INNOBLOG

In the September 3rd, 2007 edition of Business Week I found an op-ed relating to disruption entitled Why "Good Enough" is Good Enough. I thought it was a pretty decent piece that correctly illustrated an important principle of disruptive innovation. Some of the reader comments, though, weren't as friendly. Ever one to stick up for disruption, I entered the fray with a response of my own. Business Week cut me off, however, at 1000 characters. I thought I'd post the full text of my response here:

The main idea expressed in this article, that "good enough technologies are succeeding, is spot on. I wish, however, that this article had done a better job of making clear what "good enough does and does not mean. I can see in the reader comments that some people are confused.

Saying that "Good Enough is good enough is not some pronouncement advocating that corporations abandon quality control efforts in favor of pedaling second-rate crap. It is not an argument against improving products. It is not a statement against being good to consumers.

Instead, saying that "Good Enough is good enough is a recognition that there are different jobs that consumers hire products to do and that sometimes companies "overshoot these customers needs with their products. Companies applying this thinking can hone in on what is really important to the consumer and tailor their products to those important jobs, making performance tradeoffs that can benefit you and me and all consumers, enormously.

Sure, it would be great if we didnt have to make those performance tradeoffs. I would love it if my Treo was 99.999% reliable and had voice quality as good as my home phone. But if getting there means that Verizon would have to spend billions and billions more building more and newer towers with better network technology, passing along every one of those charges to me every month, Ill keep what I have now. Good enough is good enough for me.

Of course, as time goes by, Ill continue to expect better and better service from my mobile phone. If Verizon and Palm dont improve their products and services, Ill buy a different phone and switch to a different carrier. The good news is that what is "good enough" changes. [Here I'll make my own editor's note: I'm not actually so sure that "good enough" changes, perhaps it is better to say that although I prefer my mobile phone to my landline, I'm still underserved by current mobile phones, and want them to improve along a sustaining trajectory until they reach where my true preferences and jobs are. -LL] There is still pressure on companies to keep up in order to beat competitors. But regardless of whether Verizon (and other carriers) improve, Im not going back to using only a landline phone. Mobility and convenience is too important to me. Im happy with the tradeoff "good enough gives me.

What are your thoughts on why "good enough" is good enough?