It all started with this question that someone asked me last week: is there a way to express the value of a technology to the consumer who has had no previous exposure to the product or its features?
I pondered it for a moment and then answered, in a quiet voice, "I don't really know." And as I thought about it over the next few days, I stumbled upon this idea that maybe the question
that was being asked was wrong. Not because of how it was phrased, but more how it was developed in the first place.
Follow me for a second. What is the nature of the relationship between
consumers and technology? Well, I would propose that at its very essence it is a value exchange. And in order to derive the value, you need to get the consumer to cooperate by trying or adopting the
technology, right? Once you have crossed that hurdle, the exchange begins. Once that process is in place, you then have to meet certain requirements: does it do for consumers what they thought it
would? Does it fulfill a certain need or desire? Does it allow them to become better, faster, smarter, or cooler? It must--because if it doesn't, they will abandon it faster than you can say
"price reduction."
As I was having this conversation in my own mind and putting it down on "paper," I came across an article in the Harvard Business Review
about tools of cooperation and change. It basically outlined the tools that managers can employ to effect change in the organization, based on the types of relationship and behaviors that currently
exist. Now, I thought to myself, we are on to something here! If there is value in changing, people are often more willing to do it than not. Isn't that the same with technology? Yes.
So here it is, a matrix if you will, outlining some
tools that can be employed to engage with a consumer--based on the perceived value exchange of the relationship that consumer will have with a particular technology. I invite you to think about this
and see if it applies to you and your process of expressing the value of a particular product or service as well. If there is merit in the construction, it would be interesting to apply it in
practice. The question then becomes, where can it be applied? In what categories should it be applied? And is there value in understanding the nature of "value" overall from the consumer's
point of view? I would argue yes to all--but you tell me.