Issue # 35 Lessons of Goldilocks - Part 2 - Crossing the Chasm

Last week we discussed the importance of the timing of your innovation. I told the story of how I got it wrong with the launch of Atomic Blox and we established that most new ideas are introduced too soon and the company usually lacks the resources or resolve to wait it out. 

Getting the timing just right is called Goldilocks Timing and if you want to get caught up or to have a refresh then click the link HERE.

This week we want to unpack the idea further and understand some other key factors in your timing that will influence the potential outcome. 

Any new innovation with mass appeal always has a lag time from when it is invented and when it is readily adopted. This idea originated from a study conducted 80 years ago in the cornfields of the midwest. In 1943, two researchers at Iowa State University wanted to study the adoption rate of farmers trying new types of hybrid corn seed. Their results showed a bell curve where a group of “early adopters” would take the chance on the new innovative seeds before other farmers. These people liked to be identified as eager first movers while their counterparts preferred a more stayed “wait and see” approach.

Later a Stanford sociologist named Everett Rogers demonstrated that this same pattern of adoption is true across the introduction of most new innovations. He identified five distinct types of adopters: innovators, early adopters, the early majority, the late majority, and the laggards; publishing his theories in his classic book “Diffusion of Innovations.”   

This idea was further popularized by Geoffrey Moore in his book Crossing the Chasm however he added the nuance that not all ideas progress through the bell curve in a uniform manner. Furthermore Moore expanded on the idea that for mass adoption to be achieved, there is a chasm to be bridged from the early market to the mainstream. 

The big idea from all three research projects is that there is an Innovation Adoption Lag. It is the time from when a new innovation is introduced, how that intersects with current human behavior and when the value proposition and incentives are right for mass adoption. ‍

Historically speaking it is often true that the inventors of a technology are not necessarily the benefactors of its mass adoption to the mainstream. The pioneers are often not necessarily the settlers because the innovator is often too early and the innovation adoption lag takes too long.

Consider the following: 

• Thomas Edison did not invent the light bulb; it was invented by Humphrey Davis 20 years prior.
• Henry Ford did not invent the engine; it was invented 89 years before the first model T rolled off the production line, by Francois Isaac de Rivaz.
• Steve Jobs did not create the smartphone; it was invented 14 years earlier by IBM and sold by Bell South.
• Sam Altman did not invent AI; it was imagined 70 years prior, by two computer scientists, Alan Turing and John McCarthy.

The hardest thing to do is to get people to change existing behaviors. This means that while timing for the introduction of your innovation is critical, even more important is trying to anticipate the level of behavioral resistance required by your target market to adopt it. The lower the barrier of resistance the more readily your new idea be embraced. 

According to Morgan Housel, there is a 20 - 30 year innovation adoption lag. Housel has  identified 10 emotional steps that the consumer moves through when considering adopting a new technology:

1. I have never heard of it
2. I have heard of it but do not understand it
3. I understand it but do not see how it could be useful
4. I see how it could be fun for rich people but not for me
5. I use it but it is just a toy
6. It is becoming more useful to me
7. I use it all the time
8. I could not imagine my life without it
9. Seriously, people used to live without it?
10. It's too powerful and needs to be regulated

Cars, airplanes and cell phones have all gone through this evolution and now AI is rapidly moving through the same process. The key once again comes down to timing: the moment you first launch an innovation, if it solves a big present problem, and finally the time it takes (the lag) to cross the chasm to become the go-to option in the customer's mind.

It is also true that the Innovation Adoption Lag can be influenced significantly as a result of a crisis. Consider the progression witnessed during the second World War; where conflict began in Poland on horseback and 6 years later was concluded in Japan with nuclear bombs. 

In reflection, as you consider the launch of your new idea that you think is timed right, realize that there will be an innovation adoption lag and consider the following questions:

1. Does your idea compliment and/or enhance existing behavior of your target market?
2. What would prevent your target market from adopting your new idea?
3. Do the incentives of adopting your idea outweigh the barrier of resistance and if so what needs to be true to cross the chasm to the mainstream.

‍