In emerging tech markets, 'get real' by talking about the competition
Innovators trying to establish new markets would be wise to try to attract attention by publicizing not only themselves, but also the competition, according to a new sociological study by a faculty member at the University of Southern California鈥檚 (USC) Marshall School of Business.
Mark Thomas Kennedy, assistant professor of Management and Organizations at USC, used breakthrough research methods to reduce tens of thousands of pages of media coverage into 鈥渕ental maps鈥� of technology market competitors.
His conclusion challenges the conventional wisdom that has marketers focusing exclusively on what makes their product unique. His research shows that, when trying to create new markets, firms that dare to publicly mention their competitors in their public positioning actually do better for it.
鈥淔rom business schools and marketing consultants, entrepreneurs are mostly taught that talking about the competition is a dangerous no-no,鈥� says Kennedy. 鈥淏ut in the early stages of new markets, talking just about yourself is even more dangerous. In fact, it actually hurts innovators鈥� chances of success by increasing the odds they鈥檒l be overlooked or ignored as 鈥榣one voices.鈥� We know that there is strength in numbers, but what we haven鈥檛 known is how firms get 鈥榗ounted鈥� in the media.鈥�
Kennedy鈥檚 study, published in an article in the April 2008 issue of the American Sociological Review, answers that question by showing how the media helps to make new markets real. Titled 鈥淕etting Counted: Markets, Media and Reality,鈥� the article tackles one of the key challenges innovators face鈥攋ust getting counted enough for the world to take their new ideas seriously.
Building on groundbreaking scholarship from Columbia University鈥檚 Harrison White and New York University鈥檚 Joseph Porac, Kennedy鈥檚 study extends the new school of thought about markets, which characterizes markets as networks that capture shared views about how to compare and categorize competing producers.
As these networks form, Kennedy says they have an intimate connection to the media because journalists serve as the public鈥檚 principal intermediaries in society鈥檚 collective conversations about whether new products are 鈥渞eal鈥� enough to be categories unto themselves.
鈥淚n new markets, the study shows that associating your product with a rival or two helps to put new markets on the map in the minds of journalists and the audiences who read what they write,鈥� says Kennedy.
Kennedy鈥檚 data set included a comprehensive collection of media coverage about one of the hottest technology markets from the 1980s鈥攖he market for computer workstations.
Covering the period from 1980 to 1990, his statistical analyses accounted for factors such as the timing of market entry, company size, previous media coverage and a proxy for the quality of competitors鈥� products.
Acknowledging that the media and PR worlds have seen significant changes with the advent of the Internet, Kennedy says that credibility has not gone out of style, and audiences still weigh stories and predictions about important market 鈥渢rends.鈥�
He cites recent creation of markets for digital cameras, GPS-based navigation systems and 鈥渃rossover鈥� automobiles as examples where consumer demand was boosted by media coverage that helped audiences to see emerging producer communities as evidence that these markets are for real.
鈥淵ou have to dignify the competition to create the market鈥攐therwise you are distinct, but irrelevant,鈥� Kennedy says. 鈥淚f you can be first in the market along with others, co-creating something new, you can get much more attention than by trying to go it alone.鈥�
Source: University of Southern California
