Resources

Developing Differentiation with the 3Cs Model

Differentiation vs Distinctiveness

I was once challenged with the question is that a distinction without a difference?

This is a question that characterises a lack of clarity in describing differences that is all too common. The terms distinctiveness and differentiation, in particular, are often confuse. In this article on developing differentiation we’ll start by unravelling the difference between differentiation vs distinctiveness. We’ll do this via some definitions, and then look at developing differentiation using Kenichi Ohmae’s 3Cs model.

Distinctiveness

Let’s start with distinctiveness.  Distinctiveness makes for easy identification and recognition, based on a particular characteristic or set of characteristics.  Distinctiveness makes a brand or product stand out from the crowd.  

The OED provides the example of: “juniper berries give gin its distinctive flavour.”

Differentiation

Differentiation relates to the act or process of distinguishing between two or more things or people.  This is usually part of a choice with a specific purpose in mind. In comparison to distinctiveness, differentiation is less immediate and more deliberate.

Achieving Balance

We believe it is important that both differentiation and distinctiveness are conveyed in ways that matters to the audience. Ideally this should be in an engaging fashion, as a story which can be re-told.  It is also important that we get the balance between the two right.  Many tech firms claim to be distinct to the point of being unique, but few actually are.  Such self-serving claims may resonate well internally but are likely to collapse under buyer scrutiny.

This point of view aligns with one put forward by Professor Mark Ritson in a seminar, entitled Defending Differentiation, which was reported in Marketing Week.  In the seminar, Professor Ritson put forward the case that marketers have swayed too far away from differentiation in search of distinctiveness when they should be looking to achieve both.  To compensate for this over correction he proposed the concept of “relative differentiation”:

The goal is not to be unique, but instead have “more” of something than other brands do within the category. Marketers should choose to prioritise “attributes and associations that matter to their target consumers” which will prove enough to influence purchase decisions, he said. He accepted this was a more “diluted” version of differentiation but more achievable. “Differentiation is not about uniqueness, it’s about difference,” he added.

Unique or Unicorn Selling Points?

Differentiation not representing uniqueness, but difference makes a lot of sense.

However, this representative is at odds with many descriptions of differentiation which stress identifying and communicating the unique qualities of a product or company.  Unique qualities aren’t unheard of, but they are unusual.  Unique Selling Points often exist only in the mind of the seller, or may not be sufficiently important to the buyer to form part of the purchase criteria.  We like to refer to them as Unicorn Selling Points. This reminds us that USPs are rare, and that if that they are too common in the proposition the buyer is likely to view it as a fairy tale!

Developing Differentiation using the 3Cs Framework

In the same article Professor Ritson recommends making use of the 3Cs framework. This, along with Value Curves, is a framework we have found to be extremely useful in establishing differentiation.

The 3Cs Model: Customers, Competitors and Corporation

The 3Cs framework is a simple, foundational framework created by Kenichi Ohmae in the 1982 book, “The Mind of the Strategist: The Art of Japanese Business.” We’ve described it, and how to use it in proposition development in How to Win Using the 3Cs Model.

In short, the model or framework organises 3 factors required for an effective strategy. It was originally drawn as a triangle of three circles, but is now often represented as a Venn Diagram.  The circles represent Customers, Competitors, and Company (Corporation in Ohmae’s book). The 3Cs model is usually drawn as a Venn diagram with the intersections representing scenarios.  

Adopting a Buyer’s Perspective

Whilst the 3Cs represents three players, we’ve found that by overlaying a buyer’s perspective on the 3Cs model we can use it to create a customer-centric approach in proposition development that is really powerful. Here are the three overlays:

• Customer: Factors that contribute to a successful procurement (important)
• Company: Proof points that the procurement will be successful (proven)
• Competition: Evidence of why the final vendor was chosen over the competition (differentiated)

We’ve substituted Audience for Customer and assigned the scenario between You and Competition that is usually blank ‘out of scope’ to remind us to exclude whatever isn’t important to the audience. Embracing these points, we can draw the 3Cs as follows:

To achieve competitive advantage we need to deliver more of what the buyer wants.  In terms of the 3Cs these are:

• Factors that contribute to a successful procurement (important)
• Proof points that the procurement will be successful (proven)
• Evidence of why the final vendor was chosen over the competition (differentiated)

5 Steps to Effective Differentiation

We see five steps to using this variant of the 3Cs model for differentiation effectively:

1. Gain the deepest possible understanding of what is important to the audience – aim to go deeper than the competition (see the table below)
2. Align your message to what is important to the audience – more so than the competition
3. Deliver the best proof points you can for all your assertions – aim to provide more evidence than your competitors
4. Differentiate from the competition in ways that align tightly to factors that matter to your audience.  Recognise that you can differentiate in all three circles of the framework not just one.
5. Rigorous adherence to the above is likely to differentiate your approach and potentially to act as a distinction from the those who are more product centric.

Distinctiveness Revisited – The Role of the Brand

If we accept that distinctiveness makes for easy identification and recognition it follows that the brand and its attributes (both tangible and intangible) have a big role to play. 

Accepting this is helpful in not over doing the search for distinct and unique factors in our propositions.  

Conclusion

In a response to an article on differentiation vs distinctiveness (Mark Ritson and Byron Sharp should hug it out on distinctiveness vs differentiation), one sage commented “Distinctiveness = capture; Differentiation = keep. Both are needed if a brand wants to exist and last.” This simple summary works well!

The winner in any B2B procurement should be the vendor that offers the most value.  The 3Cs framework can help us develop that value on our audiences terms and we have found it extremely helpful in rapid proposition development. (For more on developing value see Visualising the B2B Value Landscape).

In our quest to understand, capture and use value to determine how to win (and where to play!) we have gone deeper by integrating Category into the 3Cs model and also by including some of the basic building blocks of value such as outcomes and capabilities.  Stay tuned as we dive deeper in B2B value!