Intro

Eager Sellers, Stony Buyers is an article that explores the major differences between how sellers view a new product and how buyers see the same product. Throughout the article, the author provides several key insights into how to close this gap, which too often leads eager companies to failure.

Overcoming Resistance

One key point from this article is that there are two main focuses when adopting a new product: behavior change and product change. Product change is relatively simple. It just asks, “how different is this product from what I’m already using?” There’s plenty of room for innovation in this area, but practical limits are set by the other factor: behavior change. Behavior change includes all the things we want our users to do differently when they use our product. An example from the article of a product with low product change but high behavior change is the Dvorak keyboard. Users had to completely relearn how to type for little benefit, which Gourville calls a sure failure.

There are several ways to make behavior change easier: by creating a product that is significantly better than current options. One strategy product managers can adopt is following the “9x effect.” Companies often overestimate the perceived value of their product by a factor of 3, while users tend to underestimate how valuable a product will be for them by the same factor. To close this gap, a product needs to be 9 times better than what the user is currently using. Other common ways to lessen this burden include building products that require low product and behavioral changes (easy sells) or those with high behavioral and high product changes (long-term efforts).

Loss Aversion

Beyond resistance to change itself, loss aversion also considers the benefits of making the change. This idea shows that users tend to see potential losses as more significant than potential gains. This applies not only to disadvantages of a new product but also to losing benefits from the old one. Therefore, it is a product manager’s role to reduce this sense of loss. One approach is to introduce minimal losses, like the example of alternative fuel cells on small islands. By adding a small inconvenience that doesn’t greatly impact the population you’re targeting, you can avoid exaggerated feelings of loss.

Another approach is to minimize the loss of existing benefits, such as those in the “low product change” category listed above, but this risks hindering innovation. Additionally, many of these changes are difficult to notice, even from the user’s perspective.

Conclusion

Innovation drives the way we live and work. With rapid technological progress, it’s hard to imagine what our lives will be like in just a few years. Still, before creating something new, one must pause and ask: Is my product truly better than others? Does it make things harder for users to switch? What are the actual benefits? These are the questions that a diligent PM ought often ask themselves, lest they fall into the trap of overestimation.