Without a solid understanding of the true needs in the marketplace, innovation is a gamble. The scattershot approach is a hesitant one that allows no focus, no concentration of resources and people, no "damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead!" It seems to be the pursuit of serendipity. No wonder for all the techniques, skill-sets and brilliance, so many innovation projects only have only a 10-20% chance of succeeding.
Chief among the gamble reduction has been the “Customer Driven Movement”, the attempt to understand what customers want before a company invests in the creation of a new product or service. But the sad results are - - after 30 years of this customer driven thinking - - that 50 to 90% of the products and services initiated end as failures. Yes, gaining inputs from the customer is important. But under this widely used methodology neither the innovator or the customer knows how to obtain the type of inputs they really need. The literal voice of the customer does not translate into meaningful inputs. Companies identify opportunities by segmenting markets, conducting competitive analysis, and brainstorming for customer wants, needs, benefits, solutions, ideas, desires, demands, specifications and so forth. None of these can be used predictably to ensure success. The reason is these ideas are usually based on faulty inputs. Customers don’t really know or verbalize what frustrates them or delights from. The best they usually do is suggest an incremental improvement to what already exists. Innovation based on these ideas from the customer is really all about existing “me-too” products & services. There is seldom huge value creation and with it the creation of new markets. Likewise technology driven approaches have just not been good enough. Too often technology based innovation is a gamble on a market that might not be there. The technology is wonderful but the demand is not. So how can we reduce our risk?
We have to move beyond the customer – driven paradigm.
We can boost our innovation success rate to four out of five … or even higher over time! There are disciplines with identifiable core elements; these breakthrough innovation disciplines can be applied with an above 80% innovation success rate. This is a much better path to innovation. Success improves and the risk of failure is reduced as we become more certain about the critical unmet needs in our marketplace. The value of these disciplines is only realized as they are embedded into the day-to-day practices and mind-set of our organization. The result is an innovative capability that is hard for anyone to match. Do we want a bigger market share? Fatter margins? Much happier customers…. Well?
There are essentially three critical functions: (1) mapping user needs, (2) structuring standardized statements on (a) jobs-to-be-done (b) desired outcomes, & (c) constraints, and (3) quantifying same with a very simple formula. Put another way, we deconstruct into its elements what the buyer is attempting to do; then we break down those elements into a series of very simple but precise questions; and finally, we put the responses to those questions into numbers (metrics) that will make it obvious what to prioritize as innovation projects.
A New Way To Identify Unmet Needs
People "hire" a service or product to get a job done. By doing a detailed analysis of "getting the job done", it is possible to discover many opportunities for innovation. An innovation map breaks down the central task a customer wants done into a series of discrete process steps. The purpose of job mapping is to get a complete view of all the points at which a user, at each step of the job, might hope for more help from a particular service or product. One goal of the job map is to gain insight about the biggest drawbacks of each particular service, tool or product being used at a certain point in time. The opportunity to innovate exists in eliminating the drawback by making the job simpler, easier, or faster.
The power to question is the basis of all human progress.
A skilled interviewer is needed to generate a job map and the corresponding statements (job & outcome). For any given innovation project, about 15 separate interviews are required: a combination of one-on-one and small group interviews. Each small group counts as one interview. Clients or prospects can be the target, but in each case it is best if they are as distinct and diverse from each other as possible. The interviewer can usually capture 20 to 30 high-quality job (tasks steps with a defined purpose) or outcome statements (measures of success) in a single hour. After 15 interviews, it is not unusual to have uncovered 80 to 100 unique and important customer needs. These needs can later be evaluated and prioritized.
There is a comprehensive discipline for understanding the unmet needs of customers. The process involves following a structured approach for the creation of a job map. Before beginning the eight steps used for creating such a job map, it is useful to ask context questions that will get the users talking: "What makes this job challenging, inconvenient or frustrating? Time-consuming? What are the pitfalls? What causes the job to go off track? What aspects of this job are wasteful?" In other words, they become focused when asked about what they know best and what the "job" is which they use a product or service to do. At the same time, it is vitally important to steer away from talking about solutions, possible improvements, features and benefits. Going there confuses the issue of what is the actual job and its outcome.
In creating a job map, the purpose is NOT to find out "how" the user is executing a job; rather the aim is to discover "what" a user might be attempting to get done at each point in executing a job AND what has to happen at each of those junctures in order to successfully complete the job process. Following a job map reduces the likelihood a certain job step will be overlooked or incorrectly combined with a different task. Missing a step in the map means a critical corresponding outcome may not be seen; dissatisfaction with any outcome is where each innovative opportunity lies.
When a buyer hires a service to get multiple jobs done, it is usually obvious what the core job is - - it's the foundation for achieving all the other jobs. So start by mapping our customer’s core job associated with our product or service; micro mapping can be done later as needed. In the lumber business, the core job may be building a home, putting up a fence, refurnishing a kitchen, adding a garage, painting a chair, buying a drill, cutting a board, etc. Begin defining the execution step by deconstructing the most central tasks to the job. Then define pre-execution steps (what must happen before the core execution step) and post-execution steps (what has to be done to know the job is successfully completed). Defining isolates the role each step plays in the process of getting the job done.
After the steps are identified, the innovator can often create value by:
- improving the execution of a specific step;
- eliminate the need for certain work inputs or outputs;
- remove an entire step or transfer the step;
- address an overlooked step;
- re-sequence the steps;
- change the physical location of a step;
- alter the time a specific step is carried out.
Once we have finished defining the context of and the job we are focused on, we then build a job map which has at least these nine main components or steps:
- Define: plan, select, determine. What has to be known and decided before starting a job. Determine the objectives of the job. Assess which resources are necessary and available. Plan the approach for each task to be done. The innovator can help customers understand their objectives better, simplify their resource planning process, and possibly modify the amount or type of planning needed.
- Locate: gather, access, retrieve (needed items or inputs). What items have to be located before doing the job. Is there a checklist for both tangible and intangible requirements? Innovators may focus on streamlining this process by making components easier to identify and gather, or more available, or by eliminating the need for some items altogether.
- Prepare: setup, organize, examine (the environment and materials to be used). What preparation work is needed before doing the job? The innovator can find opportunities by looking for ways to make set up less difficult by creating checklists, guides and safeguards, perhaps by automating preparation processes or organizational tasks.
- Confirm: validate, prioritize, decide. What checklists or verification steps are needed to ensure successful execution? This involves verifying before proceeding that the working environment and materials required are proper in quality, function and capacity and that the particular job-to-be done is still the top priority. Innovators might help buyers gain better information and feedback that they need to confirm potential delays, readiness, and decide among execution alternatives; they might also find ways to build confirmation into the locating and preparing steps.
- Execute: perform, transact, administer. What is the customer going to do to get the job done successfully and consistently? The usual goals are to achieve optimal results while avoiding problems and delays. The most fruitful area for innovators is to provide the know-how by which customers can gain real-time feedback and automatically correct execution problems.
- Monitor: verify, track, check (whether adjustments need to be made or unexpected problems need to be resolved). What needs to be monitored to ensure successful and consistent execution? Innovators need to pay attention to the costs of poor execution. When time consuming or demanding monitoring can be made more passive by solutions that call attention to problems or relevant changes, very significant value can be created.
- Modify: update, adjust, maintain. What modifications need to be made as a result of monitoring the quality of execution? Modification is often uncharted and dangerous territory for the customer as the search is made for the right adjustments; it can be very time-consuming, costly and frustrating. Innovators will find ways to help get execution back on track and keep it on track. Anticipation actions in support of predictable problems can be most valuable.
- Conclude: store, finish, close. What steps need to be followed to properly conclude the job. Many things must still be done when the core job has already been completed. Users often find such steps burdensome because they want to move on to the next job. Innovators can find opportunity by helping users to simplify their closing processes; other value can be created by helping to integrate some of the closing tasks into earlier steps.
- Troubleshooting: What types of problems need troubleshooting during the course of doing a job? Look for ways to speed up the troubleshooting process. Can root cause be more easily identified? Are symptoms often mistaken for root cause? What type of troubleshooting happens over and over again? Can it be eliminated?
Once a job map has been completed, each step can be broken down into sub tasks or component jobs-to-be-done; with each comes a clear purpose of achieving a desired outcome. 50 to 150 outcomes are typically generated from the one core job process. Think of each job and desired outcome as an opportunity to innovate: the devil is in the details and so is the innovator's reward (as well as the eager customer's satisfaction). That's why it's important to list all possible outcomes of each job so a key opportunity is not missed.
The next step in the Customer Centered Innovation Map is to turn the jobs-to-be-done into brief, simple "Job Statements", "Outcome Statements" and “Constraint Statements” (what’s blocking job effectiveness). In these statements the opportunities can be numerically identified and prioritized, taking the guesswork out of finding deep customer needs.
Structuring Standardized Statements
The goal of uncovering real user needs is pursued by considering the jobs they're trying to get done and the outcomes they're hoping to achieve. A job statement defines (1) an action (the "verb"), the reason a service is hired. It also contains (2) the "object" of the action, i.e. "the what", as well as a (3) "contextual clarifier" that might give the "where" or "when"; optionally, an illustrating (4) "example" or two can help remove any vagueness about what is meant. For instance:
Determine (action verb) where your car is parked (object of action) when at a public event (contextual clarifier) such as "write down the parking lot section letter when going to a football game"(example).
The statement should not contain any proposed improvements, solutions or possible features and benefits. They only cloud or confuse what the vital action might be. The purpose is to isolate and identify each elemental action. A good statement fleshes out what the user is really trying to accomplish, not just list a task that gets them there. Getting down to the root action is known as "validating". It is the difference between an invalid step, "check the monitor", and a valid step "get the patient's vital signs".
An outcome statement defines (1) the direction of improvement (universally stated as the two words "minimize" or "increase"), (2) a unit of measure (a category such as time, frequency, number, probability - - not the specific metric or measurement taken at a certain point in time), (3) the object of control, or desired outcome (what is hoped to be accomplished), and as in the job statement (4) contextual clarifiers & (5) optional examples. For instance:
Minimize (direction of improvement) the amount of (unit of measure) paint wasted (object of control) when it is poured from one container to another (contextual clarifier) - - roller pans, smaller cans, and sprayers (optional examples).
The outcome statement helps the user to judge how well a particular job is getting done. The collective set of outcomes personifies the users’ value model (the overall level of satisfaction for the core job). Knowing what outcomes users are trying to achieve gives the innovator short-term and long-term direction in choosing specific ideas and technologies to pursue.
Following a standard structure for the format of each statement is critical. Otherwise, inconsistencies between statements will bias and confound the results; such skewing may mean missing the best opportunities. Statements need to be as brief as possible, exact words should be consistently repeated as much as possible, and language must be simple and obvious to all involved. Variety in word and format is the enemy here. Statements should parallel each other in a consistent ordered structure. The more uniform the statements are, the easier it will be to pick out important variables and identify focal points.
Once job and outcome statements are completed, then the importance of each job and the satisfaction of each outcome can be investigated. This is the primary reason a core job is mapped and broken down into individual statements. When important jobs are not well satisfied, there is a screaming need and a breakthrough innovation opportunity. The need intensity can be mathematically calculated.
Prioritizing Unmet Needs
Here is one effective formula for quantifying and prioritizing unmet needs. The following section provides us with a simple way to take gathered data and create measures that identify the ideal target opportunities. While valuable information comes out of the interview process, a survey of a larger population is often valuable for validating whether our findings are valuable to a larger market. The process of creating metrics would work for either the initial 15 interviews or for a targeted larger population.
The job and outcome statements - - usually 50 to 150 - - are now put into a survey instrument (a questionnaire). A statistically valid (a well-diversified customer and prospect cross-section) representation of the innovation target pool is now polled. Typically a number between 180 and 600 people is best. The participants are asked to rate "the importance" of the each job and outcome statement. A scale of 1 to 5 is employed where 5 means critically important while 1 means not important at all. Then the participants rate "satisfaction" where 5 shows total satisfaction and 1 complete dissatisfaction. The answers are tabulated and scored.
The survey results will ultimately show which markets (as represented by individual jobs) are over-served and under-served. The extent of opportunity will also be revealed. The opportunity will be expressed as a specific number generated by a very simple calculation.
In this formula, we see “opportunity” to equal its "importance" plus the "difference between importance and satisfaction". The difference can never be less than zero; this is because high satisfaction must not diminish the fact that any particular job is important. So as
A + B = C (where B>=0):
Calculation: IMPORTANCE plus (IMPORTANCE minus SATISFACTION) = OPPORTUNITY
IMPORTANCE is expressed as a percentage and restated as a number between 0 & 10. The percentage is the number of 4s and 5s, "important" and "very important", divided by the number of responses (the total number of 1s, 2s, 3s. 4s and 5s). This number is then reduced by one decimal point: 99% becomes 9.9, 70% becomes 7.0, 33% becomes 3.3, etc.
Likewise SATISFACTION is expressed as a percentage of 4s and 5s and converted by one decimal point. If IMPORTANCE minus SATISFACTION is a number less than zero, it is stated as 0.
For example, when a statement is rated as 77% in importance and 23% in satisfaction, the formula is:
7.7 + (7.7 - 2.3) = 7.7 + 5.4 = 12.1
Likewise, when a statement is rated as 23% in importance and 77% in satisfaction, the negative number in "B" becomes zero and the formula is:
2.3 + (2.3 - 7.7) = 2.3 + 0 = 2.3
Then multiply by 5 to get a %
2.3 x 5 = 11.5 %
12.1 x 5 = 60.5 %
The 60.5 % number represents a highly important but poorly satisfied job; the 11.5 % number represents a fairly unimportant job that is executed with a high degree of satisfaction. These final numbers represent the opportunity score for any particular job or outcome. Opportunity scores of 75 % or better represent compelling areas of opportunity that must not be ignored. While rare in mature markets, they are quite common in newer markets. Scores between 60 % and 75% represent easy pickings for the innovator. Scores between 50 % and 60% often prove to be worthwhile areas to investigate. Scores below 50% are generally unattractive but not always. There can be opportunity where jobs are both important and well satisfied. Obviously, the higher the score the greater the priority should be. The need to be served cries out.
High opportunity scores represent underserved markets. With existing customers there is the opportunity to get a job done better or to get more jobs done. New customers can be gathered by helping them do jobs others are already doing or by helping them do a job no one is doing yet. Of course this means stretching beyond existing distinct capabilities and core competencies into developing new and related skills. The stretch is the difference between stagnation and progress. Innovating companies are learning organizations.
The scores also reveal where markets are over-served. Over-served means satisfaction ratings are higher than importance ratings. When the market is over-served there are usually three courses of action to take: (1) move onto another possible innovation project and halt all effort in this area - - making additional improvements will just prove to be a waste of time and resources - - innovation will add cost but not additional value; (2) innovators can look at cost reductions i.e. remove costly functions to widen the market to those that would be happier with lower-priced "good-enough" solutions; (3) engage in disruptive innovation which means taking out costs along multiple dimensions by creating a lower cost business model that others in the industry might find difficult to match. Often new markets can be found by introducing a less-costly, lower-performance product.
Lead with Needs
Having a system to capture customers' deepest and most pressing needs is critical to innovation. Usually, all critical needs can be identified with clarity and certainty. The needs can be prioritized for importance and opportunity. Key unmet needs in the marketplace become the focal point for aligning know-how, resources, people and strategy. The company's current performance engine (way of making money) can be invigorated; new performance engines with brand-new solutions can be built to ensure a positive future.
With this clarity, core markets can be grown, opportunities can be capitalized upon in adjacent markets, new markets can be discovered, and existing markets can be disrupted. Success is never certain; but, the path towards it can be mastered in a way that creates substantial improvements in a company’s innovative advantage.
Confidence comes from having customer-defined metrics that serve as the baseline for investigation of any marketplace; that market can be more easily understood in terms of jobs-to-be-done (people buy drills to create holes – the job to be done). The job, not the product or service solution, is the most elementary unit for analysis and the basis for further exploration. The job map breaks down complexity and cloudiness into identifiable opportunities. Those opportunities can be prioritized with hard numbers instead of wishy-washy guessing and hoping. Practicing these well-practiced company disciplines ensures the needs of the customer becomes central to the innovator's thinking, while personal opinion, intuition and past experience becomes secondary and subservient.
Most importantly, the mystery and most of the uncertainty disappears from the innovative process. The rigorous controlled approach based on customer-defined metrics enables the generation of valid breakthrough ideas at the right time and place. Formulating growth strategy becomes simple and effective; value creation becomes straightforward.
Go to: Home Go to: Powerful … Making You Powerful