August 27, 2019 Daily Post
Comments on most blogs are rarely all that interesting.
But one discussion, covering updates to a popular banking product, really caught my eye this weekend.
The product was regarded as being the most feature-rich outside of unfavorable, bloated alternatives. It was described as being the individual’s top pick.
But they then went on to describe how a product with fewer (even basic) features, that was less fit-for-purpose in their particular case, was fast becoming there new market preference.
How can this be?
The ‘lesser’ competitor was not winning in features and functionality. But they were starting to win on trust.
They had transparent development practices and roadmaps, so everyone knew what was coming and when. They had a very small – but active – community with strong engagement and support. You knew what was going on, and you knew people cared about the work.
The lacking of these elements led the commenter to fear their former-favorite tool could “close down at any moment”, citing they had consequently spent years also using a backup product “just in case”.
Paying twice, to use two products, “just in case” the favorite/popular option disappeared. All because there was no transparency and no perceivable community.
The quality of the product is only a part of one’s decision to take action.
The world surrounding that product – trust in the company, trust that others care, trust they will still be here tomorrow – matters even more.
It’s one of the reasons why companies like Basecamp.com have such loyal supporters – there is transparency from the company and there is a promise to still be there tomorrow.
Similarly, it’s one of the reasons why we roll our eyes when Google announces another messaging platform – they tell us nothing, and they’ve a track- record of terminating their work without warning.
Will you be here tomorrow? Does the market know that?\