|
Getting Customers to Choose You in a Commodity
Market
Differentiating your business in a
crowded marketplace where your and your competitors’ products are
very much alike, if not the same, remains one of today’s biggest
marketing challenges.
Technology-based products and services
are no exception. As
technologies mature, core product performance and features that once
provided clear competitive differentiation become largely comparable
from product to product. When
one examines the array of products currently available in cell
phones and PCs, for example, slam-dunk choices are rare.
Service products, from web site hosting to software
installation and integration, are no different.
What’s more, this evolution toward product parity appears
to be accelerating with each succeeding product generation.
The answer to this phenomenon lies
with a well-known cornerstone principle of marketing:
whole product. Simply
defined, “whole product” is the basic product or service for
sale, plus every additional attribute, service or even relationship
needed for customers to realize a complete solution to their problem
or application. Put another way, whole product fills the gap between the
marketing promise made to the customer and the ability of the
product to fulfill that promise.
The implications are clear.
To compete effectively, you must constantly add to the
richness and completeness of customer satisfaction with your product
or service. Companies
like Dell Computer and Nordstrom’s have become leaders by placing
great emphasis on whole product.
They continually seek out and experiment with innovative ways
to delight customers with more than just basic products.
Frequently, however, companies can
also make a real difference in their markets by simply delivering on
the obvious fundamentals of whole product.
Consider, for starters, prompt, effective, courteous customer
service. How many
companies do we all know that regularly contradict lofty pledges of
great customer care with service that can better be described as
wretched? Many
industries need look no further than customer service to discover an
opportunity to outshine the competition.
Many similar opportunities exist:
increased, individualized product choices and configurations,
easy ordering, rapid delivery, installation, training, and much
more.
Even so, some companies in highly
competitive markets – IT professional services, for example –
appear to have exhausted all the possibilities.
Well over a hundred such IT firms operate in the DFW area
alone. To win
customers, many seem to promote every whole product claim
imaginable. But in
attempting to address every conceivable customer desire, they all
begin to look alike from the customer’s perspective.
The appropriate strategy for companies
in markets filled with such claims and counterclaims is one that
unfortunately few choose to adopt.
That strategy involves focusing on a specific market,
industry or set of applications and providing superior whole product
to that segment. The
job of actually meeting whole product promises is both expensive and
resource-intensive. Even
the largest companies can succeed at it in only a few markets. That spells opportunity for the smaller company that can
select and address a segment that competitors have either ignored or
are underserving from a whole product perspective.
But in doing so, most companies
recognize that they too are somewhat if not severely
resource-constrained. Thus
they also face the questions of which whole product elements to
provide, and in which order. Very
often those choices are made almost arbitrarily, reflecting little
if any fact-finding or strategic analysis.
Obviously, such choices have only random chances of success.
Better
choices present themselves when they are based on direct market
knowledge and customer feedback -- in a word, research.
A relatively small but timely investment in research can pay
enormous dividends by guiding a company toward a whole product
strategy that will resonate with customers and differentiate it in
an otherwise competitive marketplace.
by James R. Helbig as published in ICCB
9/19/2000 |