What do the Boeing 747, Kevlar body armor and Viagra all have in common (besides, I suppose, the potential adrenaline rush associated with each)? All came about by accident, the result of existing, but reimagined, intellectual property. The 747 was Boeing’s losing bid for a military freighter; Kevlar was invented as a component of racing tires; Viagra was intended to combat high blood pressure and heart disease. None would be household names were it not for innovative minds exploring alternative use cases for IP otherwise destined become footnotes in history books and annual reports.
Last week, in Entrepreneurship, Tunnel Vision and Train Wrecks, I talked about how entrepreneurs sometimes see their products, stories and customers through “tunnel vision”, with sales pitches invariably resulting in “train wrecks”. It is up to the entrepreneur to understand their customers’ individual perspectives and frame their offerings accordingly: One product, multiple stories. This assumes, however, that it is the right product in the first place – that it solves a real problem and meets an existing need. But what if it is not and does not? How is that not a failure?
Let us first consider the two fundamental ways in which products come to be. On the one hand, you recognize a problem, you conceive of a solution and then you develop the IP necessary to productize that solution. On the other hand, you have a product (successful or not) or some raw IP, all of a sudden imagine how to use it to solve a new problem, and develop a product accordingly. What is important to note is that even a failed product can become a success if the underlying IP can be reimagined as a different product, solving a different problem, perhaps even in a different industry. The question, then, is: How?
In this situation, entrepreneurs face a daunting challenge: Reimagining not only the story connecting their product to the customers’ problem, but reimagining the premise of the product and associated problem entirely. If ever a scenario were to take an entrepreneur out of their comfort zone, this would be it. Fortunately, however, entrepreneurs do not have a comfort zone, that is why they are entrepreneurs. The real issue is knowing where to begin, developing a new thesis around existing work and finding ways to connect underlying IP with other problems through a new product. Once again, this is somewhere that fresh eyes have the potential to make all the difference.
Sometimes, conceiving of an alternate use case for existing IP is as simple as knowing just enough about other problems and industries to begin asking the right questions. As a matriculating MBA, my program’s director of career services told us: “You will leave here a jack of all trades; master of none.” Here is a scenario in which that frame of thinking can be particularly valuable and, as luck would have it, it is also something I consult on. While, selfishly, my preference would be for you to engage me here, tapping into any resource with a modest amount of knowledge about a great many things (and, preferably, the ability to apply that knowledge) may prove invaluable.
Separating a product’s underlying IP from the product itself (which is really just a presentation of that IP) is paramount in pivoting under or non-performing innovations. Even successful products have this potential as start-ups enter their growth stages. Much like with “tunnel vision”, it involves stepping away from the package as a whole, considering each of its components, and applying them to any one of the virtually infinite problems facing the world today. Once again, my door is always open to those looking to explore these and other issues facing early-stage businesses, and I look forward to being of service.
Dan Palay is a Chicago-based consultant, specializing in marketing and business development for early-stage and business service companies. Please feel free to contact at [email protected].
.jpeg)
