Jeff Bier’s Impulse Response―Down with Fluff

Submitted by Jeff Bier on Mon, 10/17/2011 - 13:20

In a recent consulting assignment, my colleagues and I at BDTI evaluated a semiconductor manufacturer's new-product introduction presentation and provided recommendations for improving it.  One of our key recommendations was to include data supporting major claims regarding the new product's advantages.  This may seem like an obvious idea, but after sitting through hundreds of briefings, I find that it's an idea that is not widely embraced among technical marketing people.

I think that part of the underlying problem here is that marketing people by and large really do believe in their products.  That's a good thing.  But as a result, sometimes it's too easy for them to lose track of the fact that, absent a clear and credible explanation (backed up with good data), prospective customers won't automatically believe in the product's advantages.

Another challenge is being heard above the noise.  To the product manager developing the new product pitch, that product pitch is all that matters.  But design engineers are bombarded with new product pitches.  And guess what?  Every one of those pitches claims that the product in question is significantly better than the alternatives.  The result is that engineers (who are typically skeptical by nature) are skeptical of all such claims.  Based on my experience, there are a few essential ingredients for making a new product pitch credible:

Make specific claims.  Vague claims are not credible.  "This is the best processor for baseband applications" is an example of a vague claim.  "This processor has half the power consumption of its nearest competitor in a typical base station application" is a much more specific, and therefore, much more credible claim.

Express the claims clearly and succinctly.  If the claims are not clearly stated, they're unlikely to be understood.  If they're not understood, they're not credible.  An example of an unclear claim comes from a long-ago press release about software development tools.  It said, "New tools improve software development by 10X."   What’s the metric here?  Productivity?  Code speed?  We have no idea, and therefore the claim is not credible.

Provide evidence.  Providing evidence is how you really convince the audience that the claim is true.  Evidence can take many forms, but since we're dealing with engineers here, high-quality data is usually the best evidence.  Note that I said high-quality data.  Anyone can make numbers up, or pull data off of datasheets that isn't really comparable.  It's usually pretty clear to the audience when the numbers have been pulled out of the air.

Good data comes from having a sound methodology and executing the methodology with care.  You should be prepared to explain how you got your data, and how your methodology makes the data relevant to the customer's situation.  The more impressive your claims, the more you need data to back them up.  If your product is really 2X better than the nearest competitor, you'd better have solid data to show that.  Otherwise, the audience is going to assume you're making things up — the claim sounds too good to be true.

Explain how it works.  Especially when your claims are impressive, having good data is often not sufficient.  You should also explain to the audience how your product is able to achieve these results.  For example, you might say: "Our chip uses half the power of the nearest competitor.   (And here's the data.)  We're able to achieve this because we use application-specific instructions that enable us to run at a much lower clock speed for a given level of required performance."  By explaining how the results are achieved, you further bolster credibility.  And, you may get the added benefit of showing how unique features of your product enable exceptional results.


Of course, there's no "recipe" to guarantee a successful product pitch.  But I think that the four guidelines presented here can go a long way towards (as a colleague recently put it) "eradicating fluff" and helping strong products reach their potential.

Whether you're on the buying or the selling side, what factors do you think make the difference between a credible product pitch and an eye-roller?  Leave a comment here — I'd love to hear from you.  Post a comment or send me your feedback at http://www.BDTI.com/Contact.

Add new comment

Log in to post comments