Untitled

[mondavey-blog]

Is an "elite”-branded MBA hurting rather than enhancing our performance?

This week we looked at Brands & Culture with two readings - one about the market for skin whitening creams in India (Deshpande & Chaturvedi, 2017) and the second about how a brand’s reputation can actually hurt, rather than enhance performance due to the “brand-as-master” effect (Banker et al., 2019). 

I found the latter reading the most thought-provoking. Through three different studies the researchers found that high-performance branded experiences (not products) resulted in a worse performance than the exact same experience that featured a “lesser” brand. 

As our class is part of an elite-branded MBA, it got me thinking about whether it’s worth paying a premium for this type of experience - will the result of my MIT MBA be worse than if I had completed the same coursework at a lesser-known school? Am I intimidated by the brand and thus will expect not to be able to do as well? This would be an interesting experiment to run, but more complicated than it sounds. For example, one of the reasons “elite” programs are considered as such, is because they’re able to command the best faculty in the world. They also have a great deal of learning resources and access to a wide network who can contribute to the learning experience. All of these factors would be difficult to control for. However, perhaps we should start testing people at the end of the MBA, not just via the GMAT / GRE before they start (although I would not volunteer to revisit the GMAT!). 

The article also reminded me of Carol Dweck’s work on the “Growth Mindset”. In her studies, Dweck found that if children had a growth mindset ( “I can learn anything if I put my mind to it”) vs a fixed mindset ( “I am born with a set of abilities and don’t have the capacity to increase them” ) they were more likely to do well on a test, believing that if they tried harder they would achieve better. The fixed mindset students performed in a similar way to the students who felt the “brand as master” effect in Banker et al’s studies - they were defeated by their mindset, believing that the test was beyond them / too tough for their abilities. It would be interesting to test whether there is a connection between these two study results. 

[mondavey-blog]

Innovation Diffusion

This week we’re learning about how a new-to-the-market product is adopted and what factors influence the speed of its adoption. 

In our readings, I liked the distinction between diffusion theory that focuses on people (e.g., Geoffrey Moore’s Categorization of Innovation Adopters) vs product (e.g., Rogers’ Five Factors) however I think that considering these two “types” independently misses an important interplay that occurs between them.

In his HBS note, author JT Gourville, encourages managers to first consider the intrinsic “product” factors, perfecting these (increasing relative advantage, decreasing complexity etc.) before turning to “people” factors in what sounds more like a consideration of where advertising spend should be focused, rather than having any influence on product design. 

Instead, I think these two approaches to innovation diffusion would have more benefit if considered together - first, understand who the product’s likely early adopters are and their needs, then turn to product factors; how you can change the product’s relative advantage, complexity, compatibility, observability, and trialability to best meet their needs? Then iterate back to people factors - who are the next group of adopters to understand how these product choices might influence their adoption behavior (have you designed a product so niche it will not meet broader needs?).

With their product “Good Grips”, the English brand OXO used this technique to its advantage - first understanding the needs of an ‘extreme’ user group, then adjusting the product, then considering how it could be used by a broader set of consumers.  

They designed the product - a line of hand-held kitchen tools, like peelers and scissors - for people with arthritis, creating thick rubbery handles that didn’t require fine motor-skills or a strong grip to get the job done. 

In increasing the relative advantage, decreasing the complexity, increasing compatibility with this user group, they also created a product that better solved the needs of the masses. They slightly repositioned the tools for a wider audience and have since achieved wide-spread adoption.

[mondavey-blog]

Nudge Theory in #iso

 This week, our reading was a practical guide to using Nudge Theory, popularized by Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein in 2008 and now widely used everywhere from public policy to supermarkets. 

I think the Rothman School authors did a great job of making Nudge Theory easy to use - I particularly liked their ‘menu’ of 12 different nudges and the Decision Map Checklist designed to help a user identify where to apply a nudge to influence their target audience. 

Before MIT I worked in Human-Centered Design / CX design in healthcare, so used nudge techniques, from pre-filled forms to opt-out (vs in) selections, to make the healthcare system easier to use. One of the organizations I admired in this field was the “Nudge Unit” set up by the UK Government. 

The team have since spun out of the govt, but are still going strong and creating awesome content. Interestingly, they have released a series of articles about how we can use nudge theory to improve the current self-isolation situation. One article focuses on us - students - as the target audience, recognizing that it’s a lot harder to stay motivated in a virtual learning environment. They recommend six strategies: 

* Build routines - and do so as quickly as possible. As per our reading, moments of significant change are motivators for behavior change 

* Set goals and commit to them publicly to increase follow-through. 

* Create “if..., then...” plans that pre-empt difficult scenarios and what you’ll do to overcome them (e.g., if I lose motivation to finish this assignment, i’ll contact a class mate for help)

* Set up regular prompts and reminders 

* Enlist virtual support. Their research has shown that although family / friends are willing to help, they don’t reach out because they’re not sure what to say. They suggest nominating a “study supporter” and letting them know what motivation they can offer.

* Design your environment for productivity. Removing temptations (e.g., silencing mobile phone notifications) can help to keep you focused and on track. 

[mondavey-blog]

This time last week I packed up my life in Boston and flew home to Sydney, Australia. I captured the sunrise as we were landing in Aus. Like for many people, each new day of this past week has brought with it new challenges as we do our part to prevent the spread of the coronavirus.