar tests for the aggregate to tell you something true.
The value of the 50th experiment isn't the same as the value of the 5th.
The worst habit that kills institutional memory isn't forgetting to document. It's letting directional reads get filed as wins.
Most old A/B tests contain insights your team no longer remembers. The Revival Value Formula tells you which ones are worth revisiting.
The Knowledge Half-Life framework measures how fast insights decay in experimentation programs.
Silos between experimentation teams aren't a culture problem — they're an economics problem. The Coordination Tax Ratio reveals the hidden 20-35% cost most orgs pay.
Statistical failures compound into credibility damage. The Statistical Trust Deficit framework explains why rigor in SRM detection and false positive…
The Statistical Debt framework shows how underpowered tests and post-hoc metrics compound silently — until one shipped false positive costs the team years…
Scalability in experimentation isn't test volume — it's the Learning Compound Rate: how much past learning your team can still apply.
The Experimentation Overhead Ratio (EOR) framework tells you when the math says migrate off spreadsheets. Most teams wait 6-18 months past the breakeven point.
A program-level A/B testing guide from someone who has run 100+ experiments per year at a Fortune 150 company.
A practical way to compare experimentation, brand, and performance marketing evidence without turning modeled impact into a guarantee.
How to report experiment win rates with a visible denominator, decision rule, evidence quality, business impact, and explicit limits.
How pre-committed metrics, decision rules, and a shared evidence record keep A/B test interpretation from drifting after results arrive.
Why choosing metrics after seeing results creates false confidence, and how pre-commitment protects an experimentation program.
How to make defensible experiment decisions with limited traffic, small teams, operational constraints, and stakeholder pressure.
Scaling experimentation breaks intake, hypothesis integrity, capacity, and tooling — usually in that order. What fails at 20, 100, and 1,000 tests a year.
How to distinguish diagnostic engagement metrics from decision metrics and document the path from an experiment to revenue evidence.
Why imperfect A/B traffic splits are normal, when to suspect sample ratio mismatch, and which diagnostic and follow-up checks to run.
How to audit the real definitions behind users, sessions, conversions, and revenue before trusting an experiment result.
Most A/B testing advice is written by people who've never defended a losing test in a business review.
The AI wrapper era is over. Solo builders shipping hyper-specific vertical tools win — not another ChatGPT skin with a logo on it.
Know what to test, when to trust the result, and what to do next. Practical decision guides for analysts, growth teams, and founders. Free. Weekly.
Opens Substack to confirm your subscription · Free · Unsubscribe anytime