Comments on: Better vs. Different: Symposium Follow Up

By: Jeff Stephens

Jeff Stephens — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 15:40:34 +0000

Morriss, good seeing you too! And you’re exactly right–RELEVANCE is the key. I think that in my brief 30 minutes speaking, I neglected to hammer that point home as well as I should have. And I think that’s one of the things that struck Ron, too–that maybe he thought I was saying “just pick something different…anything!” But you’re dead right–that “different” can’t be arbitrarily chosen for the sake of being different. It’s got to be true to who you are!

By: Morriss Partee

Morriss Partee — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 06:37:24 +0000

Hey Jeff,

Great seeing you again in Indy, and excellent presentation. I agree both with you that different is key. However, it can’t be just any old “different”, it has to be different in a way that is meaningful to the member/customer. And that’s easier said than done, and that’s scary to a management team, because whatever difference is chosen, there is no proof that that difference will “work” to provide superior business results. It really has to be a leap of faith on decision makers’ part, one that most aren’t willing to make. But nevertheless a torch we must continue to carry.

By: Jeff Stephens

Jeff Stephens — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 15:56:54 +0000

Oh man, excellent point! The words “than” and “for” really help clarify my point–thank you! I agree completely–you can’t compete on “better than” alone. You have to make yourself “better for” people who are a good fit for you.

By: Jesse Villanueva

Jesse Villanueva — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 22:12:42 +0000

I’d like to add this perspective on the ‘different vs. better’ topic. I’d argue that focusing on being different, allows brands to naturally be better. But not in a BETTER THAN [our competitor] sort of way, but rather a BETTER FOR [me, the consumer] way.

In sum, being different–by virtue–allows your brand to be a better choice FOR those who like the difference you offer.