You are a Product Manager in Meta's New Product Introduction organization for VR hardware. The team is considering an accessibility-focused VR experience for people with physical disabilities, especially users who cannot comfortably use standard controller-based interactions. Should Meta build this product? If yes, which user segment would you target first, what product approach would you take, and how would you define success? ### Constraints & Assumptions - Do not treat "people with physical disabilities" as one homogeneous segment. - Consider whether the first step should be new hardware, software on an existing headset, accessories, developer tooling, or a combination. - Include safety, comfort, privacy, accessibility, and ecosystem constraints. - Explain whether adoption/activation or engagement matters more at this stage. ### Clarifying Questions to Ask - Is the business goal platform inclusion, new headset sales, market expansion, regulatory/accessibility leadership, or all of these? - Which disability segment has the highest pain and best fit with current VR capabilities? - Are we allowed to modify hardware, or should we start with existing Quest devices? - What evidence do we have from customer research, support tickets, accessibility communities, or pilot programs? ### Part 1 - Decide Whether Meta Should Build Would you recommend building this product or not? #### What This Part Should Cover - A clear recommendation with reasoning. - The strategic value of accessibility, platform expansion, and spillover benefits for mainstream users. - The risks around market size, hardware fragmentation, development cost, and failure to meet accessibility needs. ### Part 2 - Choose The First User Segment Which user segment should Meta target first? #### What This Part Should Cover - A specific segment, such as users with limited upper-limb mobility or dexterity who can benefit from voice, gaze, head movement, or switch-compatible controls. - Why this segment has a strong problem-solution fit. - Acknowledgment that other groups may require different interaction models. ### Part 3 - Define The Product Approach What should the MVP include? #### What This Part Should Cover - A practical launch path, likely accessibility-first software and optional accessories on the existing platform before a separate headset SKU. - Accessible onboarding, hands-free navigation, voice/gaze controls, seated mode, caregiver assist, safety settings, and curated accessible apps. - Developer guidelines or SDK support so the ecosystem can participate. ### Part 4 - Define Success Metrics What is the North Star Metric, and should adoption/activation or engagement matter more? #### What This Part Should Cover - A north star tied to independent successful use rather than raw time spent. - Activation metrics such as setup completion, time to first successful session, and first task completion. - Engagement and retention as secondary signals after access is proven. - Guardrails for safety, discomfort, support burden, returns, privacy, and accessibility failures. ### What a Strong Answer Covers - Narrows the user segment and avoids one-size-fits-all accessibility claims. - Chooses a feasible MVP and explains why it is lower risk than dedicated hardware. - Prioritizes independent access and safety before maximizing time spent. - Shows respect for user research and inclusive design rather than treating accessibility as a checkbox. ### Follow-up Questions - What would make you decide not to build dedicated hardware? - How would you recruit pilot users ethically? - What if voice control excludes some users? - How would you measure whether the product creates real independence? - Which accessibility features could benefit mainstream VR users too?