When I met with TEC 44 member, Jeremy Cherny, for our regularly scheduled One On One last month, Jeremy was working diligently on an "apples to apples" comparison between his firm and a competitor's offering. Jeremy is president of Tobin Solutions. Tobin Solutions is an IT consulting firm.
Jeremy's apples to apples outline contained the usual laundry list of things that IT consulting firms do. Network support. Remote support. On-site repair. Training. Preservation. Consulting. On and on went the list attempting to prove that even though Tobin Solutions solution appeared to be more expensive than the competitor's proposal, the client would be better off because they would get more IT stuff.
As with most TEC members, Jeremy was open to some feedback. I remembered a newsletter that was produced by the Grunau Company, another TEC member company. Their position was that apples to apples comparisons actually commoditized the work they did, playing into a low bidder industry mentality.
The Grunau Company reasoned that no two apples were actually alike. And, you generally couldn't tell much of a difference until you ate both and tasted the difference. They wanted their people to understand that it is the intangibles that created value for the customer and sustainable differentiation for the company.
In the end, Jeremy reworked his proposal eliminating the apples to apples comparison. Instead, he focused on the intangibles that created value in the mind of his client. Time will tell if Jeremy is successful in securing the new business. We know now, however, that if he wins it won't be because he was the low bidder.
If you would like a copy of The Grunau Company newsletter containing their thoughts on the folly of apples to apples comparisons, please feel free to contact me.
RSS Feed