Consider strategic under-development.
Balancing the tension between perfection and expediency is one of the key challenges that face inventor/entrepreneurs. The zealous creator of the next great gizmo is putting her ego on the line and wants the introductory version to be a flattering reflection of her vision and skill. Meanwhile, the start-up money (from whatever sources) is running out; and near-term sales are the only answer.
Any number of clever folks have chosen to go to market with a purposely immature product - not a dysfunctional product, mind you - just a very modest one. Think of the advantages -
- The time-to-market is shortened.
- An emotional milestone is reached by the development team.
- Money begins to flow in, not only out.
- All subsequent investment in development is in response to real market feedback!!!
The Market, of course, is always right. And there is a huge difference between survey answers and trial by purchase. Any number of failed enterprises have been launched on the strength of positive responses to survey questions. When a customer makes a purchase, however, even a small one, he puts some skin in the game. The product's performance really matters. And, in my experience, his responses to functionality and quality questions are truly thoughtful.
No strategy works for every company, of course. A household detergent doesn't have a menu of optional features. It either cleans or it doesn't. But I have found the following rule of thumb to be useful advice on many occasions.
When in doubt, sell something.
Comments