Afleveringen
-
Weāve all heard the grim statistics: the vast majority of new products fail. Companies pour billions into innovation, yet the results often feel frustratingly unpredictable, more like rolling the dice than executing a sound business strategy. Project post-mortems might blame execution, market timing, or lack of features, but often, the real culprit lies deeper ā a fundamentally flawed approach to innovation itself.
The good news? This high failure rate isn't fate. It's often the result of operating without a coherent, customer-centric strategy. Many so-called "innovation processes" are merely collections of disconnected tactics ā brainstorming sessions, hackathons, feature sprints ā lacking a unifying logic that connects effort to real customer value and market success.
This post explores how to move beyond hope and guesswork. I'll outline how a strategy built on the principles of Jobs-to-be-Done (JTBD) provides the necessary structure for predictable, impactful innovation. I'll cover:
* Why typical approaches fall short of predictability.
* What makes a JTBD approach truly strategic.
* The core pillars of a JTBD strategy that works.
* Actionable steps to start building yours.
Let's stop gambling on growth and start engineering it.
Part 1: Why Predictability Remains Elusive - Common Strategic Gaps
Before building a better strategy, we need to understand why current methods often fail to deliver consistent results. Predictability breaks down when these strategic gaps exist:
Gap 1: Lack of Customer-Centricity (The Right Kind)
Many companies talk about customer-centricity, but they focus on who the customer is (demographics, personas) rather than what the customer is trying to achieve. True customer-centricity means understanding the underlying "Job" the customer is trying to get done ā the progress they are trying to make in a specific circumstance. Without this focus, you're solving for the wrong variables.
Gap 2: Idea-Led Instead of Need-Led
The "cool idea" or the exciting new technology often takes center stage. Teams fall in love with a solution and then try to find a problem it can solve. This inside-out approach is inherently risky. Predictable innovation starts from the outside-in: identifying significant, unmet customer needs first, then developing solutions to address them.
Gap 3: Missing Metrics That Matter
Are you measuring innovation activity or innovation impact? Tracking the number of ideas generated, patents filed, or projects launched tells you nothing about whether you're creating value customers will pay for. A working strategy relies on metrics tied directly to customer progress ā primarily, how well their desired outcomes in getting the Job done are being satisfied.
Gap 4: Misaligned Execution
Even with good intentions, if Product, R&D, Marketing, and Sales aren't operating from the same playbook regarding the customer's Job and desired outcomes, efforts become fragmented. Marketing might emphasize features Product didn't prioritize, or Sales might target customers whose core Job you don't actually serve well. This lack of strategic alignment breeds inefficiency and unpredictable results.
Part 2: What is a JTBD Strategy? Beyond Tactics
So, how does JTBD provide a solution? It's crucial to understand that implementing JTBD isn't just about using specific tools like customer interviews or job maps (though those can be helpful). Itās about adopting a strategic framework.
A JTBD strategy is a company's integrated approach to identifying, prioritizing, and systematically addressing customers' unmet desired outcomes within a specific Job-to-be-Done.
Think of it this way:
* Tactics are individual actions (e.g., conducting a JTBD interview, brainstorming features).
* Strategy is the overarching logic that guides which actions to take, why, and how they connect to achieve a specific goal ā in this case, predictably creating solutions customers will hire.
A JTBD strategy embeds the core logic ā focus on the Job, define success through customer outcomes, find unmet needs ā into the fundamental decision-making processes of the business. It shifts the goal from "launching new things" to "systematically creating customer value," making innovation a predictable engine for growth, not a series of one-off bets.
Part 3: The Pillars of a Working JTBD Strategy
A robust JTBD strategy stands on four essential pillars:
Pillar 1: Deep Job Understanding
Everything starts here. You must clearly define the core functional Job(s) your target customers are trying to get done. This isn't about your product; it's about the customer's objective. What fundamental progress are they trying to make? Defining this accurately sets the context for everything else.
Pillar 2: Rigorous Outcome Discovery
Once the Job is defined, you need to uncover the customer's metrics for success. These are their Desired Outcomes ā measurable, solution-agnostic statements describing how they define successful execution of the Job. Methodologies derived from Outcome-Driven Innovation (ODI) provide a structured process for capturing the complete set of these outcomes (often 50-150). Examples might include "Minimize the time it takes to..." or "Minimize the likelihood of/that..." getting a step in the job done successfully.
Pillar 3: Quantified Opportunity Identification
Knowing the outcomes isn't enough. You need to know where to focus. This pillar involves quantitatively surveying customers to determine the importance they place on each outcome and their current level of satisfaction with existing solutions (including yours and competitors'). The outcomes that are highly important but poorly satisfied represent the most significant, predictable opportunities for innovation and growth.
Pillar 4: Outcome-Driven Value Creation & Go-to-Market
The insights from the first three pillars must drive action. This means:
* Guiding R&D and Product Development: Prioritize features and development efforts that directly address the most underserved desired outcomes.
* Informing Marketing & Sales: Craft messaging that highlights how your solution helps customers achieve their high-priority, unmet outcomes better than alternatives. Align sales conversations around proving value against those specific customer metrics.
When these four pillars are in place and working together, you have a strategic framework that connects deep customer understanding directly to market execution.
Part 4: How to Start Building Your JTBD Strategy
Shifting to a JTBD strategy is a journey, not an overnight switch. Here are practical steps to begin:
Step 1: Define Your Market Around the Job, Not Just Demographics
Start thinking about your addressable market not just as an industry category or a set of personas, but as "the group of customers trying to get this specific Job done." This reframes who your competition is and where value can be created.
Step 2: Commit to Uncovering Desired Outcomes
This is the most critical, foundational step. Invest the time and resources needed for rigorous qualitative research (to discover the outcomes) and quantitative research (to prioritize them). Skipping or short-changing this step undermines the entire strategy. It's the bedrock of predictability.
Step 3: Analyze Your Current Portfolio Through an Outcome Lens
Evaluate your existing products and services. Which specific desired outcomes do they address well? Which do they neglect? Where do competitors outperform you on key outcomes? This analysis reveals immediate threats and opportunities.
Step 4: Prioritize & Align Resources Based on Opportunity
Use the quantitative outcome data (importance vs. satisfaction vs. effort vs. complexity vs. context) to make deliberate strategic choices. Where will you invest your R&D budget? Which features move the needle on critical unmet needs? How will marketing communicate this focused value? Make the opportunities visible and actionable as your guide for resource allocation.
Step 5: Communicate & Iterate
Embed the language of the Job and desired outcomes into your internal conversations, planning processes, and reporting. Make it the shared language of value creation. Regularly monitor outcome satisfaction levels to track progress and identify emerging gaps.
Conclusion: Trading Hope for Predictability
Innovation doesn't have to be a gamble. By shifting from an idea-centric or product-centric approach to a strategy fundamentally grounded in the customer's Job-to-be-Done and their desired outcomes, you can move towards a more predictable, effective innovation engine.
A well-implemented JTBD strategy provides:
* Higher Innovation Success Rates: By targeting validated, unmet needs.
* Stronger Competitive Advantage: By creating value competitors haven't recognized.
* Better Resource Allocation: By focusing investment where it matters most to customers.
* Increased Organizational Alignment: By uniting teams around a clear, shared understanding of customer value.
It requires discipline, investment in understanding the customer deeply, and a willingness to challenge assumptions. But the payoff is moving from simply hoping for growth to strategically engineering it.
What do you think? What's the biggest hurdle you face in making innovation more strategic in your organization? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
P.S. For a visual overview of shifting to a JTBD mindset for strategy, check out my companion video.
If you found this helpful, consider subscribing for more insights on building effective innovation strategies.
If youād like to take action, I would love to help. Hereās are some steps you can take to make that a reality for us:
* Join my community and get access to more content and tools
* Apply for coaching so we can do projects together and build a new business-as-usual with someone who will share the knowledge, and hold you accountable. (I have limited seats so hurry!)
* I do project work as well. Use the coaching link and we can discuss.
Why Me?
Iāve been trained by the best in Outcome-Driven Innovation. Part of that training involved how to understand what the future should look like. As a result, Iāve taken what Iāve learned and begun innovating so I can get you to the outcomes youāre seeking faster, better, and even more predictably. Anyone preaching innovation should be doing the same; regardless of how disruptive itāll be.
How am I doing this?
* Iāve developed a complete toolset that accelerates qualitative research to mere hours instead of weeks or months it used to take. Itās been fine-tuned over the past 2+ years and itās second-to-none (including to humans). That means we can have far more certainty that weāve properly framed your research before you invest in a basket of road apples. They donāt taste good, even with whipped cream on top.
* Iām also working on a completely new concept for prioritizing market dynamics that predict customer needs (and success) without requiring time-consuming and costly surveys with low quality participants. This is far more powerful and cost effective than point-in-time surveys that I know you donāt want to do!
I believe that an innovation consultant should eat their own dog food. Therefore, we must always strive to:
* Get more of the job done for our clients
* Get the job done better for our clients
* Get the job done faster for our clients
* Get the job done with with fewer features for our clients
* Get the job done in a completely different and novel way for our clients
* Get the job done in a less costly manner for our clients
You could be an early tester of the latest developments, but at a minimum take advantage of an approach that is light years ahead of incumbent firms that are still pitching a 30 year old growth strategy process but havenāt grown themselves. šš»Check it out!
All the links you need are a few paragraphs up. Or set up some time to talk ā¦ that link is down below. šš»
Mike Boysen - www.pjtbd.comWhy fail fast when you can succeed the first time?
š Book an appointment: https://pjtbd.com/book-mike
This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit jobstobedone.substack.com/subscribe -
I decided to answer some of the questions I keep getting asked about using simulations and throwing out JTBD surveys. While there's a lot more to the story, this should help you get a better understanding. Markets are dynamic and complex, and a point-in-time survey is something that teams that are in the design-build-GTM mix struggle with as these market forces jumble all of their planning.
YES ā¦ this is being built. Stay tuned.
---
If you're struggling to implement a differentiated approach to market or experience research, my colleagues and I can help. While we can do the research for you (faster, more accurately, and less expensively), we can also help you learn this new approach while integrating it into your business-as-usual. Sound interesting? Click the link below:
https://pjtbd.com/coaching-application
---
Mike Boysen - www.pjtbd.comWhy fail fast when you can succeed the first time?
šØ Join my FREE community for all of my AI Prompts, JTBD Courses and weekly AMA office hours: https://pjtbd.com/join
šØšØ Get all of the latest AI Prompts from my Masterclass for FREE! https://pjtbd.com/access100M
š Book an appointment: https://pjtbd.com/book-mikeš Other free stuff in my Notion database: https://pjtbd.notion.site
This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit jobstobedone.substack.com/subscribe -
Zijn er afleveringen die ontbreken?
-
Welcome to the future of Jobs-to-be-Done (JTBD) quantitative analysis! š In this video, we introduce a groundbreaking approach that replaces traditional survey-based models with dynamic, simulation-driven insights powered by agentic models and system dynamics.
Discover how AI can simulate every possible combination of situational factors and contexts to create rich, predictive personasāgiving you unparalleled insights into customer needs and the factors that drive satisfaction and importance.
Check out my JTBD Masterclass: https://pjtbd.com/mc
Join my FREE JTBD community: https://pjtbd.com/join
Weāll cover:ā The limitations of traditional JTBD analysisā How complexity factors and contexts shape job executionā Building agentic models and system dynamics simulationsā Using AI to predict outcomes and identify emergent complexity factorsā Real-world applications and actionable insights
If youāre an innovator, strategist, or JTBD enthusiast, this video is a must-watch.
š„ Like and Share this video to spread the word about this exciting methodology.š” Interested in getting involved? Contact me directly to explore how we can work together!
š Subscribe for more in-depth discussions on JTBD, innovation strategies, and cutting-edge analysis techniques.
#JTBD #Innovation #QuantitativeAnalysis #SystemDynamics #AI #AgenticModels #CustomerInsights
This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit jobstobedone.substack.com/subscribe -
Thanks for reading Practical Innovation w/ Jobs-to-be-Done! This post is public so feel free to share it.
Why did predictive personalizationāonce hailed as the future of customer experiencesāfail to live up to its promise? In this video, we explore how the over-reliance on data and algorithms missed the mark on delivering the outcomes customers truly wanted.
Check out my JTBD Masterclass: https://mc.zeropivot.us/s/mc-1
Consolidate your tech stack: https://effectivecrm.ai/gohere
Using the Jobs to Be Done (JTBD) framework and Outcome-Driven Innovation (ODI), weāll uncover the real "job" of personalization:
* Making users feel understood and valued.
* Saving time and effort in finding what they need.
* Helping them discover new and exciting options.
* Building trust by respecting their individual preferences.
Weāll dive into the common pitfalls, like the "creepy factor," overfocusing on predictive accuracy, and neglecting customer feedback, to show how personalization can succeed when we prioritize progress over tech-first solutions.
š Key Takeaways:
* Why predictive analytics missed the mark.
* The difference between desired outcomes and solutions.
* How JTBD and ODI frameworks can guide better personalization strategies.
š Donāt forget to like, subscribe, and comment on how you see the future of personalization evolving!
#JTBD #PersonalizationFail #JobsToBeDone #ZeroPivotProblemSolving #CustomerExperience
This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit jobstobedone.substack.com/subscribe -
SUMMARY
Teslaās Jobs-to-Be-Done Masterclass: Innovating Around the Core Job
Tesla is a name synonymous with innovation. Yet, the brilliance of Tesla doesnāt come from inventing carsātheyāve existed for over a century. What sets Tesla apart is its ability to redefine what we expect from personal mobility by focusing on jobs adjacent to the core task of transportation.
When viewed through the lens of Jobs-to-Be-Done (JTBD), Teslaās success becomes a masterclass in understanding customer pain points and innovating around them. They didnāt set out to reinvent the car but instead to transform the experience surrounding it. This strategy didnāt just result in a superior product; it reshaped an industry.
The Real Job to Be Done
When most automakers look at a car, they see a tool to move people from point A to point B. Tesla, however, asked a deeper question: What are the related jobs that people struggle with when using a car?
These jobs included:
* Minimizing operating costs like fuel and maintenance.
* Reducing environmental impact.
* Enhancing the driving experience with seamless technology.
By addressing these jobs, Tesla didnāt just build a car; they created a holistic mobility experience. They targeted frustrations that traditional automakers ignored, transforming them into competitive advantages.
The Powertrain: Simplicity That Solves Problems
At the heart of Teslaās vehicles is the electric powertrain. Unlike traditional combustion engines with hundreds of moving parts, Teslaās motors are simpler, more efficient, and far easier to maintain.
This focus addressed the job of minimizing maintenanceāone of the most dreaded aspects of car ownership. While electric powertrains werenāt a new concept, Tesla refined them to be viable for mass-market vehicles, solving two long-standing issues with electric vehicles: range anxiety and lackluster performance.
Itās not just what Tesla innovated; itās how they executed. By focusing on simplicity and reliability, they delivered more value to customers while lowering long-term ownership costs.
The Battery Breakthrough: A Giant Leap in Energy Storage
Teslaās defining innovation lies in its battery technology. Where competitors relied on small, inefficient packs, Tesla used thousands of cylindrical lithium-ion cells arranged into modular packs.
This clever design addressed two critical customer pain points:
* Range Anxiety: Teslaās batteries extended the range of their vehicles, making EVs practical for everyday use.
* Cost: By leveraging economies of scale through their Gigafactories, Tesla drove down battery production costs, making electric cars competitive with gasoline-powered vehicles.
In a world where most automakers were experimenting with incremental improvements, Tesla went all-in on solving fundamental problems. This relentless focus on customer jobs allowed them to leapfrog competitors stuck in legacy thinking.
Why Not Hydrogen? A Lesson in Prioritization
Teslaās decision to double down on lithium-ion batteries instead of pursuing hydrogen fuel cell technology highlights their strategic genius.
Hydrogen offers faster refueling and greater energy density but comes with steep challenges:
* Infrastructure is sparse, making adoption impractical.
* Producing hydrogen cleanly remains energy-intensive.
* Costs are significantly higher than battery alternatives.
Tesla recognized that while hydrogen might hold promise, it wasnāt ready to solve immediate customer problems at scale. By prioritizing lithium-ion, they could address pressing needsārange and costāwhile positioning themselves as leaders in the EV market.
Software: Teslaās Invisible Edge
Tesla isnāt just a car company; itās a tech company. The seamless integration of software into their vehicles has allowed Tesla to solve jobs traditional automakers didnāt even consider:
* Over-the-air updates reduce the hassle of maintenance visits.
* Autopilot improves safety and convenience.
* Energy optimization tools help drivers extend their range effortlessly.
This focus on software created an entirely new customer experienceāone where the car improves over time, instead of depreciating. Itās an approach so effective that even Teslaās fiercest competitors are still scrambling to catch up.
Milestones That Redefined the Industry
Teslaās story is a timeline of daring decisions that paid off:
* The Roadster proved EVs could be fast and sexy.
* The Model S redefined luxury, with unprecedented range and performance.
* The Gigafactories scaled production to levels no one thought possible.
* The Model 3 brought EVs to the masses, achieving record-breaking sales.
These milestones werenāt just productsāthey were proof points in Teslaās strategy to solve jobs adjacent to transportation. Each step reinforced their commitment to tackling customer pain points better than anyone else.
Lessons for Innovators
Teslaās approach to innovation offers a blueprint for companies across industries:
* Focus on Related Jobs: The most impactful innovations often donāt reinvent the core job. Instead, they solve adjacent problems that competitors overlook.
* Leverage Existing Technologies: Innovation doesnāt require inventing new toolsāit requires using existing tools in smarter ways.
* Integrate Software and Hardware: Seamless integration creates unparalleled customer experiences, turning products into ecosystems.
This isnāt just about cars. Any company can apply these principles to identify opportunities for innovation. By mapping out related jobs and solving them effectively, you can redefine what your industry expects from its products.
A Wild Ride with Tesla
Teslaās journey from niche startup to industry leader is more than an inspiring storyāitās a case study in understanding customer jobs.
When Tesla began, they werenāt even the first to try electric vehicles. But through relentless focus on solving the right problems, they redefined what it means to own a car. Their lesson is clear: to innovate successfully, donāt just look at what your product doesālook at what your customer needs.
Because sometimes, the best way to revolutionize an industry isnāt to change the jobāitās to change how the job gets done.
Mike Boysen - www.pjtbd.comWhy fail fast when you can succeed the first time?Book an appointment: https://pjtbd.com/book-mike
Get the whole customer management thing done on a single platform: https://effectivecrm.ai/gohere
This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit jobstobedone.substack.com/subscribe -
Iām a customer-centric innovator with a long background in customer-facing technology and trained in innovation by the masters of Outcome-Driven Innovation - the only framing that is actionable for innovators, product planners, designers, and marketers.
Follow my blog at https://jobstobedone.substack.com or find ways to contact me below
Mike Boysen - www.pjtbd.comWhy fail fast when you can succeed the first time?Book an appointment: https://pjtbd.com/book-mike
Get the whole customer management thing done on a single platform: https://effectivecrm.ai/gohere
This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit jobstobedone.substack.com/subscribe -
I've used large language models to bring a great deal of precision and consistency to the qualitative phase of #JTBD research. While a slightly different š·š¼šÆ šŗš®š½, or šŗš²ššæš¶š°-šš²š will be produced when running the same inputs multiple times, they are basically consistent in scope. Just slight variations in language.
Humans, on the other hand, introduce a great deal of variability via bias, and are heavily influenced by factors that they don't bother to document for later analysis.
šš ššµš¶š š® š½šæš¼šÆš¹š²šŗ?
Directionally, probably not. But, if you šš²š²šø š½šæš²š°š¶šš¶š¼š» in your research and also demand an audit trail of the thought process, there's nothing better than an LLM at this point in time - as long as you preserve your prompts and inputs.
ā It's orders of magnitude faster
ā It's orders of magnitude more consistent
ā It's orders of magnitude more scalable
ā It's orders of magnitude less expensive
ā It's orders of magnitude less invasive of your daily routine
As a result, you can pivot your thinking and scoping before talking to anyone in the field. How many times has a stakeholder asked you to pivot after qualitative interviews, or worse, after fielding a survey?
Practical Innovation w/ Jobs-to-be-Done is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
No, LLM outputs aren't deterministic like the outputs from code is expected to be, but humans were far less deterministic when executing tasks before we had software or assembly lines. No two people did things exactly the same way. There was always nuance - we called this craftsmanship š.
Nothing's perfect. No one is perfect. Striving for perfection misses the point and potentially wastes resources by overserving an audience that wants to get the job done better, with less friction, cost, and time.
Are you looking for a differentiated approach to market research? One that has more predictable outcomes and can now be executed faster, and cheaper?
If you'd like #AI accelerators that will set you apart - even if you don't use the formal #JTBD approach - you can get them here
How to plan your JTBD research
How to select the right market to study
Educate yourself and your colleagues with the JTBD Strategy Stack - https://community.zeropivot.us/courses/offers/adc27a2e-9e72-4404-97f2-112cc089f437
Fast track your Journey Analysis with this toolkit
Or, feel free to schedule some time to discuss how my partners and I can help you
~MikeB
This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit jobstobedone.substack.com/subscribe -
This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit jobstobedone.substack.com
Before I dive into this potentially divisive topic, I wanted to share this new toolkit Iāve created that I hope will help you understand the key principles of Jobs-to-be-Done faster and easier. It has 99 topics supporting 9 key principles. Itās completely free and I am expanding each of the topics regularly. Itās called the JTBD Strategy Stack. Check it out!
Now, on with the show!
Deep Breath
Today Iām going to talk about something that is common everywhere. But my focus is going to be on Zero Pivot Problem-Solving, powered by Practical Jobs-to-be-Done.
Iām almost to the point where I donāt even want to associate myself with the term Jobs-to-be-Done any longer. Itās become a market of fast-followers - some of whom have made ridiculous claims - who donāt give damn about ruining something. They only care about themselves. It really doesnāt matter to me what they do, or how they do it. What matters to me is constantly getting caught up in the debate about what Jobs-to-be-Done is.
Where it started for me
I was introduced to this concept when I was āin the marketā for a solution that addressed the root cause of unpredictable outcomes in digital transformation (we didnāt call it that then). The requirements that were elicited from workshops and interviews almost never survived the duration of a large implementation. Or if they did, the end users would either not adopt the new way of doing things or would simply use the new tools in ways, and for purposes, that were unintended. Most of the time this meant there was little to no discernable business impact after such a major investment.
Iām telling you this because I want you to understand what I was trying accomplish. I was not selling workshops or canvas development. I was building things and I wanted to make sure I was building the right things, the right way. And I decided at this point that internal stakeholders and their ideas were basically worthless. It doesnāt matter how good the facilitator isā¦although each of those individuals will disagree with me. They can continue to live in their own reality; Iāll live in mine.
Iām not going to diminish the work of Design Thinking teams who step forward into the functional problem-space with their method. They have no options but to do this because there was a vacuum of insights, and the culture has allowed it and promoted it. Itās very much like salespeople who have to develop their own leads because the marketing organization sucks. They should be doing what theyāre good at, closing deals. Designers should be doing what theyāre good at, designing winning concepts based on the work of strategists who develop targeted and precise insights into where the value gaps exist in a market.
This is a simple focus. Letās not overcomplicate it by trying to simplify it further. š
Taking shortcuts to get around the rigor required by a purposeful methodology will not deliver the outcomes that your stakeholders desire. Itās only great for you, because the initiative will fail, or have very little durability. In each case, you get to go on stage again, and again. Quite the business model.
Thatās what you do.
Congratulations!
Now, I want everyone to pay attention to this very, very closely. The folks that have developed shortcutting and derivative works of Jobs-to-be-Done are following a lead. On one hand, there was protective inventor who wouldnāt share the secrets of a rigorous methodology. On the other hand, there was great storyteller who recited an engaging tale over, and over again. It was an unbelievable tale of success. And it was such a simple method that even you could do it.
Letās take a look at this great storyā¦(pay attention to the end)
This is the part thatās going to get me into trouble š
-
The marketing technology landscape is vast and continues to expand each year, leaving marketers overwhelmed by choice and unsure of where to focus their efforts. Rather than seeking out ever more specialized solutions, the industry is on the cusp of the significant evolution that Iāve been predicting, one driven by a focus on outcomes and powered by the transformative capabilities of artificial intelligence (AI).
My name is Mike Boysen, and my goal is to help executive decision-makers get answers faster and less expensively that are highly differentiated and accurate, with less bias and at scale.
That was a mouthful! It was also a promise.
If you're tired of the theater of expensive consulting performed by junior consultants this blog just might be for you.
If you'd like a deeper dive, check out some of the options at the end of this post.
Now, let's get back to the topic of day.
Moving Beyond the Illusion of Specialization
The "State of Martech 2024" report reveals a staggering reality: the Martech landscape encompasses over 14,000 products. This abundance of solutions often creates an illusion of specialization, with many products offering incremental variations on similar functionalities. However, this focus on specialization may not be serving marketers well. Instead of endlessly evaluating and integrating a multitude of specialized tools, marketers are ultimately seeking solutions that deliver specific outcomes: driving revenue, enhancing customer experience, and optimizing campaigns.
The report suggests that a shift towards "composability" is already underway. Composability emphasizes the integration of different solutions within a cohesive framework, allowing marketers to create technology stacks tailored to their unique needs and desired outcomes. This move away from monolithic platforms towards more flexible and interconnected systems aligns with the need for solutions that prioritize results over individual features.
Could composability be the proxy for the āMartech Applianceā Iāve been talking about for years?
Aggregation Platforms: Enabling Seamless Orchestration
The report highlights the emergence of "aggregation platforms" as a critical element in this evolving landscape. These platforms, such as data warehouses, CRMs, and internal communication tools, act as orchestrators, unifying data and workflows from disparate sources within a single interface.
This concept of an aggregation platform is central to achieving the desired obfuscation of the underlying complexities of a marketing technology stack. By abstracting these intricacies, aggregation platforms allow marketers to focus on higher-level strategic planning and execution, leaving the technical orchestration and optimization to the technology itself.
AI: The Catalyst for an Outcome-Driven Future
AI emerges as a transformative force in the report's exploration of the "Fusion of Software and Services". AI is poised to further blur the lines between software and services, with AI agents and models becoming increasingly embedded within solutions, ultimately leading to a more seamless and integrated user experience.
The report suggests that AI will democratize access to advanced functionalities, such as data analysis, workflow automation, and content generation, empowering marketers of all technical backgrounds to leverage these capabilities effectively. This democratization further enables a focus on outcomes, freeing marketers from the constraints of technical execution and allowing them to concentrate on strategy, creativity, and customer understanding.
Moreover, the report highlights AI's potential to deliver hyper-personalized customer experiences and optimize marketing campaigns in real-time. This data-driven, AI-powered approach aligns perfectly with an outcome-oriented mindset, where the technology continuously adapts and optimizes itself to achieve desired results.
But what the report doesnāt cover are the services that are provided on the front-end of revenue development. While data is emphasized, it is through a data science lens (what, where, when, how) and not customer science (why). How long before these service provides develop software solutions that can be plugged into a composable stack?
Grab a Free Copy of the Revenue Development Canvas
Embracing the Future of Martech: A Call to Action
The "State of Martech 2024" report provides compelling evidence that the future of marketing technology lies in embracing outcome-driven solutions powered by AI, even if they donāt really address my premise directly. This evolution will require a shift in mindset, moving away from a fixation on specialized tools towards a more holistic approach that prioritizes integration, orchestration, and, ultimately, the achievement of desired business outcomes.
Marketers who embrace this evolution will be best positioned to navigate the complexities of the ever-expanding Martech landscape. By focusing on the desired outcomes, leveraging the power of composability, and harnessing the transformative potential of AI, marketers can unlock new levels of efficiency, personalization, and, ultimately, business success.
If you'd like to learn more...
* I do offer end-to-end consulting if youāre just not ready to do it all your own. My approach is highly differentiated and more competitively priced than your alternatives. Big Brands: This means you can probably get many more problems solved with your existing budget (I work with a global team of experienced practitioners)
* I also offer coaching, if youād like to know someoneās got your back and you want to do the heavy lifting and get some knowledge transfer, I'm there!
* Get on the waiting list for my new JTBD course and playbook called Zero Pivot Problem Solving. Itās my Masterclass on steroids! Anyone signed up for my original class gets automatic access. You can find the original Masterclass here.
* Finally, I've recently opened up a JTBD community on Discord that is completely FREE!
This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit jobstobedone.substack.com/subscribe -
This is a review of my original article: https://open.substack.com/pub/jobstobedone/p/one-way-to-think-of-experience-and?r=4wccx&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&showWelcomeOnShare=true
This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit jobstobedone.substack.com/subscribe -
This podcast summarizes my second article in the Martech series I wrote in 2020 and talk about how to define markets better for innovation.
Hereās the original article
This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit jobstobedone.substack.com/subscribe -
PAUL GREENBERG was nice enough to host me on his ZDNet blog several years back so I could give my contrarian view to the CRM and Martech world about innovation.
I donāt do it like they do.
Hereās a link to the original article so you can look at some of the visuals, but this podcast will give you the foundation. They probably explain it better than I did.
The CRM industry: A new science for customer experience | ZDNET
This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit jobstobedone.substack.com/subscribe -
Over 4 years ago I wrote a piece, sort of tongue-in-cheek about a variation on Gartnerās Magic Quadrant. I was trying to make a point, and itās quite possible that Google has helped me make it a bit clear. Enjoy!
Link original article:
https://open.substack.com/pub/jobstobedone/p/the-subjective-quadrant-for-digital?r=4wccx&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit jobstobedone.substack.com/subscribe -
This podcast takes a look at one of my recent posts/videos and walks through it in entirely different way. I hope you find this valuable. Itās teaching me more about story-telling.
https://open.substack.com/pub/jobstobedone/p/if-people-cobble-solutions-together?r=4wccx&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit jobstobedone.substack.com/subscribe -
This podcast is a review of an article I wrote over 4 years ago. Itās the first in a series I did on innovation in Martech. While you may not be in the Martech industry, this viewpoint applies equally as well to any industry. Itās industry agnostic and market focused.
I hope you enjoy it. Hereās a link to the original article
This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit jobstobedone.substack.com/subscribe -
Original Post:
Market Approach
PMF View: Emphasizes identifying large existing markets with current needs.
JTBD Counter-argument #1
Defines markets by jobs-to-be-done, not existing product categories.
JTBD fundamentally redefines how we conceptualize markets. Instead of segmenting markets based on product categories or demographic characteristics, JTBD focuses on the underlying job that customers are trying to accomplish. This shift in perspective allows companies to identify opportunities that transcend traditional market boundaries.
For example, instead of seeing a market for "smartphones," JTBD might identify a market for "communicating with others while on the go." And this is only one market that a smartphone platform can enable (e.g., tasks on the go, scheduling on the go, news on the go, music on the go, etc.). This job-centric definition opens up possibilities for innovative solutions that may not fit neatly into existing product categories but directly address the core customer need.
Customer-Centric Market View
All industries drive to zero. I donāt know who said that, but it has stuck with me, because itās true. Entrenched incumbents tend to milk their customer base by adding features for cohorts of lead users. Users that do not represent the vast majority of the market. As a result, these companies add cost and complexity to an existing product that eitherā¦
* severely overserves most of the market
* misses non-traditional competitors who are threatening to make them irrelevant
Itās one thing to say you listen to customers, but are you listening to the right customers? Are you listening to them in the right context? These important questions are answered by JTBD practitioners.
Customer-Centricity has very little to do with the customer. It has everything to do with helping a group of people (customers and non-customers) get a job done completely, effectively, and quickly on a single platform.
Most products only get a small part of that job done.
Stable Innovation Framework
Many, if not most, of you have been a part of corporate environments that are so busy keeping up with their day-to-day that they lose sight of whatās important. You have to chase constant change because the competition (the visible competition) never gives up. Youāre constantly chasing the leaders and/or playing leap frog.
Meanwhile, all of you are failing to see potential threat(s) from non-traditional competitors who are operating in an adjacent step (or mini-job) because you donāt really see that higher context objective of customers. These threats can beā¦
* Scavengers - they see emergent technology that may have been developed by someone else and exploit it. This is what happened to Kodak. They developed digital photography but couldnāt allow their film and processing business to be disrupted.
* Creative Mavericks - these people just think differently about how things could be. They refuse to live within the constraints of current business models and find ways to deliver services in a completely new way that unbinds them from the constraints of incumbents. Air BnB and Uber come to mind. They get the same jobs done as their counterparts, but they address more scenarios (and a broader job context for service provision), and are scalable due to their freedom from investing in expensive physical assets. They simply utilize excess capacity from idle asset owners.
Cross-Industry Insights
Letās talk about non-traditional competitors, shall we? If you are focused on making circular saws, who are your competitors? Other circular saw makers? Sure. But also handsaws, and other contraptions you can use that are less automatic, or more capableā¦such as a miter saw.
While Bosch was able to gain a foothold in the North American circular saw market over 20 years ago using a Jobs-to-be-Done study, there is only so much value you can eek out of these studies once the value gaps around current solutions begin to disappear.
So, what do you do?
The first thing we can do is look at Related Jobs. They are extremely powerful indicators that adjacencies exist around the current job(s) a circular saw enables. This is a first step in elevating your thinking to a higher context.
Take all of these related jobs and attempt to organize them using the 8-9 universal phases of JTBD
* Define
* Locate
* Prepare
* Confirm
* Execute
* Monitor
* Modify
* Resolve (services)
* Conclude
Once youāve done that, you can ask yourself, āSelf, do these represent steps in a higher context job? And how would I describe that job?ā
The answer to those questions will take you to a higher plane of existence. No trip to Tibet needed!
When you go through the exercise of identifying all of the brands playing in those spaces, those are your non-traditional competitors operating in different parts of the higher-context job. Since customers like solutions that get the entire job done on a single platform, you need to ask yourself, ādo I need to stop thinking in terms of my current solution?ā
Effort-Focused Market Sizing
Size Matters
Traditional market-sizing requires that there be a solution, a real or estimated (guess) number of users, and a price that people are willing to pay. In a real scenario, a new entrant (into an existing market) needs to assume they can steal customers, or that they can somehow attract non-consumers (usually a disruption play and not an existing market). Many times thatās at the expense of price since non-consumers are either overwhelmed by features and complexity relative to their need, or they canāt afford the solution given what it can provide them.
Letās focus on the hammer market. How large is that? How many people use hammers, and what is the average price? How often to they need to be replaced? As an innovator, is that how want to assess your potential?
Probably not. Yet, thatās what Venture Capitalists seem to promote since PMF is broadly defined in terms of existing markets (for some strange reason).
A better way to innovate and also calculate potential market size is to rid yourself of product-think. Instead, think in terms of how youāre help a group of people (potential customers) get a job done better than before. Ideally, you take your gaze up a level and look at the related objectives they have and design a solution (or platform) that helps them achieve all of those objectives without having to cobble things together like their doing today.
Looking at the hammer is the wrong lens. Understanding that they might be constructing something (a deck, a closet, a house) is the proper lens because if you can provide a solution to building a house that uses fewer people, requires less expertise, requires fewer tools and resources you just might find a break through innovation.
How many people would value such a platform?
How much would they be willing to pay?
How frequently do they build houses?
Yes, this is a much better way to size your opportunities!
This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit jobstobedone.substack.com/subscribe -
Framing the Discussion
What Iām going to suggest below will be anathema to the hoards of Venture Capitalists out there - young and old. I am certainly an iconoclast on this topic, if not a heretic. I also have a strange sense of humor.
So be it!
However, what Iām going to suggest is something that I believe should be embraced by an industry that is known for itās abysmal track record at predicting breakthrough innovations, while using other peoplesā money to place poorly thought-out bets.
PLEASE! Do not cherry pick some success story from a well-known brand and retrofit it into your 10 point evaluation framework. Letās focus on the 10s of thousands of failures that were also invested in. I'm about to propose a method to drastically reduce the number of poorly thought-out investments. š
Iām not sure how small firms can afford to play this game. Iterative experimentation is a luxury reserved for industry titans. With their established reputations, privileged access to prime opportunities, and deep pockets, these firms can afford to cast a wide net and weather numerous setbacks in their pursuit of success. Can small firms spread their investments that broadly and have similar success?
Doubtful.
The large firms are handed the best opportunities because, maybe, one or more of their partners were successful once and therefore everyone assumes they will be successful again.
By the way ā¦ how do you define success? I often wonder what happens to startups when the founder cashes out. The founderās success is not success.
So, this is for the little guy who wants to build valuable companies and not just cash out and leave the future to someone else. Firms that have a limited amount of funding and resources and can't afford to spread it across 60 potential successes to see which one (if any) hits. Itās simply not a practical approach to investing. For anyone. Ever.
If you disagree, please leave a comment below, with sauce. Iām sure everyone will be interested, including me.
What Am I Suggesting?
Let me get right to the point. Everyone loves to talk about Product-Market Fit like itās some kind of panacea for successful startup investing. If youāre waiting until you reach this milestone to determine your likelihood of success, then you will always have a portfolio of losers to contend with.
Everyone has a portfolio of losers.
Iām going to suggest a better way to gain Potential Market Fit up front, so you can place bets with a solid understanding of market need and size, and can assess your capability to deliver (or the capability of your portfolio company) on the needs you know are faced frequently, are extremely important, and take a crap load of effort to satisfy by potential end users.
Itās one thing to (precisely) understand customer needs (which most of you donāt, sorry) and itās another to understand whether you can gain access to the required capabilities to deliver the required value. Both are necessary to be successful. Both must be evaluated earlier, as opposed to using lagging indicators after a significant investment is consumed.
And another very important consideration is to understand this at a level of abstraction that is both differentiated (the problem is framed, and solved completely differently) and achievable (utilizes long-standing or emergent resources that don't need to be invented), even if it involves concepts that you had never before considered when looking at the elementary school formulas, and rules of thumb, commonly regurgitated in the VC industry, and on social media by VC wannabees.
No, I'm not a VC. š¤£
The Bottom Line
Product launch success rates are as low as ever.
The Martech Landscape is a perfect example of this; where 95%+ of the brands it slaps onto an infographic represent the long tail of purchased licenses. Donāt ask me to explain why these brands were funded. Thatās not my job, thatās your job!
What is fueling this explosive growth? Great ideas? I'm sure that's it! š¤¦š»
But then we have to explain this. How is it that an exponentially growing list of great ideas is competing for a finite number of seat licenses?
What a waste of resources. These funds could have been better spent solving problems that have yet to be solved. Instead, we go with the tech bros or other one-time successes that never understood why they were successful. They had a good idea, the appropriate motivation, the required skills and determine, at the right time. But how do you repeat that?
Moving on...
My job is to demonstrate up-front that a startup goal is achievable, and as it stands today, there is really only one way to do itā¦
ā¦and none of your are doing it.
How was that for a cold start? š
Are you ready for more?
Practical Innovation w/ Jobs-to-be-Done is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Iāll Begin With Some Examples
There are several very common problems that are ignored when investment decisions are made, but I will highlight two of them here:
* The Market Sizing Conundrum
* The Mini-Job Conundrum
Market Sizing
Whether you are a large established brand, or a small startup, a failure to understand the size (and duration) of a market is a critical early mistake. Sure, you know how to take the number of products sold and multiply it times a price.
But thatās an inappropriate way to determine size a market (or frame it).
First, product categories are an unstable way to frame a market - especially one that doesn't exist yet. You can project that a market like this will grow, but we all know they eventually shrink zero. We can be fooled by the fact that when you start at zero, everything beyond that is growth. The problem is that you have no way of knowing when and why thatās going to happen. Youād just be guessing.
Example
The iPod was a brilliant breakthrough that quickly established a $30 billion market size based on the traditional framing and sizing approaches. So, this encouraged Microsoft to blow about $300 million trying to capture their fair share of this market, believing that if they added a few new features and demonstrated integration into the Microsoft ecosystem, there would be a huge payoff.
What actually happened was that the types of content that were being accessed via an iPod was quickly shifting from a file delivery channel to a streaming delivery channel. While Apple enjoyed great success, it was temporary. The iPod (category) platform had run its course.
Apple was ready and waiting with the iPhone (Microsoft offered the Zune - an iPod replacement) , which not only provided a platform for getting thousands of more jobs done, the platform provided a place for streaming content providers to call home (they also called other platforms home, e.g., Android devices, automobile infotainment systems, computers, etc.).
Lessons Learned
* Microsoft didnāt understand the market, how to size it, and what the lifespan was
* They failed to understand the Job-to-be-Done or the higher context job that would replace it ā¦ Apple apparently did.
Mini Jobs
Iāve already established that product categories are the wrong way to frame markets. They are backward looking, and make it impossible to see the future - without a lot guessing. š
Yes, there are people in the JTBD world that get this wrong as well. They fail to recognize that the Job they have identified is really just a step in a higher context job, where other steps are already being enabled by other brands (non-traditional competitors). This makes your job a mini-job.
Piecing this higher-context job together into a map makes it clear which direction future solutions will organically migrate towards. Your job is to see this earlier, and solve the problem much faster than anyone else. Letās take a look at what not to do.
Example
Iām not sure how many years ago it was now, but there was a proliferation of startups that were focused on building parking apps. We all had our smartphones by this time, and when we traveled we needed more than general navigation. We needed to find a parking lot, especially in those urban travel scenarios.
Locating a Parking Lot seemed like a great idea for an app. Whether this was an idea or it was a JTBD framing, people jumped on it. One day, a presentation on Jobs-to-be-Done was given to product managers in San Francisco. The JTBD at the center of the presentation was people getting to a destination (on time).
It mapped out 18 steps, or so, where step 17 was find a parking space. Letās think of this as a mini-job because clearly, a number of startups were funded based on this gap in the market. What was being presented was a different view of the future. In this view, it was a step in a higher-context job.
At this time, Google Maps and Waze were already a thing that addressed this higher-context job. And the presentation demonstrated how Google had features to address almost every step ā¦ except for the parking step.
A young man raised his hand in the Q&A and mentioned that his company was developing a parking app and asked what that step meant for his Startup. The answer?
āSon, when Google adds this feature to their their Maps platform, no one will need you." (not a direct quote, but close)
Not too long after that, this is exactly what Google did. The JTBD model that was presented in this talk had been developed and prioritized in the market years before and predicted everything that subsequently happened around that platform (even the acquisition of Waze).
It was just a matter of time before all the adjacent steps were addressed on a single platform. (which is one of the primary goals of JTBD)
Lessons Learned
* Understand that you may be defining your JTBD too narrowly (or viewing the market through a solution)
* Also understand that if you donāt frame the market as a JTBD, you would have no way of knowing this in advance.
Letās move on to what should change in the world of Venture Capital and the concept of PMF
Letās Do a Comparison
Iām going to compare traditional Product-Market Fit (PMF) concepts with the Jobs-to-be-Done (JTBD) framework, particularly the Outcome-Driven Innovation (ODI) variation - although my version is substantially adapted and modified to work better, faster, and far less expensively; which is why Iām proposing it.
Vetting tools can now be developed so inexpensively that if you do not develop them to assess potential investments, your competitors will.
We'll explore how the JTBD's approach to "Potential Market Fit" (also PMF) can predict market success before significant resources are invested, addressing each point about traditional PMF from a JTBD perspective.
Key Concept: JTBD Market Definition
In JTBD, markets are defined differently from traditional approaches. Instead of demographic or product-based definitions, JTBD defines markets based on the "job" end users or beneficiaries are trying to get done. This definition supports a more stable innovation perspective over time, as jobs tend to remain consistent even as technologies and solutions evolve.
Comparison Points
1. Market Approach
PMF View: Emphasizes identifying large existing markets with current needs.
JTBD Counter-argument:
Defines markets by jobs-to-be-done, not existing product categories.
JTBD fundamentally redefines how we conceptualize markets. Instead of segmenting markets based on product categories or demographic characteristics, JTBD focuses on the underlying job that customers are trying to accomplish. This shift in perspective allows companies to identify opportunities that transcend traditional market boundaries.
For example, instead of seeing a market for "smartphones," JTBD might identify a market for "communicating with others while on the go." And this is only one market that a smartphone platform can enable (e.g., tasks on the go, scheduling on the go, news on the go, music on the go, etc.). This job-centric definition opens up possibilities for innovative solutions that may not fit neatly into existing product categories but directly address the core customer need.
Allows identification of unmet or underserved needs before product development.
By focusing on jobs-to-be-done and their associated success measures, JTBD enables companies to systematically uncover needs that current solutions aren't adequately addressing. This process doesn't require the existence of a product; instead, it involves deeply understanding the job and mapping out all the success measures customers strive to satisfy when getting that job done.
Companies can then assess how well existing solutions satisfy these outcomes, revealing gaps and opportunities. This approach allows for a more precise identification of market needs before any resources are invested in product development, significantly reducing the risk of creating a product that doesn't fit the market.
Can uncover niche opportunities or create new markets by focusing on underserved jobs.
The JTBD approach excels at revealing overlooked or underappreciated customer needs. By breaking down jobs into detailed success measures and assessing their importance and current effort levels, companies can identify niche segments where customer needs are poorly served.
These niches might be too small or too specific to be apparent in traditional market analyses, but they can offer significant opportunities for targeted innovation.
Moreover, by addressing jobs in entirely new ways, companies can potentially create entirely new markets. For instance, the job of "sharing moments with friends" led to the creation of social media platforms, an industry that didn't exist before but now represents billions in value.
Provides a more stable basis for innovation, as jobs remain consistent over time.
One of the most powerful aspects of JTBD is its focus on jobs that remain relatively stable over long periods, even as technologies and solutions evolve. While products and features may become obsolete, the fundamental jobs customers are trying to get done tend to endure.
For example, the job of "preserving memories" has existed for centuries, even as the solutions have evolved from paintings to photographs to digital albums. By anchoring innovation efforts to these enduring jobs, companies can develop long-term strategies that remain relevant despite technological changes.
This stability allows for more consistent and focused innovation efforts, reducing the risk of being blindsided by market shifts or technological disruptions.
2. Customer Understanding
PMF View: Advocates understanding target audience through interviews about current experiences.
JTBD Counter-argument:
Focuses on underlying jobs customers are trying to accomplish, not just current solutions.
JTBD shifts the focus of customer research from current products or features to the fundamental goals customers are trying to achieve. This approach involves in-depth exploration of why customers use certain products or services, uncovering the higher-level objectives driving their behavior.
For instance, instead of asking customers about their satisfaction with a particular lawn mower, JTBD would explore the broader job of "maintaining an attractive yard." This shift in focus allows companies to understand customer motivations at a more insightful level, providing insights that aren't tied to any specific solution and thus opening up more innovative possibilities for addressing customer needs.
Note: JTBD is also quite handy at evaluating processes and journeys so even a lawn mower manufacture that doesnāt currently express interest in break through innovations can leverage it for an advantage over other lawn mower manufacturers.
Tired of doing the same customer journey workshops over and over again, and never seeing the desired long-term results? I have a solution for you. #jtbd
This is 100% free. However, it does require you to rewire your brains š¤Æ
Reveals opportunities customers might not articulate when discussing existing products.
Traditional market research often limits customer feedback to the context of existing products or known solution categories. In contrast, JTBD's focus on jobs and success measures allows customers to express needs and desires they might not have considered in the context of current solutions.
By asking about the broader job and all its associated success measures, JTBD can uncover latent needs or frustrations that customers have learned to tolerate or work around. These insights can lead to breakthrough innovations that address problems customers didn't even realize could be solved differently, potentially leading to products with much stronger market fit.
Enables prediction of Potential Market Fit (PMF) for innovative solutions by focusing on desired outcomes.
By prioritizing customer success measures, JTBD provides a framework for predicting the potential success of new solutions before they're developed. Companies can quantify the importance of various outcomes to end user, buyers, and beneficiaries, and assess how well current solutions satisfy these metrics.
This data-driven approach allows for the identification of high-importance, high-effort outcomes, which represent the most promising opportunities for innovation. By developing solutions that directly address these underserved outcomes, companies can predict with greater accuracy which innovations are likely to achieve strong market fit, even if the solution itself is radically different from existing offerings.
3. Measurement Approach
PMF View: Uses post-product surveys like Sean Ellis's PMF survey.
JTBD Counter-argument:
Quantifies importance and effort levels of specific outcomes before product development.
JTBD, particularly adapted from Outcome-Driven Innovation (ODI) universe (where we actually measure sh*t), provides a systematic method for measuring the market potential of ideas before any product development occurs. This involves surveying customers (or highly structured interviews) to rate the importance of various success measures associated with a job, as well as the current effort required to achieve these outcomes.
By quantifying these factors, companies can create a clear, data-driven picture of which aspects of a job are most critical to potential customers and which are currently underserved (it will also tell you where solutions are over-delivering). This quantitative approach allows for more objective decision-making about where to focus innovation efforts, reducing reliance on gut feelings or biased interpretations of qualitative data.
Identifies and prioritizes underserved outcomes to predict Potential Market Fit.
Using the quantified importance and effort data, JTBD practitioners can calculate an "opportunity score" - or better, bottom-up ranking - for each respondent and metric. Success measures with high importance but also high effort (or low satisfaction if you prefer) represent the biggest opportunities for innovation. By prioritizing these underserved outcomes, companies can focus their development efforts on addressing the most pressing customer needs.
This targeted approach increases the likelihood of creating a product with strong market fit, as it directly addresses the areas where customers are most dissatisfied with current solutions. The ability to prioritize opportunities in this way allows companies to allocate resources more effectively and increase their chances of market success.
Reduces risk by assessing market potential without building a product first.
One of the most significant advantages of the JTBD approach is its ability to evaluate market potential without the need for a functional product or even a prototype. By focusing on jobs and outcomes rather than specific solutions, companies can gauge market interest and potential fit before investing heavily in product development.
This approach significantly reduces the risk of wasting resources on products that don't meet market needs. It allows companies to iterate on concepts and value propositions based on solid market data, refining their ideas before committing to full-scale development. This risk reduction is particularly valuable for startups and new product initiatives, where resources are often limited and the cost of failure can be high.
4. Success Metrics
PMF View: Tracks post-launch metrics like user acquisition, retention, and revenue growth.
JTBD Counter-argument:
Predicts potential for key metrics before product development.
The JTBD framework, particularly when adapted from the aging Outcome-Driven Innovation (ODI) variation, provides a powerful predictive tool for key business metrics before a product is even developed. By thoroughly analyzing the job-to-be-done and quantifying the importance and effort levels of various outcomes, companies can estimate the potential impact of addressing underserved needs. This approach allows for informed projections of user adoption rates, customer satisfaction levels, and even potential market share.
For instance, if a large portion of the market considers a particular outcome highly important but is very unsatisfied (or high levels of effort) with current solutions, addressing this need effectively (increase in perceived value) could lead to rapid adoption and high satisfaction (or effort reduction) rates. This predictive capability enables companies and investors to make more informed decisions about which opportunities to pursue and how to allocate resources, significantly reducing the risk associated with new product development.
Estimates user acquisition, retention, and value creation potential based on outcome importance and satisfaction levels.
JTBD provides a framework for estimating key business metrics by leveraging the quantified data on outcome importance and effort (or traditionally satisfaction). For user acquisition, the number of people who rate an outcome as highly important but are currently unsatisfied, or currently expend a great deal of effort, can indicate the potential size of the early adopter market. Combining this with Willingness to Pay and frequency information about getting the job done is also a critical factor in market sizing.
* Retention can be estimated by considering how comprehensively a proposed solution addresses the full set of important outcomes associated with a job ā the more outcomes addressed, the higher the potential for strong retention.
* Value creation potential can be assessed by examining the gap between importance and effort across all success measures.
* Larger gaps suggest greater potential for value creation, as customers are likely to be willing to pay more for solutions that significantly improve their ability to achieve important, underserved outcomes.
By basing these estimates on concrete data about customer needs, JTBD provides a more reliable foundation for projecting business success than traditional market research methods.
Guides product development and go-to-market strategies proactively.
The insights gained from a JTBD analysis can profoundly shape both product development and go-to-market strategies. On the product development side, understanding the full spectrum of success measures associated with a job allows teams to prioritize features and capabilities that address the most important and underserved needs. This focused approach can lead to more streamlined development cycles and products that resonate more strongly with target customers.
For go-to-market strategies, JTBD insights can inform messaging and positioning by highlighting the specific outcomes that matter most to customers. Marketing efforts can be tailored to emphasize how the product helps customers achieve these critical outcomes, potentially leading to more effective and efficient customer acquisition.
Additionally, understanding the job-to-be-done can guide decisions about distribution channels, pricing strategies, and customer support models, ensuring that the entire customer experience is aligned with helping users get their job done more effectively.
5. Development Process
PMF View: Emphasizes post-launch iterations based on market feedback.
JTBD Counter-argument:
Front-loads the iteration process through thorough job and outcome analysis.
JTBD fundamentally shifts the product development process by emphasizing extensive upfront research and analysis of customer jobs and desired outcomes. This approach contrasts with traditional methods that often rely on rapid prototyping and iterative testing of product concepts.
By investing time and resources in thoroughly understanding the job-to-be-done before any product development begins, companies can significantly reduce the number of iterations required to achieve market fit. This front-loaded process involves comprehensive customer interviews, quantitative surveys to assess outcome importance and satisfaction, and detailed analysis of the competitive landscape ā all through the lens of the job-to-be-done.
The resulting insights provide a clear roadmap for innovation, allowing development teams to make more informed decisions from the outset and reducing the likelihood of pursuing unproductive directions.
Minimizes need for major pivots by aligning product closely with job-to-be-done before development.
One of the key advantages of the JTBD approach is its ability to minimize the need for major pivots during the product development process. By gaining a deep understanding of the job customers are trying to get done and the outcomes they're seeking, companies can align their product concepts much more closely with actual market needs from the very beginning. This alignment reduces the risk of developing features or capabilities that don't resonate with potential customers, which often necessitate significant pivots later in the development cycle.
Instead, the JTBD approach allows for more nuanced and targeted iterations, focusing on refining and optimizing a product that is already fundamentally aligned with customer needs. This can lead to faster time-to-market and more efficient use of development resources, as teams spend less time backtracking or completely rethinking their approach.
Provides a stable foundation for product development, potentially reducing time-to-market and costs.
The comprehensive understanding of customer needs provided by JTBD creates a stable foundation for the entire product development process. This stability comes from anchoring development decisions in enduring customer jobs rather than fleeting preferences or technologies.
With a clear, prioritized list of customer outcomes to address, development teams can work more efficiently, focusing their efforts on the features and capabilities that will deliver the most value to customers. This focused approach can significantly reduce time-to-market by eliminating much of the guesswork and misdirected effort that often plagues product development.
Additionally, by reducing the need for major pivots and minimizing the development of unnecessary features, JTBD can lead to substantial cost savings throughout the development process. The result is a more streamlined, efficient path to creating products that have a higher likelihood of achieving strong market fit.
"Failing Fast is for people who failed statistics. The odds of success are the same every time" ~Ulwick
6. Launch Perspective
PMF View: Acknowledges that product launch doesn't automatically signify PMF.
JTBD Counter-argument:
Establishes Potential Market Fit through job and outcome analysis before launch.
JTBD's approach to establishing Potential Market Fit fundamentally differs from traditional PMF methods by focusing on pre-launch analysis and prediction. Through rigorous job and outcome analysis, companies can gain a deep understanding of customer needs and market opportunities before investing heavily in product development or launch preparations.
This analysis involves identifying the core job customers are trying to get done, breaking it down into specific success measures, and quantifying the importance and current effort (satisfaction) levels for each outcome. By doing so, companies can identify underserved areas of the market and assess the potential impact of addressing these needs.
This data-driven approach allows for a more accurate prediction of how well a proposed solution will fit the market, providing a solid foundation for launch decisions and strategies.
Increases likelihood of success at launch by aligning product closely with market needs.
By using JTBD to establish Potential Market Fit before launch, companies significantly increase their chances of success when the product does go to market. This increased likelihood of success stems from the close alignment between the product's capabilities and the actual needs of the target market.
Rather than launching a product and hoping it resonates with customers, companies using JTBD launch with a clear understanding of which customer needs they're addressing and why these needs are important. This alignment allows for more targeted marketing messages, more effective sales strategies, and potentially faster adoption rates.
Additionally, because the product is designed to address specific, validated customer needs, it's more likely to deliver value from day one, leading to higher customer satisfaction and potentially stronger word-of-mouth promotion.
Reduces risk of building products that don't meet market needs.
One of the most significant benefits of the JTBD approach is its ability to reduce the risk of developing and launching products that fail to meet market needs. By focusing on jobs and outcomes rather than specific product features or technologies, JTBD helps companies avoid the common pitfall of creating solutions in search of a problem.
The comprehensive analysis of customer needs and market opportunities that precedes product development ensures that resources are invested in addressing real, validated market needs. This approach significantly reduces the risk of launching products that customers don't want or need, which can lead to costly failures and wasted resources.
Instead, JTBD increases the odds of launching products that deliver meaningful value to customers, enhancing the company's chances of market success and providing a stronger return on investment.
7. Growth Interpretation
PMF View: Recognizes that rapid growth doesn't always indicate sustainable PMF.
JTBD Counter-argument:
Focuses on core jobs and outcomes to predict sustainable Potential Market Fit.
The JTBD framework provides a more nuanced and potentially more reliable approach to interpreting growth than traditional PMF methods. Instead of focusing solely on short-term growth metrics, JTBD emphasizes understanding the core jobs customers are trying to accomplish and the outcomes they seek.
This focus allows companies to predict sustainable Potential Market Fit by aligning their products with enduring customer needs rather than temporary trends or artificial growth drivers.
By thoroughly analyzing these jobs and outcomes, companies can identify which aspects of their product truly resonate with customers' fundamental needs. This understanding helps differentiate between growth that stems from addressing core customer jobs effectively (which is likely to be sustainable) and growth driven by factors like aggressive marketing or temporary market conditions (which may not be sustainable in the long term).
Helps ensure product development and marketing align with genuine, long-term customer needs.
JTBD's emphasis on core jobs and outcomes provides a stable foundation for both product development and marketing efforts. In product development, this approach ensures that features and improvements are prioritized based on their ability to help customers achieve important outcomes more effectively.
Rather than chasing fleeting market trends or competitor features, development teams can focus on innovations that directly address underserved aspects of the customer's job-to-be-done.
Similarly, in marketing, JTBD insights allow for messaging and positioning that speaks directly to customers' fundamental needs and motivations. This alignment between product capabilities, marketing messages, and customer needs creates a powerful synergy that can drive more sustainable growth. It helps attract customers who are genuinely served by the product, leading to higher satisfaction, better retention, and more organic growth through positive word-of-mouth.
Avoids chasing short-term growth at the expense of sustainable market fit.
One of the key advantages of the JTBD approach in growth interpretation is its ability to help companies avoid the pitfall of prioritizing short-term growth over long-term sustainability. In the traditional PMF model, there's often pressure to demonstrate rapid growth, which can lead to strategies that boost numbers quickly but don't necessarily build a stable customer base.
These might include unsustainable discount strategies, over-aggressive marketing spend, or adding flashy but ultimately unnecessary features.
JTBD, on the other hand, encourages a more measured approach. By focusing on how well the product helps customers accomplish their jobs and achieve desired outcomes, companies can assess whether their growth is built on a solid foundation of customer value.
This perspective helps leaders make more balanced decisions, potentially foregoing some short-term growth opportunities in favor of building a product and market position that can sustain growth over the long term.
8. Market Dynamics
PMF View: Sees PMF as requiring ongoing adaptation to market shifts.
JTBD Counter-argument:
Provides a more stable framework for ongoing market analysis.
JTBD offers a uniquely stable framework for analyzing market dynamics over time. Unlike traditional market segmentation methods that often rely on demographic data or product categories ā which can shift rapidly ā JTBD focuses on the fundamental jobs customers are trying to get done.
These jobs tend to be much more stable over time, even as the means of accomplishing them evolve with technology and societal changes. For example, the job of "staying connected with loved ones" has remained constant for centuries, even as the solutions have evolved from letters to phone calls to video chats.
This stability in the underlying jobs provides a consistent lens through which to view market changes. It allows companies to track how well different solutions are serving these enduring needs over time, providing a more meaningful and actionable view of market dynamics than simply tracking product sales or market share.
Focuses on enduring jobs-to-be-done, which change less frequently than specific solutions.
One of the most powerful aspects of JTBD in understanding market dynamics is its focus on jobs that remain relatively constant over long periods. While specific products or technologies may come and go, the underlying jobs customers need to get done tend to persist. This focus on enduring jobs provides a more reliable foundation for long-term strategy and innovation. It allows companies to anticipate market shifts by understanding how new technologies or solutions might better address these persistent jobs.
For instance, a company focused on the job of "capturing and sharing memories" would be better positioned to navigate the shift from film photography to digital and then to smartphone cameras and social media sharing.
By keeping the focus on the job rather than any specific solution, companies can remain agile and responsive to technological changes while maintaining a consistent strategic direction.
Enables maintenance of Potential Market Fit by continually reassessing outcome importance and satisfaction.
JTBD provides a framework for maintaining Potential Market Fit over time through continuous reassessment of customer needs. This involves regularly measuring the importance of various outcomes associated with a job and how well current solutions (including the company's own products) satisfy these success measures.
By tracking these metrics over time, companies can identify shifts in customer priorities or areas where satisfaction is declining. This ongoing assessment allows for proactive adjustments to products or strategies to maintain strong market fit.
For example, if certain outcomes become more important to customers over time, the company can prioritize improvements in these areas. Similarly, if satisfaction with certain outcomes starts to decline (perhaps due to new competitive offerings), the company can focus innovation efforts on these areas to maintain their market position.
Anticipates shifts in customer needs before they manifest in market data.
One of the most valuable aspects of JTBD in navigating market dynamics is its potential to anticipate shifts in customer needs before they become apparent in traditional market data. By maintaining a deep understanding of the job customers are trying to get done and regularly assessing the full spectrum of associated outcomes, companies can often detect subtle shifts in customer priorities or emerging unmet needs before they significantly impact purchasing behavior.
This early warning system allows companies to be proactive rather than reactive in their approach to market changes. For instance, a company might notice increasing importance ratings for outcomes related to privacy or data security before these concerns translate into changes in purchasing patterns. This foresight enables companies to get ahead of market trends, potentially developing solutions to emerging needs before competitors even recognize the shift is occurring.
The JTBD framework offers a proactive and predictive approach to establishing Potential Market Fit. By defining markets based on jobs-to-be-done and focusing on outcomes rather than existing products or traditional market segments, JTBD allows for:
* More informed decisions before significant resource investment. Simple and affordable market models can be pre-baked for quick deal vetting and/or redirection.
* Identification of innovative solutions / business models that may create new markets.
* Reduced risk in product development and marketing.
* A higher likelihood of sustainable success through alignment with enduring customer jobs.
This approach provides a stable foundation for innovation and vetting investments into founder-proclaimed innovations while still accommodating the need for ongoing market analysis and product refinement.
To Founders: We all have ideas. Yours are no better than anyone else's if you're just guessing. It takes more than a set of ārules of thumbā to validate an idea. Open your minds to a far more predictable approach. We've made it faster, less expensive, and generally more accessible. You can succeed, and succeed again.
To Venture Capitalists: You've got it made. No sense upsetting the apple cart, right? š°š°Just kidding! Or am I? š
What I'm doing to make this more accessible
Jobs-to-be-Done, done right, is not a workshop or a handful of customer interviews. It is a rigorous research methodology that has traditionally taken months, sometimes 6 months, to complete for a single, tightly focused study. I realized early on that clients Iāve worked with are competing for growth and they want answers nowā¦not 6 months from now. And it doesnāt matter the size of the company, or the industry.
They also want answers that donāt cost as much. Traditional strategy firms are constantly under downward pricing pressure. Why? Because itās becoming more and more obvious that the differentiators between them are limited to ā¦
* a prettier PowerPoint deck
* more energy in their presentations
* stronger personalities
* better network
As a systems thinker, Iāve long wanted to make this process accessible to companies that donāt have Fortune 500 budgets. Within the past two years, Iāve been able to eliminate well over 50% of the time and cost required to get this work done, and Iām taking steps to reduce the time and cost even more with my global network of collaborators.
At the same time, I can craft more consistent and scalable models than the old-school practitioners. Additionally, Iāve weeded out 99% of the bias that they introduce - which may have turned you off in the past. Yes, thatās actually a thing.
We talk about Jobs, Steps, Success Metrics, Situational Factors, Financial Metrics and more. These make up the model that we prioritize in order to gain the forward-looking insights we need. This model building process can now be done in hours, instead of 6-8 weeks. This leaves time to iterate when necessary, whereas before you had to get it right the first time - or you risked having to reinvest the time, and doubling or tripling your budget!
This approach is scalable for both your investment decision-making process, as well as industry and sector focus.
I know many of you have heard of JTBD. But youāve heard the lite version of it which is rooted in marketing, not front-end of innovation. The lite version is 100% lagging indicator theater, and 0% forward-looking systems thinking. Iād like an opportunity to expose you to a different way and would enjoy talking to anyone that is interested in helping to propel this approach forward.
It could be your differentiator, especially if your a smaller firm that struggles to get it right with limited funds to invest.
If youāre with a larger firm, wouldnāt it be nice to have 8 hits out of 10 ā¦ instead of 1 hit (maybe) out of 60?
If you'd like to learn more...
* I do offer end-to-end consulting if youāre just not ready to do it all your own. Iām 20x faster and at least 10x cheaper than your alternatives. Big Brands: This means you can get many more problems solved with your existing budget (I work with a global team of experienced practitioners)
* I also offer coaching, if youād like to know someoneās got your back and you want to do the heavy lifting and get some knowledge transfer, I'm there!
* Iāve also offered the Ultimate JTDB Masterclass where you can find an evolving set of GenAI prompts intertwined with an expanding and much deeper look at executing these projects from end to end yourself.
* Finally, I've recently opened up a JTBD community that is completely FREE!
www.pjtbd.com | [email protected]
This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit jobstobedone.substack.com/subscribe -
Let me know what you think of this format. So much easier to produce frequently to get thoughts out of my head, that you might find interesting.
Practical Innovation w/ Jobs-to-be-Done is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
If you'd like to learn more...
* I do offer end-to-end consulting if youāre just not ready to do it all your own. Iām 20x faster and at least 10x cheaper than your alternatives. Big Brands: This means you can get many more problems solved with your existing budget (I work with a global team of experienced practitioners)
* I also offer coaching, if youād like to know someoneās got your back and you want to do the heavy lifting and get some knowledge transfer, I'm there!
* I can help you get your qualitative research done in 2 days for mere budget scraps.
* Iāve also got an academy where you can find a number of options for a do-it-yourself experience. This portfolio of AI prompts eliminates the pain of learning how to perform proper qualitative JTBD research.
* Finally, I've recently opened up a JTBD community that is completely FREE! It's still early days and it's where I work with clients - in private spaces - and where I hang out to answer questions or just blather on. I hope you'll join us! There will be more and more free stuff, and there will also be some premium stuff eventually. I wonder what that will be?
This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit jobstobedone.substack.com/subscribe -
My name is Mike, and my goal is to help all of you achieve your innovation research outcomes faster, less expensively, with less bias, and fewer assumptions. The obvious next step is giving you a way to sort through strategic options so you can accelerate into experiments quickly, cheaply, easily and productively. This blog documents many of the thought exercises I go through as I continually strive to take existing knowledge and emerging technology and blend them together to address our unmet needs.
If you want a deeper dive, here are a few options:
* My courses and AI prompting technology
* My Community (free)
Note: Paid subscribers get this a week early. Everyone else will get an email when it releases to the world.
For the āToo Long; Didnāt Readā Folks š¤«
My approach to using AI - in some cases - requires that we generate a quantity of outputs that is not necessarily conducive to survey construction. It just makes them too long.
Not too long ago I published an article and video (Blogcast) that demonstrated an approach you can use - after the fact - to shrink those lists down to a level that you can actually use.
The approach requires a review of other factors in the model - such as situational factors and contexts, in combination with stakeholder collaboration - to filter the list down to only those metrics that are relevant to a subset of those factors. It explained the reasoning for both inclusion and exclusion in the output. Still useful, but ā¦
There is now a better way. In order to emulate what really happens when humans synthesize a large set of metrics, I decided to
This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit jobstobedone.substack.com/subscribe -
As I think about all of the Outcome-Driven Innovation (ODI) surveys Iāve seen, I donāt believe Iāve ever seen the solution captured specifically for each step in the map. Generally there is a question about which products are used in a āSelect all that Applyā format. This is a Job-level capture, so it doesnāt address the fact that a single job performer might use different tools at each step (not to mention the fact that a higher-context job might actually have different job performer at each step, more on that in a separate blog). This approach really doesnāt tell us what we need to know. I always found this odd becauseā¦
* ā¦we always talk about people cobbling solutions together to get the job done, so we know there should be multiple solutions - whether they be products, services, do-it-yourself, or all of the above.
* ā¦it didnāt allow us to determine at which step our clientās solution was being used, and / or where competing brands were being used.
Weird, isnāt it?
We say one thing, and then we do another.
In fact, if we were to implement a step-wise approach to understanding which methods | brands | products | or services were being used, weād need to determine in advance, which brands we want to focus on so we can screen-in and screen-out our respondents to we have better control over our budget.
Is this possible? Is it too much work?
Iāve been thinking about this and wonder if it doesnāt make more sense to identify what brands are being used for each step, regardless of how much extra research work is involved. Iām starting to believe that growth strategy studies fall dramatically short if this work isnāt done.
Depending up on the level of abstraction, we will see brands, whether theyāre traditional or non-traditional competitors, occupying - or dominating - adjacent steps in a job map. It might not be as prevalent in the world of journey analysis when weāre focused on consumption steps related to a particular brand, such as a train ride from point A to point B.
However, if the customer journey is actually longer than the train ride - which most are because weāre not talking about company pathways here - then weāre failing to see the entire journey from the customersā perspective, and therefore failing to find ways to help get their entire job done on a single platform, or with a single brand. Weāre also not able to evaluate our non-traditional competitors against a common set of performance criteria.
That would include other similar solutions competing at the same step, in basically the same way. And it could include services that are offered by a provider who has found a way to solve a problem for customers that spans brands and industries.
One example would be Amazon shopping which negates the need to set up your own shopping website, or hire a dedicated eCommerce platform - like Shopify - for those businesses that donāt want to, or canāt handle all of the complexities that would be with involved managing these activities and/or want access to a larger audience that your product might be recommended to.
Do you really want to limit journey analysis in a way that ignores opportunities to leverage capabilities across the broader job-to-be-done?
Maybe you do.
So letās think about something as simple as cutting your lawn. If we were going to study this, we would need to assume that there is no lawn maintenance service yet (because this has been a thing for many decades).
So, weāre probably trying to understand a higher context job to be done. In other words, if weāre a lawn mower manufacturer, the job our product is focused on (cutting the lawn) is probably a single step in a higher-context job of maintaining a lawn or even maintaining a front yard (which may not have a lawn at all).
Sure we could simply be trying to improve an existing service solution, but thatās a limited view and our ability to identify hidden value gaps will shrink dramatically over time. If our goal is to find growth pathways, we need to abstract our thinking away from current solutions
I know, that makes you uncomfortableā¦your boss probably wants you to do something productive next week.
So the first step is to make sure weāre not locked into a job definition that represents a very mature market. We need to elevate our view of the market from
home owners cutting their front lawn
* Determine the desired lawn height - The ability to decide on the optimal grass length that meets the aesthetic and health requirements of the lawn.
* Locate the lawn mower and fuel - The ability to find and gather the lawn mower and ensure there is enough fuel for the task.
* Prepare the lawn mower for use - The ability to check the lawn mower's condition, such as the sharpness of the blade, and fill it with fuel if necessary.
* Select the mowing pattern - The ability to decide on the pattern or direction in which to mow the lawn for optimal appearance and health of the grass.
* Start the lawn mower - The ability to safely turn on the lawn mower, readying it for the task at hand.
* Mow the lawn - The ability to operate the lawn mower to cut the grass to the desired height, following the selected pattern.
* Monitor the lawn mower's performance - The ability to keep an eye on the lawn mower's functionality, ensuring it operates efficiently and the grass is being cut evenly.
* Refill fuel if necessary - The ability to stop and refill the lawn mower with fuel if it runs out during the task.
* Adjust mowing pattern as needed - The ability to change the mowing direction or pattern based on obstacles or uneven growth patterns encountered.
* Inspect the lawn for missed spots - The ability to check the lawn after mowing to ensure no areas were missed and the desired height is uniform across the lawn.
to
home owners that are maintaining their front yard
In this map, there could be an existing model for yard maintenance, or not. The concept of hiring a service does not require a service to be present, it just needs to be measured to see whether customers struggle in ways a service could addressā¦and to what degree.
* Evaluate the yard's maintenance needs - The ability to assess the current state of the yard, identifying specific areas that require attention, such as mowing, landscaping, or addressing pest issues.
* Decide between DIY maintenance or hiring a service - The ability to weigh the pros and cons of personal effort versus professional services, considering factors like time, cost, and skill level.
* Research and select a yard maintenance service if hiring - The ability to find and choose a professional service that aligns with the homeowner's maintenance needs and budget, if the decision is to hire.
* Schedule a service appointment if hiring - The ability to arrange a convenient time for the maintenance service to visit and perform the necessary tasks, applicable only if the service route is chosen.
* Locate gardening tools and supplies if DIY - The ability to find and gather necessary tools and materials, such as lawn mowers, rakes, fertilizer, and seeds, if opting for DIY.
* Prepare the yard for service or DIY maintenance - The ability to clear the yard of any obstacles or personal items that might hinder the maintenance process, regardless of the chosen maintenance method.
* Communicate specific needs to the service provider if hiring - The ability to convey particular concerns or instructions to the professionals, ensuring customized care of the yard, applicable only if the service route is chosen.
* Execute yard maintenance activities if DIY - The ability to carry out the planned tasks, such as mowing the lawn, trimming bushes, weeding, and watering plants, if opting for DIY.
* Oversee the maintenance work or monitor DIY progress - The ability to monitor the service team's progress or self-monitor DIY efforts, ensuring the work meets the homeowner's expectations.
* Inspect the work upon completion or review DIY results - The ability to review the maintenance service's work or assess the results of DIY efforts, ensuring all tasks have been completed to satisfaction.
* Provide feedback or request adjustments if hiring - The ability to communicate with the service provider about any areas that may need further attention or improvement, applicable only if the service route is chosen.
* Plan for ongoing maintenance - The ability to schedule regular maintenance appointments or set a personal maintenance schedule, ensuring the yard remains in optimal condition throughout the year.
We could also get into decision-oriented jobs where the homeowner considers their idea state, and whether the yard should be grass, dirt, decorative stone, or old cars on jacks. Thatās a completely different exercise.
Either way, you can see a dramatic difference in how the first job map will include a lawn mower at almost every step. But second map could have different solutions depending upon whether you go DIY or with a service. And it could also incorporate other maintenance items beyond just cutting grass - which is assumed in the first job.
They say that constraints often lead to innovations. But in this case, the constraint is a self-imposed view of the world. Youāll benefit from seeing past this kind of constraint.
If you'd like to learn more...
* I do offer end-to-end consulting if youāre just not ready to do it all your own. Iām 20x faster and at least 10x cheaper than your alternatives. Big Brands: This means you can get many more problems solved with your existing budget (I work with a global team of experienced practitioners)
* I also offer coaching, if youād like to know someoneās got your back and you want to do the heavy lifting and get some knowledge transfer, I'm there!
* I can help you get your qualitative research done in 2 days for mere budget scraps.
* Iāve also got an academy where you can find a number of options for a do-it-yourself experience. This portfolio of AI prompts eliminates the pain of learning how to perform proper qualitative JTBD research.
* Finally, I've recently opened up a JTBD community that is completely FREE! It's still early days and it's where I work with clients - in private spaces - and where I hang out to answer questions or just blather on. I hope you'll join us! There will be more and more free stuff, and there will also be some premium stuff eventually. I wonder what that will be?
This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit jobstobedone.substack.com/subscribe - Laat meer zien
