Skip to main content

Embracing your Weakness

I mention in my article on positioning and messaging that one way of formulating a theme for your marketing campaign is to identify your product's biggest weakness and highlight the strength within that weakness.

Since your product can't be all things to everyone, it will have weaknesses. To be really useful and appealing to your target market, your product will inevitably turn off, or at least not appeal to, some people outside your target market. The key is to embrace this weakness and show how your target market benefits from it.

For example, are you marketing a software product that is targeted at power users? If so, ordinary users will probably have a hard time using it. The difficulty results from satisfying the complex needs of the power users. That's okay, however, since power users by definition are able to deal with this complexity. You might therefore choose "power" or "sophistication" as the theme to trumpet to these users.

Comments

Michael said…
This sounds like a different phrasing of the "exploit your constraints" line of thinking from Jason Fried's recent ITConversations recording from ETech 2005.

I've been trying exploting constraints a lot recently, and even trying to impose them to better structure my work. It seems to work out quite well: once you cut down the number of posiblities, you can focus on that nice small set and actually get something done.

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

Use Case as a Black Box

Consider the following use case: Purchase Items Actor: Purchaser Precondition: Purchaser types at least thirty words per minute and has a web navigation efficiency rating of at least 40. Postcondition: For the average Purchaser acting at full efficiency, the number of seconds elapsed is no more than 30 + 20 * n, where n is the number of items purchased. The name of the use case represents a functional requirement. What does the product do, or enable the user to do? Purchase items. What are we to make of the preconditions and postconditions? What relationship do they have to the requirements for the product? Answer: the preconditions and postconditions are the nonfunctional requirements attached to the functional requirement . Another way of expressing the nonfunctional requirement would be as an attribute and associated constraint: Usability: For a Purchaser who types at least thirty words per minute and has a web navigation efficiency rating of at least 40, it shall take no

Henry Ford's "Faster Horse" Quote

You may have heard the ( apocryphal ) Henry Ford quote: If I'd asked customers what they wanted, they would have said "a faster horse". Over at the On Product Management blog , Saeed gives his take on this infamous quote. He "hates" it, and gives some compelling reasons. Saeed is spot on in his explanations. Personally, I think the quote is great, but it's a matter of interpretation. The valid point of the quote is not that it's a bad idea to facilitate a conversation with your market to better understand it. The valid points are: You must ask the right questions to get valuable answers. You must interpret the answers thoughtfully - often outside their direct meaning - to glean reliable information. Asking questions is not always the best way to "listen" to your market. (E.g., sometimes pure observational studies are more reliable.) Nonetheless, I find the quote is helpful to combat "armchair product management" in the