A while back, I interviewed for a Sr. PMM job and didn’t get it. The hiring manager—a Director of Product Marketing—told me it was a toss-up between me and another candidate. She couldn’t believe I said optimizing copy on a landing page doesn’t matter. In front of their Director of Growth, no less.
I apologized, said I understood, and thanked her for her time.
I’m one of those people who doesn’t like to fail. Don’t get me wrong—I fail often. Very often. But if something doesn’t go quite right, I tend to loop it in my head. A few years ago, I paid $4k over MSRP for a van (love the van, #dadvanlife), but it still hurts to think about it.
Meditation helps. It teaches me to let things go, be present, and compartmentalize.
But after this interview, I kept looping through the conversation. What did I say? What did she hear? Was there an error in my thinking?
Eventually, I realized I didn’t fully explain myself.
What I meant was—landing page optimization doesn’t matter if you’re not solving the right business problem. Tweaking headlines or copy won’t help if your ICP is off or if you’re targeting buyers instead of champions (common mistakes). And none of that matters if macro industry trends are slowing your growth.
It's about solving for the right thing at the right level.
Most Marketers Misunderstand Jobs to Be Done
Most JTBD applications focus narrowly, mapping job titles to tasks or layering emotional context onto functional jobs. But JTBD can and should inform ICP segmentation at a broader, strategic level.
Clayton Christensen’s Google Talk offers an expansive view of JTBD—one every PMM should embrace.
Understanding Clayton Christensen's Innovation Framework
Most of what you've learned about innovation is probably wrong.
Clayton Christensen—the visionary behind the Innovator’s Dilemma, gave a Google Talk, now 8 years old, that fundamentally reshaped how I think about innovation, growth, and how startups can win. Here's the distilled version.
Four innovation types you need to know
Christensen categorizes innovation into four buckets:
-
Potential Innovations solve a specific job-to-be-done better than alternatives.
-
Sustaining Innovations make already good products better.
-
Efficiency Innovations help you do more with less.
-
Disruptive Innovations make expensive or complex products affordable and widely accessible.
Jobs to Be Done drive potential innovations
Forget personas, demographics, and firmographics.
The real key to great product innovation is understanding the job-to-be-done. Customers don't just buy products; they hire solutions for specific tasks.
"Bananas suck as commuter breakfasts," Christensen quipped. They're gone instantly and leave you hungry by 7:30. Donuts crumble, Snickers bars trigger guilt. But a McDonald's milkshake? It lasts the entire commute and keeps hunger at bay until mid-morning.
Identify the job clearly, solve it perfectly, and create purpose-driven brands like IKEA—universally known for the job "I need to furnish my apartment tomorrow."
Why Most Innovations Aren’t Actually Disruptive
Most innovations, even groundbreaking ones, are sustaining—they improve existing products but don’t create new markets.
Upgrading from an iPhone 13 to 15 is great for Apple—but it's replacement, not growth. You're swapping devices, not expanding the market.
Going head-to-head with incumbents? Prepare to lose. They have resources, customers, and every motivation to crush you.
Disruption means changing the game
True disruption doesn't come from technological breakthroughs alone. It happens when you change the business model so drastically that incumbents can't follow.
Digital Equipment Corp. (DEC) once dominated computing like Google does search. They missed the PC disruption entirely because their business model couldn't pivot to simpler, cheaper devices. They were buried by their own profitable inertia.
Toyota disrupted Detroit with affordable vehicles, Samsung and Huawei challenged Apple by offering cheaper alternatives, and Uber fundamentally changed taxis by removing assets and fixed costs.
The danger of efficiency innovation
Efficiency innovations are double-edged. They're essential—think Walmart and Toyota’s production systems—but they reduce jobs and stifle real growth. Overemphasis here leads to stagnation, like post-1980s Japan: abundant capital, zero growth.
How finance metrics kill innovation
Here's the brutal truth: traditional financial metrics sabotage innovation.
Metrics like Return on Net Assets (RONA) and Internal Rate of Return (IRR) bias companies towards short-term, safe investments. Companies chase quick efficiency gains and neglect slower, potentially disruptive innovations.
This isn't hypothetical—it's the reality in Japan, Europe, and increasingly the U.S. Financial metrics trap companies in short-term loops, recycling cash into efficiency rather than investing in long-term growth.
What you need to do next
Real growth requires investment in potential and disruptive innovations—not just efficiency and sustaining improvements.
If you're leading a startup or managing products, here's your roadmap:
-
Identify and deeply understand the job-to-be-done. Master it.
-
Avoid head-to-head battles with incumbents unless your business model is radically superior.
-
Balance your portfolio—prioritize disruptive potential over efficiency-driven quick wins.
-
Question your metrics. IRR and RONA aren't commandments—they’re growth killers.
Christensen’s talk wasn’t academic theory—it’s practical advice and a wake-up call:
Invest in disruption, or prepare to be disrupted.
