Tag Archives: differentiation

It All Starts with Wanting Things to be Different

It All Starts With Wanting Things to be Different

GUEST POST from Mike Shipulski

Wanting things to be different is a good start, but it’s not enough. To create conditions for things to move in a new direction, you’ve got to change your behavior. But with systems that involve people, this is not a straightforward process.

To create conditions for the system to change, you must understand the system”s disposition – the lines along which it prefers to change.. And to do that, you’ve got to push on the system and watch its response. With people systems, the response is not knowable before the experiment.

If you expect to be able to predict how the system will respond, working with people systems can be frustrating. I offer some guidance here. With this work, you are not responsible for the system’s response, you are only responsible for how you respond to the system’s response.

If the system responds in a way you like, turn that experiment into a project to amplify the change. If the system responds in a way you dislike, unwind the experiment. Here’s a simple mantra – do more of what works and less of what doesn’t. (Thanks to Dave Snowden for this.)

If you don’t like how things are going, you have only one lever to pull. You can only change.your response to what you see and experience. You can respond by pushing on the system and responding to what you see or you can respond by changing what you think and feel about the system.

But keep in mind that you are part of the system. And maybe the system is running an experiment on you. Either way, your only choice is to choose how to respond.

Image credits: 1 of 850+ FREE quote slides available for download at http://misterinnovation.com

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

Be Better or Be Different?

Be Better or Be Different?

GUEST POST from Shep Hyken

Do you want to be better or different? That’s the question that Sally Hogshead, an amazing professional speaker who specializes in being fascinating, shared in a recent speech I had the pleasure of experiencing. While most of her work is about how to be fascinating, this speech came from a different place. She talked about the power of being different versus better than others.

Sally shared research that found 73% would rather be better versus 27% who would choose to be different.

It’s one thing to be better than your competition. What makes you better? Is it your product? Is it the customer service or experience you provide? Is there something tangible that your customer could describe that proves you are better?

And then there is being different. As I listened to Sally share her wisdom, I realized that as much as we would like to be better than a competitor – and we should strive to do so – being different is more obvious.

I have a crazy idea. Why not both – especially as this idea applies to customer service and experience?

First, let’s talk about being better. It’s likely that you sell what others also sell. It’s a similar product. It may or may not be better, and it could be exactly the same, as in a commodity. So, how can you be better? Provide a better customer experience (CX). Yes, it’s always better to be better, but maybe you don’t have to be better than your competition. Maybe you just have to be better than what is expected.

Shep Hyken Different Better Cartoon

And here’s the interesting thing about your customer’s expectations – at least as it applies to CX. As important as customer service and CX are, the bar is fairly low. There are rockstar companies that have taught customers what a good CX looks like, but many companies struggle to create a similar experience. So, consider this idea: Delivering a better customer experience is as simple as consistently meeting customers’ expectations – with an emphasis on the word consistently. By the way, I used the word simple. That does not necessarily mean it’s easy, but if you meet expectations, you’re already better than most.

Being different will make a difference – no pun intended. Being different allows you to stand out. Yes, it could be your service and CX that makes you different – think Chick-fil-A. Whatever it is, it needs to be something that customers notice and care about. That gives customers a reason to choose you over your competition.

Sally’s short speech made me think. If there’s a way to be both better and different, you’ve got a winning combination that is hard to beat. However, even if all you do is meet the customers’ service and experience expectations, which already makes you better, continue to find a way – or ways – to stand out with something that makes you different.

Image Credits: Pixabay

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

Fighting for Innovation in the Trenches

Fighting for Innovation in the Trenches

GUEST POST from Geoffrey A. Moore

The first principle of managing innovation is that there are three distinct returns on innovation one can invest to achieve.

They are:

  1. “Unmatchable” differentiation, which confers enormous bargaining power as customers who want what you have “must” select you and “must” pay a premium for your offer. We call this DIFF for short.
  2. “Speedy” neutralization, which catches you up to some new market norm set by a competitor, thereby enabling you to stay in the game rather than be eliminated for lacking this feature. This is NEUT for short.
  3. “Rigorous” optimization, which extracts high-value talent and other scarce resources from non-differentiating work in order to free up investment in highly differentiating work or high-speed neutralization efforts. This is OPT for short.

The second principle is that these three outcomes are mutually exclusive, meaning you do not want to combine any two of them into the same work stream. Most innovation programs bind DIFF objectives with NEUT objectives, tying both to the same release cadence. This either slows down NEUT or dumbs down DIFF, both of which outcomes are painfully counterproductive.

The third principle is that most innovation investment is wasted (which is actually good news, because it means you can get a much bigger bang for your innovation buck once you learn how to avoid the waste). The three great sources of waste are:

  1. DIFF initiatives that do not result in “unmatchable” offers that create unequivocal customer preference. You end up being different but not different enough to gain real bargaining power.
  2. NEUT initiatives that take too long or go too far (or, more typically, both). Here the team has become obsessed with its competitor and is doing extra work that the customer will not value, meanwhile delaying the “good enough” state that the customer would value.
  3. OPT initiatives that do not address “sacred cow” resources. You end up moving around a lot of junior resources, meanwhile leaving the senior ones trapped in context instead of being deployed against core.

A corollary that can help teams avoid waste is to pay attention to their reference points.

  • If your goal is DIFF, then your reference point should be a prospective customer’s use case, one where purchase preference will be determined by you achieving “unmatchable” performance in your key area of innovation.
  • If your goal is NEUT, then your reference point is a competitor, then your innovation focus should be to get “good enough” fast enough.
  • A behavior you must avoid is to use a competitor as a reference point for DIFF. The all too likely outcome here is that you will create a difference that the customer either will not notice, will not acknowledge, or will not value. Meanwhile, the competitor will debate the fact that you even achieved it or that it is relevant if you did.

Finally, in light of these principles, the role of the leader is to deconstruct the overall workload of the team to tease out the DIFF from the NEUT from the OPT, and to charter specific work-streams accordingly. This rarely results in a perfectly pure outcome, but the more pure it is, the more productive your team’s efforts will be.

That’s what I think. What do you think?

Image Credit: Dall-E via Bing

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to join 17,000+ leaders getting Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to their inbox every week.

Why Consumers Demand Purpose-Led Brands

Authenticity as a Differentiator

Why Consumers Demand Purpose-Led Brands

GUEST POST from Art Inteligencia

In the past, competitive advantage was primarily defined by two metrics: price and feature set. A better product at a lower cost was the undeniable formula for market dominance. That formula is now obsolete. As a human-centered change and innovation thought leader, I argue that in today’s hyper-transparent, socially conscious economy, the ultimate non-replicable differentiator Authenticity. Consumers — particularly younger generations — are no longer just buying products; they are funding missions, endorsing values, and investing in brands that clearly and consistently demonstrate a purpose beyond profit. They demand purpose-led brands, and they use their purchasing power as a moral compass.

Authenticity is the seamless, genuine alignment between what a brand says, what a brand does, and what a brand believes. It is the absence of the “Purpose Gap” — the space between stated values (on the website) and observable behavior (in the supply chain or corporate policy). In the age of social media, where a single misstep or act of hypocrisy can be exposed globally and lead to immediate reputational crisis (often termed “cancel culture”), this gap is an existential threat. Conversely, a brand that lives its purpose creates an emotional resonance that transcends mere transaction, fostering loyalty that is fiercely resilient to price competition and feature parity.

The Three Pillars of Authentic Differentiation

For organizations to embed authenticity and purpose as strategic differentiators, they must focus on three core pillars:

  • 1. Consistency Across the Human Experience (Internal Alignment): Purpose must be lived first by the people. Employees are the brand’s first and most vocal authenticators. If the purpose doesn’t inform hiring, talent development, and daily operational policies, it fails immediately. This internal alignment is the bedrock of credibility that attracts and retains mission-driven talent, fueling the engine of innovation.
  • 2. Transparency in Action and Failure (Proof, Not Claims): Customers are skeptical of glossy claims. Authenticity requires radical transparency in demonstrating how the purpose is achieved. This means sharing progress metrics, admitting to shortcomings, and disclosing the difficult trade-offs made in pursuit of the mission. Proof of effort and an honest accounting of failure is more valuable than a claim of perfection.
  • 3. Co-Creation of Impact (Customer Empowerment): Purpose-led brands empower consumers to be active participants in the mission, not just passive donors. By allowing consumers to see their purchase directly contribute to the stated purpose, the brand moves from being a seller of goods to a facilitator of shared impact, deepening loyalty and providing critical feedback on how the mission can be innovated.

“Purpose is not a marketing campaign you run. It’s a design constraint you live by. If it doesn’t cost you something, it’s not a real purpose, and your customers know it.”


Case Study 1: TOMS – Institutionalizing Purpose-Driven Giving

The Challenge:

TOMS entered the highly competitive, low-barrier-to-entry footwear market, needing a powerful, unique reason for consumers to choose them over established, cheaper, or more fashionable brands.

The Authenticity Solution:

TOMS institutionalized purpose through its One for One® model. By making a direct, measurable commitment — for every pair of shoes purchased, a pair was given to a person in need — TOMS made its purpose a non-negotiable part of the product’s identity. The purchase wasn’t just acquiring footwear; it was participation in a charitable act. This wasn’t charity tacked on; it was the core business model, creating immediate, powerful differentiation and focusing early innovation efforts on scalable giving logistics.

The Market Impact:

This model created an instant, powerful emotional connection, turning customers into advocates who marketed the mission. While the model itself evolved over time (later shifting to commit one-third of profits to grassroots efforts), the original authenticity established TOMS as a pioneer of the purpose-led business. It proved that purpose, when baked into the economic structure, can justify a price premium and build profound loyalty that traditional advertising simply cannot achieve.


Case Study 2: Patagonia – Consistency and Environmental Advocacy

The Challenge:

Patagonia operates in the apparel industry, notorious for fast fashion, high waste, and opaque supply chains. Their challenge was maintaining authenticity while scaling globally, knowing that every business decision could be viewed as a compromise to their core environmental mission.

The Authenticity Solution:

Patagonia differentiates by making difficult, often counter-intuitive decisions that prove their commitment. Key examples include their infamous “Don’t Buy This Jacket” campaign, which directly challenged consumerism, and their dedication to repairing gear, not just replacing it, demonstrating a commitment to product longevity and the circular economy. Crucially, they use radical transparency regarding their supply chain, disclosing environmental footprints, and actively lobbying for climate policy changes—sometimes even taking political stances that risk short-term sales (e.g., suing federal governments over land protection).

The Market Impact:

Patagonia’s actions consistently reinforce its purpose as an environmental activist disguised as a clothing company. This consistency creates deep trust; consumers know that buying Patagonia is an endorsement of specific, aggressive environmental values. This dedication focuses their innovation on material science and durability, while their authenticity allows them to maintain a premium price point and creates a customer base that views the brand as an ally, not just a vendor. This is anti-fragile loyalty — loyalty that is strengthened, not weakened, by the brand’s ethical stance and political action.


The New Mandate: Purpose as the Core Innovation

The time for Purpose Washing
is over. Today’s consumers have highly sophisticated BS detectors and the digital tools to verify claims. For organizations seeking sustainable innovation, the purpose itself must become the core innovation. This means asking: How can our reason for being create value not just for shareholders, but for the world?

Authenticity is the dividend paid on decades of consistent, purpose-led behavior. It is the only true non-replicable competitive advantage remaining in a world where technology and feature parity are easily achieved. Leaders must stop viewing purpose as a charitable add-on and start treating it as a strategic design constraint for every business decision and innovation cycle. When you integrate your purpose so deeply that removing it would fundamentally destroy your business model, you have achieved authentic differentiation. That is the innovation that wins the future.

Extra Extra: Futurology is not fortune telling. Futurists use a scientific approach to create their deliverables, but a methodology and tools like those in FutureHacking™ can empower anyone to engage in futurology themselves.

Image credit: Pixabay

Subscribe to Human-Centered Change & Innovation WeeklySign up here to get Human-Centered Change & Innovation Weekly delivered to your inbox every week.