Businesses that are data-driven will lose to those that are model-driven
On the Revealed blog, I wrote an essay on why growth should be model-driven, not data driven. It boils down to:
The first version of this article referenced desires as “unmet desires”
After more work and feedback from model consumers and the community, we’ve opted to remove the “unmet” qualifier.
Initially, we worded “Desires” as “Desires”; however, we noticed that model users were getting confused. They were inputting many desirable aspects of the future state associated with the Job to be Done. This led to false conclusions.
To fix this, we decided to add the qualifier “unmet” to make it explicit that the desire was not being satisfied.
However, now we’ve adjusted our Demand Profile (the tool we use to gather…
After countless consumer interviews, years of research, and trying different models, my answer to How should I communicate, quantify, validate, and design for a Job to be Done? is this:
The best way to communicate, quantify, validate, and design for a Job to be Done is use data that describe A) how a Job to be Done is created and B) how consumers will behave when they have that Job to be Done.
The data we use in this model are Unmet Goals, Constraints, Catalysts, and Choice Set.
After using the free version of LinkedIn for quite a while, I was curious about what the paid version was like. Upon clicking “try premium”, I saw this:
Right away I knew this was gonna be good. Why? Because all these options weren’t describing the product, they were describing progress — i.e. how I could improve because of the product. In other words, these are Jobs to be Done.
Even though I use the word “hire” about 15 times in my book When Coffee and Kale Compete, I never explained what it meant, and how it relates to Jobs to be Done theory.
Clay’s book, Competing Against Luck, uses hire a whopping 231 times! But again…he neither defines it nor explains why it’s used.
Both Clay and I made a mistake. The result? People say hire without knowing what it means. This exacerbates the confusion around Jobs to be Done. Sometimes people make fun of it (figure 2).
The phrase “jobs to be done” carries a lot of meaning with it. The three most important parts are:
I was invited to speak at Elevate 2018 in Toronto. I was asked to talk about how I use JTBD to create a growth strategy. I also used my two favorite examples of Jobs theory applied: Weber and DeWalt.
You can catch the deck here on Slideshare. Or see the keynote presentation below (if it embedded correctly)
On September 12, the Christensen Institute released a white paper summarizing research around four Jobs teachers are trying to get done. This article is a summary of those Jobs. After readings this summary, I recommend reading the orignal white paper.
We all have Jobs to be Done in our lives — the progress that we are trying to make in a particular circumstance. The choice of the word “progress” is intentional. It represents movement, or a process, toward a goal or aspiration. A Job is rarely a discrete event. …
Does it make sense to say “we’re using gravity” or “we’re getting started with gravity”? Of course not!
Why? Because gravity is a theory. You don’t do theories, you learn them.
The point of theory is help you: