Skip to main content

Contradicting Instincts

Talking to a colleague on the phone about a month ago, I remarked that a significant amount of what a product manager does is recommend strategy that contradicts basic instincts. The basic instincts of marketing seem to include:

  1. Strive to make your product appeal to as broad and diverse market as possible.
  2. Ensure your product has all of the same features as the competition, plus more.
  3. Choose a name, logo, and web domain name that are as descriptive of your company or product as possible.
  4. Try to hide or play down your product's weaknesses.
Yet these instincts are generally the opposite of how you should be managing your product.

Instead of striving to appeal to as broad a market as possible, you often should carefully select a single segment that is sufficiently large and focus on it. Rather than worrying about me-too feature comparisons with competitors' products, you should concentrate on solving your target market's problems. Scientific studies show that names and logos bearing little or no resemblance to your product are more effective than descriptive names. Finally, you should be embracing your product's weaknesses in order to highlight its corresponding strengths.

Comments

clapoint said…
Re: "scientific studies show that names and logs bearing little or no resemblence to your product are more effective...". Wow, you took a HUGE leap of faith in applying this singular article on product naming whose final paragraph states "Kahn says the use of odd names seems to work best in products that rely on the senses, such as food or fashion, and would probably not work in a high-stakes product category such as healthcare or financial services."

Unless you are a product manager in the consumer sector, this really doesn't apply. In the technology sector, choosing a descriptive name (especially one that might position you in the same category as your top 2 competitors) is not a bad approach.
Roger L. Cauvin said…
Hi, thanks for the critique.

It's true that some experts and scientific studies have restricted their conclusions on this matter to consumer products. And perhaps it is a "huge" leap to generalize to the B2B market.

However, it's nowhere near as big a leap as assuming - as you appear to have done - that descriptive names are okay in the technology sector. I have yet to see a single study supporting that conclusion.

Popular posts from this blog

Why Spreadsheets Suck for Prioritizing

The Goal As a company executive, you want confidence that your product team (which includes all the people, from all departments, responsible for product success) has a sound basis for deciding which items are on the product roadmap. You also want confidence the team is prioritizing the items in a smart way. What Should We Prioritize? The items the team prioritizes could be features, user stories, epics, market problems, themes, or experiments. Melissa Perri  makes an excellent case for a " problem roadmap ", and, in general, I recommend focusing on the latter types of items. However, the topic of what types of items you should prioritize - and in what situations - is interesting and important but beyond the scope of this blog entry. A Sad but Familiar Story If there is significant controversy about priorities, then almost inevitably, a product manager or other member of the team decides to put together The Spreadsheet. I've done it. Some of the mos

Is Customer Development Pseudoscience?

The “Science” of Lean Startup Lean startup practitioners embrace the scientific method, seeking the "truth" about what business model and strategy will lead to product success. We do so by: Formulating hypotheses Crafting and running experiments to test them Learning from the experiments Iteratively feeding our learnings back into revised hypotheses Sounds pretty scientific, at least in spirit, doesn't it? Yet this process actually neglects a key ingredient in the scientists' mode of operation. To identify what’s missing, let’s examine “customer development”. Customer Development Steve Blank is one of the pioneers of the lean startup movement. He introduced into the lean startup lexicon the term “customer development”. Customer development consists of sessions and interactions with customers to test hypotheses. For example, a product manager might interview a prospect, asking if she agrees with the product manager’s hypotheses about the problem

Interaction Design: the Neglected Skill

Your product development organization has a big, gaping hole in it. (Be prepared to feel defensive as you continue reading.) One of the most important roles in product development is the role of interaction designer. An interaction designer designs how the users will interact with the product and conceptualize the tasks they perform. He decides whether, for example, the user interface will be command driven, object oriented (clicking on objects then specifying what to do with them), or wizard based. The interaction designer decides the individual steps in the use cases. Every company has one or more people that play the interaction designer role. Usually, those people have little or no expertise in interaction design. Sadly, they typically don't even realize how unqualified they are. Let's see who typically plays the role at companies. Engineer . An engineer is an expert on building what is designed. Yes, an engineer may know how to design the internal structure of the hardware