The persistence of this “first try”
expectation is as striking as it is common and chronic, particularly among
companies with established revenue streams. Perhaps it is because some of our companies have become so successful
for so long that we have lost our institutional memory of those earlier
entrepreneurial times. Perhaps our very
focus on competitively differentiating our product offerings blinds us, at
least in part, to subtle shifts in the needs, values and behavior of our
end-users. Many have succumbed to the
seduction of the competition, beating a rival, but have lost touch with the
very needs of the people we seek to serve.
Some principles for addressing this
“first try” expectation can be found in Stefan H. Thomke’s book, Experimentation Matters (HBS Press,
2003). Thomke suggests both how
important and how difficult it has become for companies to get out from under
the tyranny of their own success. “True
experimentation is all too rare in successful companies.” So-called “productive failures” – those that
produce significant technical and end-user insights – become increasingly rare
in organizational cultures of success. The central message from Experimentation
Matters – a manifesto for learning from early experimentation (and
exploration) efforts – is simply “fail,” first, fast, frequently and in the
field (our paraphrase).
Beyond Thomke’s principles for
experimentation and exploration, however, are at least two other principles for
threading the needle of discovering emerging needs upon which to base future
growth. Both of these principles, and
their associated practices, aim to discover needs that are robust and resilient
enough in the first place to sufficiently motivate further experimentation and
the patience to withstand the inevitable resistance.
One is to actually slow time down. What may be right under our noses can be more
easily revealed when we watch the routines of people in which we have an
interest, in slow motion. Several years
ago in an engagement with a client in the facial tissue business, we
experimented with consumers, one-on-one, asking them to describe in slow motion
what they were doing and experiencing when they reached for a facial
tissue. Though it was awkward for people
to do so – asking them to slow something down that is so routine, unconscious
and automatic – the results were profound.
It actually led to the discovery of proprietary (at the time) insights
that, in turn, lead to a whole new and more dynamic test and measurement
framework from which several new successful products emerged. Ezra Pound put it succinctly years ago,
“Glance is the enemy of vision.”
Another principle is to change your
point of view. Landscape painters and
photographers practice this principle when they try out different angles from
which to view, capture or render the “truth” of what they are seeing. Several years ago Eli Callaway had already
committed to a state-of-the-art golf ball production facility, but needed a
fresh reason for golfers to be interested in golf balls. We knew that conducting traditional
qualitative market research (e.g., focus groups) was unlikely to turn up
anything new and different. In our
search for the right point of view, we went to a handful of non-celebrity (to
avoid the “pose” factor) experts – a golf course architect, a veteran equipment
salesman-turned-teaching professional, and a few others – and asked what we
thought was a fairly innocent question – why do people keep playing the
game? Their reaction to our question –
“All these years in the business and no one has ever asked me that question
before” – suggested that we were on an interesting track. We had simply changed our point of view from
the conventional.
We were speaking with Dick Sperry of
The Sperry Group, Inc., recently about how he “gets a vision.” Unlike the typical image many of us have that
the visions come up front and instantly, Dick described a much longer, more
iterative process of observing end-users, trying something out with them,
watching what happens, and trying again.
What struck me about what Dick said was that vision isn’t finished until
well into the development process, even to the point where a customer nicknames
the new tool.
Many of us – particularly those of us
who are process-oriented – believe that first comes a discovery of a need and
then comes the invention of a solution to that need. However, actual experience suggests that the
discovery of a need is more closely coupled with the invention of a solution. We seldom, if ever, get it on the “first
try.” It requires empathy, imagination,
patience and understanding. Ironically,
we can actually accelerate our time-to-market, if we just slow down early in the front-end exploration and change our point
of view.
This article was originally published in Innovating Perspectives in September 2004. For this and other back issues of our newsletter, please visit our website at innovationsthatwork.com or call (415) 387-1270.
This article was originally published in Innovating Perspectives in September 2004. For this and other back issues of our newsletter, please visit our website at innovationsthatwork.com or call (415) 387-1270.
No comments:
Post a Comment