Ecossistemas e proposta de valor

Outro artigo interessante sobre ecossistemas e a capacidade das empresas moldarem o mercado em que actuam, "Ecosystem as Structure: An Actionable Construct for Strategy" de Ron Adner, publicado por Journal of Management em Novembro de 2016.

"starting with a clear definition of “ecosystem”—the alignment structure of the multilateral set of partners that need to interact in order for a focal value proposition to materialize
...
The term “ecosystem” has itself grown to encompass an ecology of meanings. A helpful distinction can be made between two general views: (a) ecosystem-as-affiliation, which sees ecosystems as communities of associated actors defined by their networks and platform affiliations; and (b) ecosystem-as-structure, which views ecosystems as configurations of activity defined by a value proposition.
...
Originating as a biological metaphor, the notion of a business ecosystem highlighted the need for strategy to extend its consideration beyond rivals competing within industry boundaries.
...
Ecosystem as Affiliation
...
Iansiti and Levien (2004) define business networks as ecosystems, organized around a keystone species, and “characterized by a large number of loosely interconnected participants who depend on each other for their mutual effectiveness and survival.”
...
This perspective, which I call ecosystem-as-affiliation, places emphasis on the breakdown of traditional industry boundaries, the rise of interdependence, and the potential for symbiotic relationships in productive ecosystems. It focuses on questions of access and openness, highlighting measures such as number of partners, network density, and actors’ centrality in larger networks.
...
Ecosystem as Structure
...
starts with a value proposition and seeks to identify the set of actors that need to interact in order for the proposition to come about. [Moi ici: Mais uma vez, não há um caminho único. Cada empresa terá o caminho mais adequado. Por exemplo, no caso relatado neste vídeo partiu-se da proposta de valor]
...
I offer the following definition of an ecosystem and consider its implications:
The ecosystem is defined by the alignment structure of the multilateral set of partners that need to interact in order for a focal value proposition to materialize.
...
1. “Alignment structure.” Members of an ecosystem have defined positions and activity flows among them. Alignment is the extent to which there is mutual agreement among the members regarding these positions and flows. Different actors may have different end states and end goals in mind.
...
2. “Multilateral.” An ecosystem is inherently multilateral. This means not only a multiplicity of partners, but also a set of relationships that are not decomposable to an aggregation of bilateral interactions.
...
3. “Set of partners.” Being a set, membership is defined (i.e., it is not open-ended). Different actors may have different plans and perceptions regarding the composition of the set. Thus, defined does not mean complete, unvarying, or uncontested; rather, it means that the participating actors in the system have a joint value creation effort as a general goal. The goal may or may not be ultimately achieved. The defining attribute of partners is that they are actors on whose participation the value proposition depends, regardless of whether or not they have direct links to the focal firm.
.
4. “For a focal value proposition to materialize.” Inherent in this definition is an argument that the productive level of analysis for ecosystems in strategy is the value proposition and that the concern is with bringing about the activities required for its instantiation. Focusing on the value proposition—the promised benefit that the target of the effort is to receive, as opposed to what a firm is to deliver—expands the analysis in a natural way to explicitly incorporate partners. Focusing on materialization raises the requirement that partners reach a threshold level of coordination."

Continua.

Fundir ou eliminar marcas

A propósito deste artigo "Why Consolidating Brands Can Be a Strategic Mistake" que termina assim:

"The lesson for managers? Don’t confuse your sense of the company’s identity with your customers’ sense of your brands’ identities. If you do, you’ll only spread your own confusion."

Faz-me recuar no tempo:

• Modelo e Continente (2016)
• Será uma boa decisão? (2011) 
• Proposta de valor e marca (2009)
• Qual será a actual proposta de valor do Millennium BCP? (2006)

O artigo inicial chama atenção para o que a maioria esquece:

"Interestingly, companies that are expert in branding are usually comfortable with managing the brands separately. Executives at P&G, for instance, have a very strong sense of corporate identity even while they manage a huge portfolio of standalone branded businesses – and with multiple brands in each segment."

Julgo que a maioria dos decisores por fusão ou eliminação de marcas não percebem que os clientes são heterogéneos e valorizam diferentes propostas de valor. Como só pensam em reduzir custos, passam ao lado de um instrumento de marketing que podia ser utilizado de forma interessante aqui em Mongo.

"acha que uma PME consegue?"

Nem as empresas com dinheiro e protecção governamental se safam quando não estão focadas, quando escolheram ser tudo para todos e estar em todo o lado.

Isto a propósito de "Air France plans to cut almost 500 jobs on ‘fierce’ competition":

"Air France blamed increased competition from high speed rail and low-cost airlines as it announced 500 job cuts and said it would downsize its short haul operations.
.
The airline said on Monday it would implement 465 voluntary redundancies over the next year. It also announced plans to cut its domestic network capacity by 15 per cent by 2021.
.
The move comes as the carrier, part of the Air France-KLM group, looks to deal with “extremely fierce competition” in the sector."

Se empresas com dinheiro e consultores pagos a peso de ouro não conseguem, acha que uma PME consegue?

Quem são os clientes-alvo? Qual a proposta de valor?

Perguntas e inquéritos (Parte II)

Parte I.

Sabem que sou muito crítico acerca do que se faz sobre a medição da satisfação dos clientes. Por exemplo:

• "e eu respondi ao calhas!!!" - Janeiro de 2019
• But Our Executives Want A Number! - Dezembro de 2017
• Acerca da medição da satisfação dos clientes - Outubro de 2016
• Avaliar a opinião, não a satisfação - Janeiro de 2010
• Avaliar o grau de satisfação dos clientes? - Julho de 2009
• Acerca da satisfação dos clientes (parte I) - Fevereiro de 2010
• Acerca da medição da satisfação dos clientes - Fevereiro de 2010
• Medir o Grau de Satisfação dos Clientes para quê? - Setembro de 2006

Por isso, neste artigo, "What Must You Ask? Comparing Two Customer Survey Approaches", apreciei sobremaneira a liberdade das perguntas abertas:

"Understanding context of satisfaction – Word cloud based on responses to question, “What one word best describes this company?” [Moi ici: Até que ponto o que os clientes pensam da empresa está em sintonia com a mensagem que a empresa procura passar?]

Understanding context of satisfaction – What improvements would you make?" [Moi ici: Uma das frases mais comum naquela lista de artigos lá em cima é "não existem empresas perfeitas"]

Como escrevo aqui:

"Não existem empresas perfeitas. Por isso, de cada vez que um inquérito de satisfação dos clientes conclui que somos bons... perdeu-se uma oportunidade de melhoria e reforçou-se o conformismo com o status-quo."

Agora, relacionar isto com a parte I.

Perguntas e inquéritos (Parte I)

Há dias, ao terminar a leitura do livro "Choose" de Ryan Levesque fixei a SMIQ:

“The ASK Method starts with the desire to better understand your market at a deep emotional level so you can ultimately better sell and better serve your market. Knowing your market at this deep emotional level requires asking the right questions in the right way to understand what your most ideal potential customers want. Not what they think they want, not what they say they want, but what they really want. And most importantly, what they really want to buy.
...
People don’t know what they want. But they do know one thing, and that’s this: They do know what they don’t want. And therein lies the first clue to figuring out what to ask. The right questions are somewhat counterintuitive.
...
what we call the SMIQ, which stands for Single Most Important Question, because as the name implies, this is your single most important question
...
When it comes to X, what’s your single biggest challenge, frustration, or question you’ve been struggling with? (Please be as detailed and specific as possible.)
...
Now, the reason for asking this question in this specific way, is because, as we now know, while people don’t know what they want, they do know what they don’t want.
...
When you ask people this question, whether through a survey link created in a survey software like bucket.io designed for this very process, or through a simple Facebook post, you want the response format of this question to be open-ended—that is, they can write their response in their own words, as opposed to selecting one of several multiple choice options. The reason for keeping this question open-ended is that it’s all about discovering who the “hyper-responsive” potential customers are in your market—the people most motivated and interested and likely to spend money to solve the problem that you’re intending to solve. It’s about uncovering what natural language patterns these hyper-responsives use, so you can echo that language back in your marketing and messaging. It’s about identifying what makes the hyper-responsive people in your market different from everyone else so you can focus 100 percent of your effort on targeting and serving similar customers.
One of the ways in which you can identify hyper-responsives is, in part, by looking at the length of their response to your SMIQ. All things being equal, the person who gives a longer, more detailed, more passionate response to the question “What’s your single biggest frustration?” is more likely to spend money on a product that solves that frustration than the person who gives you a short one- or two-word answer.”

Julgo que a técnica proposta faz todo o sentido.

Continua.

Alinhamento

Uma conversa esta semana, durante uma reunião mensal de gestão, fez-me recuar no tempo até a Veronica Martinez e este postal "Escolher, escolher, escolher" que referi aqui no blogue em 2007, mas também em 2008 e 2009.

O artigo é "Aligning value propositions in supply chains":

"Despite the plethora of studies on value that have been undertaken to date, our exploratory analysis found that organisations are still failing to identify their value propositions, particularly in aligning their resources and capabilities with their value creation processes in their supply chains.
...
The value propositions directly impact business’ strategies; e.g. they impact the market where businesses are competing, the acquisition and development of core competencies and capabilities, selection of members of the supply chain and the financial priorities. The value propositions also impact operations, e.g. market research, new product development, supplier relationships, production processes, customers’ relationship and delivery systems. In other words the value propositions shape any subsequent plan and decision that companies make.
...
we can conclude that:
1. Strategic/key members of the supply chain are those who hold the core competencies of the chain.
2. The value propositions of strategic members of the supply chain should be aligned to enhance the value proposition of the entire supply chain.
3. Other members which are not strategic members of the supply chain can have different value propositions, but should support the value proposition of the overall supply chain.
4. The value proposition of strategic members of the supply chain dictate the value proposition of the overall supply chain.
5. The value proposition of the overall supply chain is the same as that of the company that is facing the end customer.
6. The alignment of individual value propositions with the overall supply chain ensures the alignment of strategic competencies.
7. The collaboration with strategic members is focused on the improvement of the supply chain competencies."

Não há receitas (parte II)

Parte I.



Kevin O'Leary com as suas ideias tem tido muito mais sucessos que insucessos. Só quero sublinhar que não acredito que a maioria das PMEs possa ter sucesso seguindo estas ideias.

Kevin O'Leary segue as ideias do Normalistão, segue as ideias do século XX, trabalha para criar gigantes.

Trabalhar em Mongo é trabalhar num outro mundo, é trabalhar para ganhar clientes, não para esmagar concorrentes.

Não há receitas

Um bom exemplo da variedade de abordagens estratégicas e de como o que pode funcionar perfeitamente num sector pode falhar completamente num outro, "What the Wine Industry Understands About Connecting with Consumers".

Depois recordo a estória do sucesso dos vinhos australianos e complemento a afirmação lá de cima com: O que pode funcionar perfeitamente num sector para uma empresa, pode falhar completamente no mesmo sector, com uma outra empresa com uma diferente proposta de valor para um tipo diferente de clientes-alvo.

“Who’s it for?”

“Perhaps it makes more sense to begin with a hurdle you can leap. Perhaps it makes sense to be very specific about the change you seek to make, and to make it happen. Then, based on that success, you can replicate the process on ever bigger challenges.
...
Your promise is directly connected to the change you seek to make, and it’s addressed to the people you seek to change.
...
As soon as you ask yourself about the change you seek to make, it becomes quite clear that you have no chance of changing everyone. Everyone is a lot of people. Everyone is too diverse, too enormous, and too indifferent for you to have a chance at changing.
So, you need to change someone. Or perhaps a group of someones.
Which ones?
We don’t care if they all look the same, but it would be really helpful if you had some way to group them together. Do they share a belief? A geography? A demographic, or, more likely, a psychographic?
Can you pick them out of a crowd? What makes them different from everyone else and similar to each other?Throughout this book, we’ll return to this essential question: “Who’s it for?” It has a subtle but magic power, the ability to shift the product you make, the story you tell, and where you tell it. Once you’re clear on “who it’s for,” then doors begin to open for you.”

Quantas empresas têm a resposta a esta pergunta “Who’s it for?” definida de forma clara, sem espinhas?

Muito poucas!

Esta semana, quando debatíamos o tema da proposta de valor e de quem são os clientes-alvo, no âmbito de uma formação sobre o balanced scorecard, mais uma vez surgiu a ideia de que não se pode ser tão pragmático e escolher clientes-alvo, porque os mesmos clientes uma vez são preço e outras vezes são serviço e outras vezes são inovação/design.

Veio-me logo à cabeça o exemplo da Dow e da Xiameter. Uma mesma empresa ter duas marcas, cada uma dedicada a um segmento diferente. Os produtos que existem na Xiameter também existem na Dow, embora com marcas diferentes, porque o serviço associado e as condições de compra são completamente diferentes. Se eu arriscar e comprar um bilhete para o Alfa e pagar 20 dias antes de o usar vou ter um desconto. Se eu o comprar no último minuto pago o preço completo. O produto é o mesmo, o cliente é o mesmo, o contexto do cliente é diferente, logo condições diferentes.

Recordar:

• Preço-baixo from Carlos da Cruz

Trechos retirados de “This Is Marketing” de Seth Godin.

Quantas variantes dum produto?

Um tema que deve interessar a quem se preocupa com posicionamento, proposta de valor e perceber o cliente-alvo:

"Consumers almost always tell researchers that they prefer to have many versions of a product from which to choose. But, in fact, consumers’ perceptions of how many choices they prefer change depending on whether they intend to use an item for pleasure or to meet a functional need. (Think of a swimsuit desired for beachwear versus swimming laps.) For retailers, that difference has big implications for the problem of assortment — how many variations of a single product to offer.
.
Consumers motivated by pleasure believe that what pleases them differs greatly from what pleases most other people. They will therefore prefer a large assortment. But when seeking to meet a utilitarian need with the same product, they are less inclined to see their preferences as being greatly different from those of other people. They will then be satisfied by a smaller assortment from which to choose."

O texto competo pode ser encontrado em "How Many Versions of a Product Do Consumers Really Want?"

"Most people tend to describe what they do rather than the value they bring"

"“Why should this client meet with me?” is the first of theThree Magic Pre-call Questions.
.
The question gets right to the core of your value proposition. Something you offer brings measurable value to your clients.  What is that? The measurable value you bring to your clients is the reason they should meet with you. That is your Value Proposition.
.
I will be candid and say that it is embarrassingly common for salespeople, professionals and even large companies to not have a clear understanding of their value proposition and the value they bring to their clients.
...
Most people tend to describe what they do rather than the value they bring. This is a big mistake, [Moi ici: Um erro demasiado comum que temos combatido ao longo dos anos. O que os clientes compram não é o produto, o que os clientes compram é o que conseguem ganhar com a integração do que compram na sua vida. O nosso velho "think input e não output"] It is critical to know how to articulate the real value you deliver.
.
Your value proposition communicates (among other things) both the measurable value you deliver, as well as how you differ from competitors or alternatives in your same space.  Without a measurable value proposition it will be hard for you to command any kind of price for your solution because prospective clients have no discernible value to compare against your price. Without a value proposition your product or service simply looks like an additional cost.
.
Lack of a value proposition also tends to make all vendors look the same to buyers.  Without a value proposition clients will assume that all solutions in the same space solve with roughly the same degree of effectiveness."

O nosso "think input em vez de output" - quando se pensa no produto que se vende pensa-se em output. Quando se pensa no que se vende como o input que o cliente vai integrar, vai usar na sua vida para gerar um resultado valorizado na sua vida:

• Privilegiar os inputs sobre os outputs (parte VIII)
• "it took a holistic approach towards how to play"

Trechos retirados de "Why Should Your Client Spend Even One Minute With You?"

Os elementos da pirâmide de valor no B2B (parte III)

Parte I e parte II.

"At the top of the pyramid are inspirational elements: those that improve the customer’s vision of the future (helping a firm anticipate changes in its markets), provide hope for the future of the organization or the individual buyers (for instance, that they can move to the next generation of technology easily and affordably), or enhance a company’s social responsibility.
.
Elements at the base of the pyramid have long been easy to measure, and competing on them has been straightforward. The more emotional elements at the middle and upper levels have traditionally been difficult to isolate and quantify and, therefore, harder to implement. But the battle for differentiation is shifting toward these less transactional aspects. For a strategist or a product manager, mastering the intangibles of the customer’s total experience—all the service, support, interactions, and communications wrapped around an offering—is much harder than making an offering faster, cheaper, or more durable.

Imagem e trechos retirados de "The B2B Elements of Value"

Continua

Os elementos da pirâmide de valor no B2B (parte II)

Parte I.

"Elements within the third level make it easier to do business; some provide purely objective types of value, by, say, increasing a customer’s productivity (time savings, reduced effort) or improving its operational performance (simplification, organization). But here we encounter the first set of elements that involve subjective judgments from buyers. They include things that enhance relationships between parties, such as a good cultural fit and a seller’s commitment to the customer organization.
.
Considerations such as whether a product can decrease anxiety play a large role.
.
The elements at the next level provide additional types of subjective value, addressing individual buyers’ priorities, whether they are personal (reduced anxiety, appealing design and aesthetics) or career related (increased marketability or network expansion.)"

Imagem e trechos retirados de "The B2B Elements of Value"

Continua

Os elementos da pirâmide de valor no B2B (parte I)

Algo a não tragar acriticamente, mas a considerar:

"The most objective kinds of value are found at the base, and the higher a level is, the more subjective and personal the types of value it contains.
...
At the base of the pyramid are the table stakes: meeting specifications at an acceptable price in compliance with regulations while abiding by ethical standards. Above the table stakes are functional elements, which address companies’ economic or product performance needs, such as cost reduction and scalability. Delivering on those has long been a priority in old-line industries such as manufacturing. As both buyers and sellers, B2B companies still focus most of their energy on functional elements."

Aos "table stakes" chamei ontem numa empresa o bilhete para entrar no campo e poder jogar.

Imagem e trechos retirados de "The B2B Elements of Value"

Continua

Diferenças

Diferentes clientes-alvo, diferentes propostas de valor, diferentes vantagens competitivas, diferentes preocupações e constrangimentos.

De um lado, "O empresário que paga acima da média e não quer horas extra". Antes de ler o artigo, só com o título, fiz uma aposta: Tens de ter marca própria e muito valorizada.

"“A beleza salvará o mundo”. Esta citação do escritor russo Fiódor Dostoiévski aparece na primeira página do site da Brunello Cucinelli, um empresário italiano. Embora menos conhecida do que impérios como a Prada e a Gucci, a Brunello Cucinelli é um ícone da alta moda, que fatura 450 milhões de euros e cresce 10% ao ano."

Bingo!

Do outro lado, "Luís Onofre, patrão do calçado: “O absentismo nos homens é quase zero e muito grande nas mulheres”". Cada vez mais o sector de calçado português tira partido da resposta rápida, da flexibilidade, à medida que os compradores encomendam cada vez mais tarde, cada vez em quantidades mais pequenas seguidas de reposições rápidas do que tiver mais sucesso.

BTW, isto vai ser cada vez mais frequente no futuro, "Líder da ANJE: “Há quem queira investir e fazer fábricas e não tem trabalhadores”".

Deixam-me a pensar

Um anónimo da província entretem-se a diletar:

"O conhecimento técnico, a aposta, constante, na qualidade, nos detalhes e no estabelecimento de “relações de confiança e de transparência” têm sido os grandes pilares de desenvolvimento da Impetus no mundo. A par da inovação. O grupo conta já com vários produtos patenteados e linhas específicas para desporto, com tecnologia que regula a humidade e transpiração, além das gamas Innovation (linha que armazena o calor corporal excessivo e volta a distribuí-lo em caso de necessidade, uma tecnologia desenvolvida pela NASA para os astronautas), Thermo (para proteger do frio, no inverno) e ProtectDry (roupa interior para incontinentes, lavável e reutilizável, e com tecnologia que elimina odores). Este último é um produto que está a ser vendido, em força, na grande distribuição, com destaque para Portugal, Espanha, Suíça, Alemanha, EUA e Suécia e com entrada, em breve, na Rússia e na África do Sul.
...
O Citeve e a Universidade do Minho são parceiros de excelência em I&D. Recentemente, chegou ao mercado a linha de roupa interior com certificado orgânico, que garante um fabrico socialmente sustentável e sem uso de químicos.
...
O objetivo é o aumento da capacidade produtiva por via da aquisição de novos equipamentos, alguns dos quais completamente inovadores no país
...
A consolidação de mercados é a grande prioridade da Impetus, que exporta 98% do que produz, com especial destaque para mercados como Espanha, França, México, Japão, Estados Unidos, Alemanha, Suíça e Noruega, estes últimos em regime de subcontratação para outras marcas, o chamado private label, caso da Calvin Klein ou da Tommy Hilfiger, entre muitos outros. A marca própria vale 25%.
...
Mas o private label, mesmo incerto, é o que nos tem mantido até aos dias de hoje."

Recordar:

• Especulação (parte III)  (Agosto de 2008)
• É a crise, outra história portuguesa... (Outubro de 2011)
• Spin-off à vista? (Dezembro de 2011)

No que fico a pensar?

Algo que passou na conversa que deu origem a este postal da semana passada "Em busca de um novo oásis": a fraqueza relativa das marcas próprias (comparar com a opinião de 2011) e o crescente encanto com o private label, talvez por causa do ruir do retalho tradicional.

E volto aquela preocupação de Dezembro de 2011. Assim como na série "Uma coisa é uma coisa e outra coisa é outra coisa" abordo a relação entre estratégia e estrutura produtiva, este artigo onde se fala de investigação e de "grande distribuição" e o de Dezembro de 2011, deixam-me a pensar se não há algo a melhorar a nível de relação entre estratégia, propostas de valor e estrutura de vendas.

Trechos retirados de "Impetus. O ‘underwear’ de Casillas está a investir 3 milhões"

"companies can no longer hope to be everything to everyone"

Em todos os sectores o mesmo aviso:

"In this complex environment, auto companies can no longer hope to be everything to everyone. There are simply too many technical options, markets, and social and demographic changes to address. And as the competitive landscape intensifies, being average at many things will not be good enough anymore; companies will need to pick their bets and become great at the things that truly matter for the customers they have chosen to serve. Each auto company must be very clear about how it plans to add value for its particular set of customers; in other words, it has to confidently choose its way to play. And auto companies must determine which distinctive capabilities — that is, which unique processes, tools, knowledge, skills, and organization — will allow them to deliver on this value proposition better than anyone else and create a clear right to win.
.
Armed with a coherent system in which distinctive capabilities, a strong way to play, and suitable products and services are aligned, automakers can generate sustained profitable growth. Such a coherent system is hard to copy, provides real value to customers, and differentiates companies from competitors"

 Imagem e trecho retirado de "Auto industry growth strategies: Fasten your seatbelts"

Fiquei com curiosidade ...

Ao ler "Inovafil apresenta Nidyarn" fiquei a pensar sobretudo nas implicações deste trecho:

"«A estratégia é não sermos só moda, é passarmos também a ser desporto e técnicos»"

Despedi-me do meu primeiro emprego, trabalho que adorava pois tinha a melhor tarefa do mundo, engenheiro de produto, porque estava mergulhado no mundo técnico (fornecer a VW, super racional) e fui transferido do dia para a noite para o mundo da moda (o mundo do toque, do brilho, da subjectividade).

Fiquei com curiosidade em saber o que é que a Inovafil vai fazer a nível a nível do lado direito do canvas de Osterwalder:

A proposta de valor vai ser diferente porque o job to be done vai ser diferente. Os clientes-alvo procuram e valorizam coisas diferentes, têm mindsets diferentes, estão em ecossistemas diferentes, têm ritmos diferentes, vão a feiras diferentes, estão susceptíveis a coisas diferentes, visitam prateleiras diferentes.

Que alterações vão fazer a nível comercial?

Vão ter pessoas diferentes a fazer o desenvolvimento para cada área do negócio ou vão ter uma só?

Lemingues (parte IV)

Parte I, parte II e parte III.

"If you have the ability to generate greater results than anyone else, a strategy called “customer intimacy,” then you have to make the necessary investments to deliver that level of value. Look, your competitors aren’t stupid. If they have a lower price, they know that they are giving up something when it comes to customer intimacy. Maybe they decided not to make the investment in the additional people. Maybe they don’t want or intend to make the investment in leadership. To reduce their price, they have to give up something.
.
You have to pick a lane on these things. You can have the very best product, but you are going to have to sell at a price that allows you to deliver the very best product. If your product is your intimate knowledge of the client and the ability to work creating high trust, high value, and high caring, then you are going to have to give up low price to deliver those things."

Trecho retirado de "You Have to Pay for Your Competitive Advantage"

Antes da proposta de valor

"Before focusing on the value proposition and the other elements of a business model, it is very important to get a deep insight and holistic understanding of the customers' world, their contexts, activities and experiences. In this block, the customers' explicit and latent reasons for buying and the benefits that the customer desires are analyzed. The questions to be answered include:

• How do we get a deep insight and holistic understanding of the customer's world, their future strategies, and their own customers' world? 

• Why does the customer buy? 

• What kind of benefits (functional, economic, emotional, social, ethical, environmental, symbolic) does the customer desire?"

E volto à figura do ovo e da galinha...

E ao tema do concreto para o abstracto...

Também proponho às PME que comecem por identificar os clientes-alvo antes de pensar na proposta de valor. No entanto, antes de identificar os clientes-alvo recomendo que se faça o recenseamento do que se tem. Uma PME tem de partir daquilo que tem, daquilo que pode funcionar como um ponto forte, daquilo que pode servir de alicerce para a construção de um modelo de negócio.

Trecho inicial retirado daqui.