Here, I thought it’d be interesting to view some startup and marketing concepts within the context of basic qualities discussed in physics. Believe it or not, there are lots of similarities about physics, startups, and marketing.
On Positioning …
Complex ideas and theories are derived from a few simple but profound discoveries. In physics, the special theory of relativity is such an example. The notion of time and space being perceived differently by observers in different states of motion (i.e., all uniform motion being relative) is loosely translated into marketing by observing that customer profiles and segments need to be treated differently. If Albert Einstein were a marketer, he would probably be an expert at market positioning.
On Momentum …
Physicists describe momentum as mass times velocity. A rate of change of momentum is described as force. There are a couple qualities about momentum that matter to marketing. First, momentum is an additive quality – that is, a large body momentum equals the sum of momenta represented by individual particles. But, more important is the second quality of momentum. Whole body momentum depends only on the forces acting on it from the outside. Meaning, the complicated forces acting between individual particles may exist but it does not matter in the scheme of things.
A startup cannot have whole body momentum without those outside forces. This is why a bunch of above average people can succeed while a group of geniuses can fail. This is also why I’m such a big believer in market development being such a critical aspect of overall marketing. Startups must place itself in an area undergoing momentum shifts or work hard to create it with others – never alone. I have mixed feelings about venture capitalists overall but this is one area where they get my utmost respect and admiration. Great VCs have an intrinsic understanding of turning market momentum into an advantage.
On Acceleration and Velocity …
In physics, velocity is dependent on speed and direction. In startups, speed gets way too much attention while direction gets too little attention. This is in reverse to the natural order of things. There’s force in play when acceleration – or changing velocity – occurs. Velocity alone does not matter. Route dependence of time is something to think about – not the speed dependence of time. Think about trying to reach the mountaintop. The route you take will dictate the amount of time it takes to reach the mountaintop. That is, if you choose the correct route, your slower speed will relatively be better than if you had chosen the wrong route at blazing speed.
It never fails to amaze me that startups always talk about runway in context of cash burn instead of strategy. The problem with the runway analogy is that it assumes that (much like light) the runway is a clear, direct line. It doesn’t pay enough attention to route dependence. Running out of runway is akin to running out of money (which, in turn, means you’re out of time). I understand the intent of the analogy but still believe it can lead to self-destructive behavior on the part of startups over its interpretation. The runway mentality propels the startup to overemphasize speed over direction.
Focus less on the runway and velocity. Focus more on the route and acceleration. If you pick the wrong route, you’ll be able to recover since you’re going at a lower velocity. When you’ve picked the right route, you can accelerate (i.e., increase velocity). Routes are supersets under which runways can exist. If the mountain top has moved farther away (negative events such as the failure to eliminate some technical risks), your runway has shortened as a consequence. You’ll need a more precise route to account for the changes in direction. If the mountain top has moved closer (positive events such as a series of big customer wins), your runway lengthens and affords you more time to flatten your route (that is, make the route wider to minimize the abrupt turns). “Windows of opportunity” and “runways” which are not rationally explained are meaningless. It doesn’t need to be exhaustive in detail – just rational. And, if the explanation you hear hinges on how much money is left or some blindly asserted notion of speed (the faster, the better), you’re probably in trouble. Which leads us to the final part of this posting …
On Wisdom …
In life, there are many more fools who can ask more questions than a wise person can answer. In startups, more wise people are needed to ask the right questions than to answer it. Startups often get hung up on getting all the right answers. But, as in physics, it’s actually the right questions they lack. It’s just human nature to want answers. Furthermore, it’s human nature for CEOs and management teams to feel the pressure to have the right answer for everything. There’s a simple way to test whether or not your startup is being wise. If there are a lot of unanswered questions being tackled by a few people, you are probably mirroring life in general (i.e., fools are in the majority). But, if there are a few questions being tackled by a ton of people, you’re probably driven by wise folks and the fools are getting smarter as a result.
- John
Comments