Many Customers Are Actually Willing to Pay More, Not Less

Unraveling the "More Cheaply" Conundrum in Jobs to be Done

One of the core tenets of Jobs-to-be-Done Theory that we often hear is that customers will switch to products that get their jobs done better and/or more cheaply.

One the one hand, this goes against everything we see when we conduct this kind of research. On the other hand, it’s not that simple. So, let me break it down for you.

Willingness to pay

We should keep in mind that there are two major customer groups: consumers and businesses. These two groups will have different reference points when evaluating the cost of using tools or in our case getting jobs done. These two things are also quite different. Let’s take a brief look at each category for some perspective.

Consumers (B2C)

There is a theory that consumers will use a frame of reference relative to their income (or pay). Where a marketing strategist might survey customers in the context of the product they are currently selling they may ask something about the level of performance of the product, or the product category; possible like this:

Example survey question:

"Imagine you are shopping for [product/service]. You have two options:

• Option 1: Costs $100, performs at 90% efficiency.

• Option 2: Costs $70, performs at 70% efficiency.

Which would you choose?"

As a Jobs-to-be-Done practitioner, you would take a different approach. While you may use this method in marketing, the true power is at the front-end of innovation. Marketing has absolutely no control over product performance.

In a JTBD survey these questions will be asked after they have already rated success metrics for the entire job map. Theoretically, their thinking is still framed around that job (not a product that may only get one step done). In fact, if surveyed correctly, they’ve already been asked to identify the tools, solutions, or approaches used at every single step.

Therefore, let’s develop a better question in a visual way to demonstrated this framing more clearly.

I’ll use an near-neighbor example from our favorite 25 year old case study: The Bosch Circular Saw.

• Job: Building a deck

• Context: As a DIY project

• End User: Handy homeowner

• Fidelity: Low (10–12 steps)

• start point: construct framing

• end point: install deck boards

The start and end points are designed to tighten the context window into an adjacent area that a toolmaker would be more capable of addressing in the near term

Why Building a deck? Because focusing on cutting wood using a circular saw is too close to the solution space - implying a single solution gets the whole job done. For this example, we want to see the larger context job-to-be-done; while ensure that it’s not too large.

However, our client is a circular saw manufacturer that actually wants to find growth pathways beyond the circular saw. One scenario their customers experience occasionally is building a deck - and this is where they want to focus. Since DIYer’s do this infrequently (they’re not professionals) the company is considering how they can help their customers (or prospective customers) by simplifying the process and toolset without having to hire a professional - either through a product or a simpler service.

But what should the company focus on and how much would prospective customers be willing to pay? Clearly, everything mentioned below would be a hefty investment for a one-off project, and contractors simply pass the cost of all of this through to their clients — even though it’s masked as as service, they’re not doing it in a novel way.

The Job Map

What if your client wants to develop a novel way that gets more of the job done on a single platform (or a tool and resource combination that obfuscates the need for much of what we see above). Let’s say having all of these tools on hand would cost a DIYer $700 to acquire. Let’s not even get into the necessary resources.

Another example survey question:

"Imagine you are shopping for [product/service] that would get this entire job done with a single solution (again, this is DIY). You have two options:

• Option 1: Costs $250, gets 90% of the steps done efficiently.

• Option 2: Costs $700, gets 25% of the steps done efficiently.

Which would you choose?"

Which option would you choose? It seems simple, but you need to make sure respondents are in the right frame to answer the question. I wouldn’t put images in the survey, but I include them here to make a point.

---

When I did research with consumers at T-Mobile while studying a communication job, the frame was slightly different. The audience had to own a smartphone, so they were using that as a medium along with the costs of the service, even though they were also using numerous other services built on top of that service for similar tasks (like meetings, chat groups, etc.).

We didn’t bother repainting the visual map and solution-scape but since they had just been asked a lot of questions that were far-and-above simply purchasing a smartphone, it was clear that we were asking a question that had nothing to do with the cost of a phone and/or service plan.

We framed the questions around how much they earned and it was in the context of getting the communication job they had just gone through done perfectly.

"Imagine you are shopping for [product/service] that would help you communicate perfectly with a remote party with a single solution . How much would you be willing to pay?

1. A great deal

2. A months pay

3. A days pay

4. An hours pay

5. Not much

6. Don’t know

With 7 segments of customers, we now had a much better understanding of how each group struggled, and how much they were willing to pay to eliminate that struggle. It had nothing to do with cell phone plans. These were different groups using communication tools in different situations and contexts. The most interesting part is that they are willing to pay so much more!

That’s because it wasn’t about the phone and plan. T-Mobile’s customers were clearly - trust me, really clearly - struggling in so many ways in this communication job we had framed that it was an early advantage knowing this in great detail… and backed up by statistically reliable data. (They didn’t take advantage - cultural thing).

Now, go back to the deck model as a reference and remember that they are thinking about all of the different tools, platforms, and personal effort they have to use to communicate, not just the purchase of a smartphone. When they add it all up in the heads, it’s really costly. Obviously, many believed it cost them more than a month’s pay.

Important Note: For everyone that claims to be a Jobs-to-be-Done expert, 99% of them can’t provide this kind of insight because all they do is interview a few people and then jump to conclusions. It’s your choice to do shallow research.

Businesses (B2B)

Making this determination with enterprises is somewhat different. First of all, the end user is most likely not the purchase decision-maker. Therefore, it makes little sense to ask them financial questions. We generally use a separate survey for those people that includes financial metrics — performance and cost related success metrics they want to achieve across all users.

The big question you’ll need to answer is if you can deliver a product or service that they determine will help their end users be more productive as contrasted against a current solution, or through elimination of an array of solutions. How much more would the organization be willing to pay for such a solution?

Or I should say, how much less can you come in under that cost of the current array of solutions; or how much performance loss can you help them avoid in other areas impacted by the users of such solutions. It’s more of a Total Cost of Ownership discussion. If you can quantify the reduction in TCO, do you really need anything else? Sure, an understanding of the motivation of a purchase-decision-maker is helpful.

So, what’s the right question, or set of questions to ask?

Well, I’ve seen this improperly imposed upon end users. Frankly, no one should really care what they’d be willing to pay since they don’t pay for the current solution. The job map and success metrics will inform you as to where they struggle. That’s the role they play.

If you were asking business professionals who are trying to collaborate in a meeting with remote participants, what would be a pointless question to ask? This is especially pointless if the preceding question asked them to estimate the cost of such a meeting 🤣.

They.

Don’t.

Pay.

The.

Bills!

The only person that can answer this question - and it would need to be carefully crafted along with other TCO metrics - is the purchase decision-maker.

So…

“If a solution became available that could eliminate every way you struggle when collaborating in a meeting with remote participants, how much more do you think [OWNER] 🤡🤡🤡 would be willing to pay per hour for that solution over what your current solution costs today?”

1. 0%

2. 1% to 10% more

3. 11% to 20% more

4. 21% to 30% more

5. 31% to 40% more

6. More than 40%

7. Not sure / don’t know

… don’t ask such questions of end users.

When surveys are already ridiculously long, why would you risk asking a series of questions that these respondents can’t answer? However hard your client/stakeholder pushes you to do this…

DO NOT DO IT

In Conclusion

To say that customers want solutions that help them get jobs done more cheaply isn’t wrong. However, simply asking them if they want a cheaper solution is not how you do proper WTP research; at least not in the context of innovation and JTBD.

The right questions don’t look right to experienced pricing and marketing professionals. That’s Okay. Let them do them. You need to become the outlier that’s always proves out to be right.

---

Mike Boysen - www.pjtbd.com
Why fail fast when you can succeed the first time?

🚨 Join my FREE community for all of my free AI Prompts, and free JTBD Courses and weekly AMA office hours: https://pjtbd.com/join

📆 Book an appointment: https://pjtbd.com/book-mike

🆓 Free stuff in my Notion database: https://pjtbd.notion.site