As a positioning nut from back through the ages, I'm delighted with the work you're doing. However, I tend to keep it simpler - using the Al Ries/Jack Trout positioning methodology of looking at where I can be #1 in the customer mind. In other words, I see what's in the customer's mind as a series of ladders, and I chose a ladder where I can dominate.
I think, for better or for worse, that ultimately good positioning comes by a) having people understand that there is such a concept, b) having people well-versed in the positioning theory out there (like yours and Al and Laura Ries') and c) sitting with one or two other people and just working it hard, back and forth, until you get the the ideal positioning tagline. In hotly competitive fields, there's always a way to carve out a niche for yourself.
Key, however, is understanding how the mind of the customer works and where you fit into it. Mercedes - luxury; BMW - performance; Volvo - safety; Chevy - value; and so on. These analogs work very well in thinking through how you can win.
And in the end, massive amounts of customer survey/research to get the gleanings. I've found that doing customer research is the single most important factor in getting these insights. It's really hard to be smart in a vacuum.
I've liked the Customer-Centric Methodology. It's a good way to narrow the set of customers that get the most value of a product. It also shows that there is no need put a plenty-of-features product on the market. 1 well-differentiated feature can be enough to find the best positioning.
I'm having a hard time distinguishing the difference between her customer-centric methodology and arbitrary starting point in the section above it.
Wouldn't the customer-centric methodology run into the same problem of other teams being in a holding pattern? In steps 3 and 4 (the value and customers that care), aren't these just hypothesis' until proven correct? You would still have to test the value you think you bring and the customers that resonate with that value prop.
Going through positioning work for my startup now and this is fantastic
Loved this!
I think this is one of the best content pieces I've read from your newsletter. Keep it up! It was really helpful for me :)
As a positioning nut from back through the ages, I'm delighted with the work you're doing. However, I tend to keep it simpler - using the Al Ries/Jack Trout positioning methodology of looking at where I can be #1 in the customer mind. In other words, I see what's in the customer's mind as a series of ladders, and I chose a ladder where I can dominate.
I think, for better or for worse, that ultimately good positioning comes by a) having people understand that there is such a concept, b) having people well-versed in the positioning theory out there (like yours and Al and Laura Ries') and c) sitting with one or two other people and just working it hard, back and forth, until you get the the ideal positioning tagline. In hotly competitive fields, there's always a way to carve out a niche for yourself.
Key, however, is understanding how the mind of the customer works and where you fit into it. Mercedes - luxury; BMW - performance; Volvo - safety; Chevy - value; and so on. These analogs work very well in thinking through how you can win.
And in the end, massive amounts of customer survey/research to get the gleanings. I've found that doing customer research is the single most important factor in getting these insights. It's really hard to be smart in a vacuum.
Clear, detailed, understandable. Thanks!
I've liked the Customer-Centric Methodology. It's a good way to narrow the set of customers that get the most value of a product. It also shows that there is no need put a plenty-of-features product on the market. 1 well-differentiated feature can be enough to find the best positioning.
Mind Blown :)
don't agree with category pioneer as a loser at all
There would be No Amazon if Jeff thought of it that way
I'm having a hard time distinguishing the difference between her customer-centric methodology and arbitrary starting point in the section above it.
Wouldn't the customer-centric methodology run into the same problem of other teams being in a holding pattern? In steps 3 and 4 (the value and customers that care), aren't these just hypothesis' until proven correct? You would still have to test the value you think you bring and the customers that resonate with that value prop.