Make several, not one.

| | Comments ()
Thanks to Tim Brunelle, via Gavin Heaton, via Drew McLellan via Todd Andrik for digging up this Malcolm Gladwell talk from the 2004 TED conference. He's talking about Howard Moskowitz's learnings on consumer preferences.



The thing I really find interesting about all of this is the idea that segmenting potential consumers into multiple groups and working to please each group separately. When applied to experience design, product design, engagement planning, or design & strategy of just about any type, this thinking throws quite a twist into how planning currently proceeds within so much of the business. For example, when planning the IA for a corporate website we tend to strive towards a single sitemap, when we should probably be striving either towards 3 - 5 OR providing for dynamic self-segmentation. The problem with the standard solution set of "section 1 is for purchasing", "section two is for browsing" etc...is that purchasers and browsers exist within each segment and segments are likely to have different requirements for each task. Separating sections by product doesn't do much better, as flavors of products (even colors) are likely to have specific types of people that are most attracted to them.

The more I think about it, the more I think that distributed media is perhaps the real solution to the application of this thinking to the communications space. Just as it doesn't make sense to try and make one coffee for all consumers, it doesn't make sense to make one website or ad campaign or one "integrated" campaign for all consumers. You'll likely end up making people "60% happy".

Why not make many different pieces and aim at making people "78% happy"?

Comments