Why would anyone purchase online learning?

Why would anyone buy or use any product?

That’s not a rhetorical or an easy question. If you ask the purchaser or user of a particular product, you might be able to get a very specific reason. But, the more interesting questions are,

• Is there one generic need that a product has to meet?
• If I were creating a product, is there some formula I could follow to ensure that my product met the market’s sweet spot?

Here is my proposal.

No, there is not one generic need that a product can meet and therefore be successful. But, yes, there is a hierarchy of needs, depending on the market cycle. If you know your audience, and you know the market cycle, you can engineer your product for success.

The concept of a hierarchy of buyer’s needs was most recently brought to my attention in an article from the Creating Passionate Users blog, by Kathy Sierra.

Kathy’s hierarchy, for successful tech products (not necessarily in education) is below:

   

She encouraged readers to mix, rip, and burn their own versions. Here’s mine (click on the image to expand it).

Each level is a gate, if only one product meets the needs at that level, that is the one that will be purchased and/or used. As more products enter a marketplace, buyers and users have more choices, so it becomes more important for products to meet higher level needs.

For a first mover product, if it meets some need, if the need is great enough, and if buyers can afford it, the product will be purchased and used.

Where there are already many players, a product not only has to meet a need, but it has to be a safe choice, it has to work well, it has to solve related problems as well, be easy to implement and learn, and be enjoyable to use.

Of course, in education, the hierarchy is further complicated by the fact that there may be multiple roles involved in purchasing, as well as multiple roles involved with use. Interested parties include students, instructors, administrators, managers, organizations, and the actual purchaser. The same person or group may have multiple roles as they touch any individual product.

How will this model help you? That depends on whether your are introducing or purchasing a product.

How would you apply the model if you were introducing a new product?

Here is what we do when we are working with clients. First, look at alternative uses for the funds that a purchaser would use for your product. Second, based on the market, determine the level of need you need to meet for purchase and use. And third, map out your product against the needs of the stakeholders your product touches.

How would you apply the model if you were purchasing a product?

Place the different products against the grid of needs. Rate how the products meet the different levels of needs. If there is only one product that meets your needs, consider if you can afford it and if it really does meet your requirements.

We are always interested in hearing from you, so let us know how this model meets with your own experiences.

Comments

[Joel Josephson]

Dear Mitchell

Thank you for the interesting article. I used to be a high tech consultant before I got involved in education and technology, when I founded the Kindersite.

Over the years I was inundated with ideas for new technology, medical devices etc.etc. I still do a little consulting in this field, just to keep my hand in. I also had to try to value a new idea within the potential market.

In my opinion, the over-riding potential of a new product or solution is how far it is an advance of existing products and solutions.

If there is a real advance, then there MAY be a need for the new solution.

I say MAY because of a critical factor that needs analysis finds very difficult to overcome, namely, 'Existing inertia'. In most markets, users have gained a level of convenience, familiarity and possibly adaptation of the product, to their needs, plus the cost-of–replacement. These factors produce the 'Existing inertia' that has to be overcome by the new solution before it will be adopted.

I create an imaginary graph of Convenience over Stress or Pressure. I will then compare existing products/solutions against the features of the existing solution.

To overcome 'Existing inertia' you either have to have increased convenience (real added value features from the user perspective) OR an existing high stress/pressure level.

I will illustrate this with two examples:
1. Email
1.1 Many of us, within our work, rely on Microsoft Outlook as an email client, it is not the best solution but it allows us a sufficient level of adaptability and features, such as specialized folders, moving messages around, deleting, mail rules etc. that we are quite happy to use it, idiosyncrasies, bugs and all. This is the most 'Convenient' and 'Minimum stress' solution.

1.2 Now we are traveling to a conference without our own laptop. We need to keep in touch with our home base, family, have ongoing urgent work to deal with etc, i.e. the stress level has risen. So we drop to the next most 'Convenient' solution and resort to an Internet email solution as the next best thing, the first moment we have access to an Internet connected computer, like Hotmail, Yahoo or Gmail. Internet email clients are not as adaptable or easy to use as Outlook and are much slower to use, in most circumstances.

1.3 We are actually traveling, in an airport departure lounge, do not have any access to a computer with Internet. Then we would resort to email on our mobile wireless device. The 'Convenience' compared to Outlook is very low BUT the stress level is very high.

In fact the low 'Convenience' of mobile email has been partially compensated by SMS that is an email replacement solution that fits more 'Conveniently' within the limits of mobile wireless devices and is a highly successful solution, as far as it goes.

Second example, imaginary:

2. The domestic dishwasher – this example came as a result of trying to explain this idea to my dear wife. We have an existing dishwasher, it is not old and it works very nicely. We have no, perceived, stress level with this solution. We have accepted its limitations, managed to work out how to use it from the incomprehensible guide book in 14 languages (all double dutch) and have a good level of comfort and convenience.

2.1 A new dishwasher model comes on the market that will work by voice activation. You tell it to go to program 3 and start, off it goes. It costs 33% more than the model that you turn a dial and press buttons. Would my wife convince me that we need this added value, her answer is no. Reason, the added value only adds marginally to our convenience, the higher cost/stress alleviates the convenience, plus learning to use the new machine (see double dutch above). We will stay with our current solution, thank you.

2.2 Another new dishwasher comes on the market. This one clears the dishes of the table, rinses them, stacks them in the machine, and turns itself on. Cost – double an ordinary dishwasher. Now we can see a stress/pressure that we did not perceive before, in reality we had accepted the stress as a fact of dishwasher life. Dishwashers do not clear, rinse, stack and cycle.

Does my wife want this new machine; I could face a divorce if I do not bankrupt the family in getting one. The new machine has exposed a very high stress level, the cost and convenience of learning to use the new machine are lower than the stress, result a real need.

This model of Convenience against Stress can be adapted and used in many situations. In medicine, small advances are often adopted regardless of convenience, even at a high cost, due to the ultimate stress situation, life or death.

The model can also be used within a financial framework, if money equals stress. It does not completely explain, early adopters of technology, unless you agree that for them ‘Convenience’ on adopting a new device/software is low (they are good at it, no double dutch for them) and being an early adopter a pioneer, overrides the stress/money.

Joel Josephson is the Founder and Executive Director of the Kindersite Project http://www.kindersite.org that is used in 13,600 schools in 148 countries as a free resource for education. He is also a specialist in Internet dissemination for educators being involved in 6 European Union funded education projects.