I have been accused of being an Apple Fanboy.  I  admit to owning a number of ‘i-things’, but nothing like this: 25 Signs That You Might Be An Apple Fanboy.  I do not have an Apple tattoo, no Mac-couch, or any of the items on this list. I am guilty of enjoying Apple products. 
What is the big deal with Apple anyway? I am sure that everyone has an opinion on this. There is not much middle ground: they seem to be loved or hated. 
Apple is brilliant at using design to provide an amazing customer experience.  It is not just about the product. The experience is managed at every touch-point. Customer service, packaging, product, iTunes … it is all part of the experience that we call Apple. 
I have been reading, Do You Matter?: How Great Design Will Make People Love Your Company by Brunner, Emery and Hall (Sponsored link). The authors made the following observation:

We think that most
people are prone to define design, particularly good design, more narrowly than they should. When you see an iconic product, such as an
iPhone, for instance, [...] it’s so easy to overlook the big picture of
how the product fits into the company’s future – and the future of
similar products in general. We want you to consider a far broader view
of the significance of design.

Speaking of product design, the authors wrote that:

The difference between a great product and a merely good product is that a great product embodies an idea that people can understand and learn about – an idea that grows in the minds, one they emotionally engage with.

Can a product, and a company, be successful based on design alone? Not necessarily.  The author pints to the “total concept – how the product operates, how it sounds, and how it feels.” Does it resonate with customers? That is what is special: you experience Apple. 

If you want to look at an interesting case study, consider the Motorola Razr. Clearly this was a popular phone. Was Motorola able to use this to sustained the success they enjoyed from the early success? They tried to migrate the Razr ‘looks’ to next generation of devices, but they never really understood this: Design, as the author points out, establishes the relationship between your company and your customer.

I highly recommend this book.  It should be read by every engineer, marketer, and business person. As for Apple – that’s your call.  I love my i-things.

Rick

Photo: By multisanti

Check out this Web Browser market share data: From April 2009 until the end of February 2010, Internet Explorer lost 6 points. Market share for other Browsers was flat, with modest gains in a few cases. The biggest winner: Google Chrome which appears to have take share almost exclusively from Microsoft’s Internet Explorer.  

Chrome is relatively new, having been released in September of 2008. I am sure that most of us expected it to be successful. While 5.6% sounds small, the trend is significant. As for Firefox, it is not growing like it did early in the decade, but I would not write it off. Read the history of Firefox; it has been around for a while with version 1.0 coming out in ~2001.

Perhaps you are thinking, “Well, Micorsoft has this large position; 6 percent is nothing.”  Check out this July 2004 InfoWorld article which says IE had a share of greater than 95% early in the decade.  Now instead of a 6 point share loss, we are talking about 34 points in 7 years. Ouch.

What’s going on here and what can we learn? While there are many lessons, I want to comment on three: Innovation, Focus, Velocity and Risk Taking. 

- Innovation: Many (most?) of the Browser innovation we use today originated in smaller companies or as browser add-in’s. These innovations targeted user needs. It is not that big companies cannot innovate – they can and do, but small companies are usually faster, they are hungry and their culture promotes risk taking.  When the big guy becomes fat and happy, the smaller player usually moves in and eats his lunch (i.e. take market share). I am not saying Google is small, but they are behaving like a small company in how they develop new products.

Note: There are several Firefox add-on that I cannot live without and that could easily become standard features for a browser. (I guess that would be a good topic for a future post). 

- Focus: Big companies often become distracted. Management sees new ‘growth opportunities’, loosing focus on what really matters (Think of the recent problems at Toyota). Focus is often overlooked as a key to success in business and life. Project team will be more successful if they focus; business will be more successful if they are focused on what matters. It is possible to bring focus to teams inside large organization. 

- Product Development Velocity: Microsoft is not known for being fast to market. They have deep pockets and are wiling to be patient. This strategy has worked, but this data suggest that it may not be sustainable. Rapid prototyping and involving customers early works. Get something in the customers hands early! I live in a world where it takes far too long to develop products. Speed to market has has many benefits and is a competitive advantage.

Risk Taking: Remember this phrase: ‘Fail early and fail often’. Don’t be afraid to change directions. Be willing to take well considered risk. Will there be failures? Most certainly. Organizations that are not wiling to take risk spend most of their time in a state of paralysis which slows or even kills innovation.

Organizations that put these principles in place can increase their chance of success. Yes, it take talent, capital and other factors, but these four keys can make or break an organization.

What do you think?

Rick

I wish I had coined that phrase. I ran across it earlier today in a BusinessWeek ‘special report’ that I received by email. It was written by Dave McClure (well done Dave). I agree with Dave and I am not going to rehash his comments. I  recommend that you read his article, along with the other articles referenced in ‘The Value of Design‘ by Helen Walters.

In my years in engineering and business I have observed some really good engineering. I have also seen some great design. It seems like it is more common to find poorly designed products, many of which are supported by good underlying engineering work.  You cannot simply engineer good design. Well-designed products are ‘addictive’. They elicited an emotional response, which is frequently not rational. (As a passionate designer and good friend often reminds me). 

Do you want an example? How about the iPod? When it launched, there were other mp3 players in the space. The functionality was not that different, but the iPod was very well designed. What really set it apart? It was the entire experienced .. an experience that was designed to generate an emotional response.  I remember when I purchased my first iPod. I recall how each element was expressed: The packaging, the well designed case and user interface. Heck, it even had white ear buds. Then, not much after the iPod hit the street, there was the iTune store. This changed the entire experience in purchasing music and other content.  And the best part … Apple was able to price the device at a premium. They quickly took market share from the competition and created a cult-like following, much like what they have enjoyed for years with the Mac. 

Contrary to common believe, the impact of ‘good design’ extends into the B2B space. Many B-2-B companies overlook the value of good design and make due with average products. Some of the most ‘design abused’ products live here. There is a real opportunity for good design firms and for companies with open minded, progressive management.  

So, while it takes more than well-designed product to win, a well-designed product can make a difference. 

What do you think? I welcome your comments.

Rick