Hey all,

As usual, I hope you’re having a great day!

I have been considerably slowed down multiple times by what is called “product-market fit” on my entrepreneurship journey. I like to call it “the holy trinity,” the perfect synchronization of the right solution for the right people with the right problem.

I have gone through multiple realizations and analogies about what I was doing wrong with the trinity and the unique value proposition (UVP). I have also witnessed those problems in other businesses or with founders I have talked to or advised. I want to share them here, hoping they might help you frame your issue if you happen to be facing one of them.

So here are 3 personal analogies for early market validation problems:

The hammer:

A hammer has many use cases, as it’s such a universal tool. It can be hard to summarize its function at a level that is neither too high (“It can build anything”), or neither too low (“It can nail 2mm nails on a 2x10 kauri wood plank”).

Saas tools that can have many functions depending on their use can easily fall into this analogy. Articulating the core purpose becomes challenging, as it can depend on the current customer (a hammer will have a different result for a builder or a warrior, e.g.).

There are three solutions for this situation as I see it now:

• Articulate the core purpose so that people can derive a use for the tool by themselves. Think of a saas founder talking to other people about its product, and the customer goes, “oh, I could use it for this.”
• Find a middle-level core purpose. E.g., the hammer: a blunt instrument used to strike with strength. This solution is much, much harder than it sounds. As the founder of an innovative product, you have to develop a new purpose-based definition of whatever you brought into existence. And it can be challenging (as proven by all the businesses defined as a “Uber/Tinder/… of”, in fault of being able to concisely explaining what they do).
• Start working with a single niche and then expands. The risk with this method is that the holy trinity of the niche will be very different from the overall population you could help, and there’s a real risk of refining something so specific for the niche you won’t get out.

The swiss knife.

The swiss knife problem can look similar to the hammer but is a different case. The hammer has an underlying core function with many applications. The swiss knife is either A) a collection of tools put together in a specific way, or B) a project that aims to tackle many UVP’s simultaneously. Example A) would be a comprehensive accounting platform. Example B) would be a payment gateway delivering unique value to both payees, receivers, and banks in different ways in a single process.

The main problem with a swiss knife is that there are better businesses for each tool or purpose. There are always better knives/screws/openers when by themselves than the ones on a swiss knife. I would challenge any entrepreneur of a swiss knife to consider if it is the most valuable to try to tackle everything at once or if it would not be better to niche and focus on a single purpose.
There are cases where a swiss knife is justified. If there is a genuine value-add to gather the tools in the same place (for a swiss knife, it’s the portability) or if the one stone many birds approach outweighs the cost of not specializing, only then it could be a good option.

Some might ponder the difference with a hammer, where it might also be necessary to niche. While a swiss knife might try to deliver multiple UVP at the same time, the hammer will have different UVP depending on who is using it. Furthermore, The hammer requires to niche first the audience, which might then influence the tool; the swiss knife requires to niche first the tool, which might then restrict the audience.

The blood test:

Last but not least, let’s move into the blood test. This realization in this article hit me the hardest, as I believe I ended up building one.

A blood test is a tool that mainly delivers knowledge. But not everyone knows how to read and derive value from that knowledge. Hence the main problem with blood test businesses is that they sometimes deliver their value (knowledge) to the wrong people or simply inadequately.

Blood tests are not for patients. In most cases (caution, this can depend on your target market), the customers do not want the blood test, as they can’t read it. They want the insights. They want to know if they need heart surgery or to stop eating sugar. That’s where the doctors come into play, analyze the test, and deliver consumable insights. The doctor will make the insights easily digestible while also focusing on the needs depending on the context. It is the difference between a general finance report and a warning that such department OPEX costs are through the roof; information vs. wisdom.

Without the “analysis” from the “test knowledge,” the customers will often go: “so what? How can I use this to my advantage?” (talking from experience).

If you have a blood test business, there are three options I can think of now.

• Sell your test to “doctors.” Find professionals who can read it and deliver the final steps themselves to the customers.
• Educate your audience before or while delivering the knowledge. It allows your customer to understand the test results by themselves. It can be tricky as the audience might not have the time/desire/capacity to learn.
• Deliver the analysis, not (just) the test.

This choice will depend on which customer segment is most viable and which one the founder will most resonate with.

This concludes those three metaphors. I am still refining those definitions and possibly adding some, so I am always keen to hear from your experience. Let me know what you think, and I wish you a beautiful day! :)

Here’s the Infographic for you to use and share, as a summary: