How did we get the gap in the competition?

First of all, I refer to the competition between countries to illustrate the three possible modes of competition:

1.0, product competition. Labor-intensive, winning by quantity . For example, China used 800 million shirts for a Boeing plane.

2.0, technical competition. Win by quality . For example, China’s “effective patents” is second only to the United States. A large number of high value-added products have emerged.

3.0, pricing power competition. For example, Microsoft’s Windows, Intel’s chip, how much it costs to sell. Why is the country going to suppress Huawei this year? Because Huawei threatens the global pricing power of the 5G.

Therefore, from 1.0 to 3.0, the intensity of competition, the difficulty increases step by step, the decision-making authorization is getting higher and higher, you have me, I have you. These are closely related to our personal abilities, teamwork and long-term promotion.

▲ three-level competition mode map

Below, I will use the “purchase process” as the main analysis tool for case analysis.

The second step: case interpretation, find the law

1.0 Product competition

▲Product competition-competitive analysis chart

There was a frontline representative who was responsible for promoting a new antihypertensive drug. However, the antihypertensive strength of the new drug is relatively weak; at the time, the entire industry was advocating “strong blood pressure reduction”… The promotion of new drugs is tantamount to “going against the wind” and “too difficult”.

In the sales analysis, he found that a certain customer usage was significantly higher than other customers, so he humbly asked for advice. The customer told him that the blood pressure of the person is fluctuating. After observation, although this new drug is not effective in reducing blood pressure, it has the best blood pressure control in the morning. Moreover, among hypertensive patients, the probability of early onset is greatest. Therefore, the control of blood pressure in the morning is stable, which is of great significance to high-risk patients…

This description of the differentiation of customer behavior is the starting point for the “purchase process” analysis capability. How much is this lightly cut? The “early morning hypertension management” strategy successfully cut the market segment of several billion dollars for the company. Step by step to 2.0 .

From this real case, the product characteristics are relative, and using the purchase process to focus on the right place is the key to success. Don’t underestimate your value because you are too light.

In fact, there are some people who say that I am a small representative who “make money to sell cabbage, why do you want to sell white powder?”

In fact, there is no direct correspondence between abilities and positions. But if you have the ability, only the corresponding position has not yet arrived. Then you just need “opportunities.” You can become “high-latency” first, and then wait for “time.”

2.0 Technology competition

▲Technical competition-competitive analysis chart

1.0 to study the interaction between people and products (I am better than who), “product marketing” thinking prevails. However, Level 2.0 focuses on the interaction between the customer’s scenario and the product, and focuses on “providing a total solution for the customer”.

What is the difference between “product marketing” and “whole solution”?

such as,

Doctor’s perspective: My product can shorten the course of the disease by 12 hours, but can the customer’s experience describe the characteristics of this product? (It’s not that he is sick himself). However, if you change the angle, considering that the average circumstance of the ward required by the hospital is 7 days, but the average hospitalization of a certain disease is 7.5 days , it is easier to reach the hospital’s assessment requirements in less than half a day. This is a “solution”.

Patient perspective: Company A produces inhaled sex hormones, nebulization requires nebulizers, and patients often have to go to the hospital for treatment. In the past two years, this “troublesome” patient experience is enough to influence the willingness to purchase (patients complain that inconvenient medication will also affect the prescription willingness of the doctor). So the company found a pharmacy to set up an “atomization center”, so that patients can get timely treatment at the pharmacy, which increases the patient’s willingness to purchase (while reducing the work pressure and prescription pressure of the medical staff), which is a “solution.”

The feature of the solution is that multi-party collaboration benefits. “To make the cake bigger together, to be stronger than to enjoy a single sesame.”

The above example is not difficult to find, to reshape the purchase process, you need to use the “purchase process” to analyze the interactive experience between people and the scene :

Study the interaction scenarios of customers (patients, doctors, relevant functional units), which factors in the scenario will interact, how will the target customers experience, and which experiences will become the key factors affecting purchasing decisions? …Do we have the conditions/capabilities to shape/affect the progress of the experience, etc…

Then, according to the previous combing results, mobilize resources at all levels (sales, marketing, medicine, finance, etc.) to change the interactive scene and change the customer experience. Therefore, the more complex the reshaping process is, the higher the corresponding personnel capacity needs.

3.0 Pricing dispute

Since my own level and experience are not enough to get the information of this industry, I can only take other industries as examples. At this level, please go out with Joe to demonstrate the battle between Apple and Android.

For the success of the iPhone, the general public will attribute:

Excellent industrial design (beautiful)

The user’s operation is the simplest (human-machine interaction), the system does not card;

Users are eagerly sought after, representing a “life attitude” and “social symbols.”

But is this enough?

If the opponent also strengthens the design, even the cottage? (Competition 1.0)

What if the opponent upgrades the better configuration? (Competition 2.0)

Joe is not a god-level figure, he directly entered the 3.0 era with the iPhone . He released the iphone software development kit to third-party developers. Everyone can write the software and then trade through the platform. “The world is talented, use it for me!”

Third-party software is on the rise. Fruit powder buys its favorite software, makes software (game) developers profitable, profits generate more applications, and prosperous software applications push Apple’s usability again to increase user stickiness.

The opponent suddenly discovered that the entire software development industry is “giving” to Apple’s mobile phone. A good app may only have an Apple version. In this kind of competition, it is equivalent to Apple pulling a bunch of small brothers and opponents!

After the first wave of “degradation strikes”, Nokia was like an awakened indigenous, rushing to the battlefield with a big knife spear. But he faced the guns and guns, and there was no suspense to be slaughtered…

The Android camp is also very difficult, because no matter how to improve the phone configuration (2.0 mode competition) , it is difficult to grab Apple mobile phone users. Until Android set up its own ecosystem, APP is rich enough to breathe…

The cleverness of Jobs is that his “purchase process” is based on the “mobile internet” painting, rather than the “mobile phone purchase process.” He doesn’t think he is a mobile phone at all.

Even after Steve Jobs left, Apple has succeeded in becoming the first company in the history of the country to have a market value of more than one trillion dollars!

When we got back to the starting line of Iphone, we had to face such a problem – “Why is Jobs thinking of the 3.0 competition model of the mobile Internet?”

Sorry, Jobs didn’t tell me. However, from the “purchase process” methodology, he may have found a 3.0 competitive model from IPOD . There are signs:

IPOD was the only Mp3 that was designed to interact with the Internet at the time.

The “big data” generated by the IPOD user group is known only to Apple.

Decided that the iPhone uses a 3.0- competitive weapon appstore . May be verified with IPOD.

I think the real horror is the third. He deceived everyone in his contemporaries. Ming repair the plank road, dark crossing Chen Cang.

As shown in the figure, Internet 1.0 , all software must make money through a computer equipped with Windows (this road is open to me), so Microsoft is the overlord of the PC era (leave money to buy).

But in the era of mobile Internet , iphone is like a “computer” and will become a traffic portal. Jobs sold the computer, and he figured it out. The hard part is the second layer, how big is the mobile phone software market, will customers pay for it, and how will it affect user behavior (paying)?

So he did a test – IPOD, he chose the most primitive human needs “eat, drink, play” and test with “music”. If the customer is willing to pay for the music, then it may pay for the mobile phone software, and the big software market can become may.

People who have used IPOD know that it can pick and buy music from the Internet. IPOD performance report tell Steve Jobs, ” you think the future is real!”

Now, there is only one foot missing…

When the fruit powder became fascinated with IPOD, I went out with my earphones every day, holding my mobile phone in my pocket, and suddenly the phone rang… I took off my earphones and picked up the phone… At that moment, the fruit powder couldn’t help thinking, why can’t I use IPOD to make a phone call?

Sun’s justice in Japan’s Softbank is like this. He flew to the United States and took a mobile phone design that mimicked the IPOD look. He told Jobs that “Can you make an IPOD that can make calls?”

Jobs was surprised to see Sun Zhengyi (iPhone research and development is top secret), but Sun Zheng’s design and the real thing in R&D are too much… Finally he couldn’t help but say, “We have been developing for 2 years…”

So, an era has been opened in a long-awaited way.

As if overnight, after a gust of wind, self-heating, everyone’s life has changed…

He is too covert, attracting everyone’s attention with “products” and hiding the height of his thinking. He fulfilled his promise, the age does not belong to him, who can belong to it?

At the end of the case, 1.0 to 3.0 is all open.


Looking back at history, what I want to do most is to pay tribute to the pioneers, who show the peaks of thinking to future generations.

I am just a “post-horse gun”, can write does not mean that it will do. Be convinced by the talents of others and be sad for your ability.

The master is inexhaustible, knowing his own gap, there is a chance to catch up (write it to myself).

We need to use a lot of tools, which is the crystallization of human wisdom.

There is probably no shortcut between 1.0 and 3.0 . The person who can be made, “common knowledge” is a sign.

Excellent = priority rust, backwardness is behind the brain.

Starting from the late 1.0 , it means that competition is the sum of the whole > individual advantage.

For those who are interested in 2.0 and 3.0 , you can listen to Chang Qing’s class. You can read “Smart Business” and “Insight”.