Skip to main content

Fidelity or Convenience: Which Path Are You On?

On June 2nd, I'll be attending an open session hosted by the Silicon Valley Product Manager's Association (SVPMA) entitled Best Practices for Product Management for V1 Products.  (If that link is out of date, it's because the SVPMA doesn't create unique URLs for its workshops.)

Having a mere few years of direct product management experience, this workshop interests me considerably.  It's not that often that PMs get to work on V1 products.  The ability to discuss and define the business objectives, to formulate a strategy, and to work with a clean slate presents itself.  Having managed Vx products, this seems like such a novel and exciting idea.  Of course, it's also fraught with peril.

I recently read the book Trade-Off by Kevin Maney in which he explores two factors that can determine whether a product is successful or not: Fidelity & Convenience.  The idea is rather simple; successful products either have high fidelity (quality, cachĂ©, brand, and often price) or high convenience (simplicity, ubiquity, often low price).

Ferrari, for example, is the quintessential high fidelity automobile.  New models are infrequent.  Supply is limited.  Performance is extraordinary.  Styling is unparalleled.  Price is prohibitively expensive.  Honda, on the other hand, is among the most convenient automobiles.  Modestly priced.  Common amenities.  Available almost everywhere.  You probably know a few people who drive Hondas.  You probably don't know anyone who drives a Ferrari.

Maney illustrates the fidelity/convenience trade-off using an axis, represented in the following graphic (my own image).


This is not to say that high fidelity products have no convenience factors, or vice-versa.  Rather, when defining a product, it is important to know which axis will be the basis for your product.  Are you aiming for high convenience (such as iTunes) or high fidelity (such as a Sota turntable)?
 
If you attempt to define a product that has both high fidelity and high convenience, you are grasping at what Maney calls the Fidelity Mirage; an unattainable position that results from the inherent incompatibility between high fidelity and high convenience.

Starbucks coffee is now chasing the fidelity mirage.  At one point, Starbucks was the definition of high fidelity coffee; it was to coffee what Sam Adams was to beer back in the early 1990's during the microbrewery explosion.  However, Starbucks is now everywhere.  They no longer hire or train real baristas; they bring in high school students who learn fast-food-like routines and have very little knowledge of coffee or coffee culture.  Starbucks recently launched a line of instant coffee called VIA.  Let me repeat that: instant coffee.  Starbucks is reaching for uber-high convenience, and as a result, its image as a high fidelity product is suffering.  They are at risk of becoming the next Dunkin' Donuts.

The axis also contains an area called the fidelity belly; this is where mediocre products languish, failing to develop a strategy that moves along either the fidelity or convenience axis.  The Laserdisc was a classic fidelity belly item.  It was not as convenient as VHS tapes (laserdiscs were cumbersome and expensive, and there weren't enough titles available) and did not represent sufficiently high fidelity to make the transition worthwhile.  It wasn't until DVDs came about that the mighty VHS (which crushed BetaMax, another fidelity belly product) met its demise; losing out in fidelity and ultimately convenience too.  Ironically, DVDs are in the belly today; on-demand video (Netflix, Hulu, et al.) is more convenient, and Blu-Ray is higher fidelity.  Looking forward, it won't be long until on-demand video surpasses physical media all together.

When defining, designing, and delivering our products the fidelity vs. convenience trade-off must be taken into consideration.  Who is it that you're targeting?  Is your product on a clear path toward convenience or fidelity?  The answer should not, and Maney argues cannot, be both.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Social CRM: Putting Customers First

Last night I attended Social CRM: Putting Customers First , hosted by the San Francisco chapter of the Social Media Club .  It was a great event, and I'll briefly recap some of the discussion and my observations. The panelists were first asked why Social CRM (SCRM) was relevant.  Their answers were as follows: Vendors need to know who their customers are out there on the social web. Vendors need to be able to identify customer pain points from conversations on the social web.  Vendors need to know what to do with these conversations on the social web.  These discussions are the center of business today; their importance cannot be understated. The social web grows too fast for vendor solutions to keep up.  Therefore, vendor solutions must embrace the social web, and learn how to crowdsource.  There is no way that you can scale communities and community managers that fast. Customers don't care about your organization structure, they just want answers a...

Building Better Products Using Quantitative & Qualitative Data

Disclosure: This was an internal post I wrote and shared with my colleagues back in 2015. While cleaning out my Confluence space, I came across it and thought that I'd share it with everyone. There is a much more recent and polished post by my good friend Glenn Block on Mind the Product that you can read here:  https://www.mindtheproduct.com/2018/01/need-quantitative-qualitative-data/ What Data Is/Not Data cannot  compensate for bad design or replace good design, but it can inform designers. Data cannot compensate for listening to actual users, but it can inform the kind of user research we conduct. Data cannot tell us what to build, but it can inform what we should investigate. Example If you can visualize a funnel report where visitors are leaving a buying process during various stages of the journey, quantitative data can give you information about where you may have a problem. In the above example, the quantitative data ( QT ) informs you that 36 pe...

Luck Is Not The Answer

As the 2011 season of the National Football League approaches, so does the rabid anticipation of its parasitic counterpart; fantasy football. Anyone who knows me knows that I love football (not fĂștbol); particularly the NFL . I grew up a dedicated Patriots fan and have since become more of a fan of the game itself rather than just a New England loyalist. I tend to keep up with NFL news throughout the year, and regularly download the Rich Eisen Podcast for listening during my morning commute. Rich's guest on the most recent episode was Michael Fabiano, the resident fantasy football expert at NFL.com. At one point during the podcast, Rich and Mike were exchanging viewpoints on what constitutes being an expert and how no matter how much of an expert you are, you need to be lucky to win a fantasy league. A similar sentiment was expressed during a 2010 podcast by one of the guests (I forget whom); that it's all luck and you can't really predict anything. I take exception t...