CH04-EX01. The Ocean Radar Case: Recognizing Substitutes and Designing Comparison Metrics

• Related Chapter: CH04
• Related MN: MN04
• Related KM: KM028-competitors-and-substitutes.md, KM029-comparison-metrics.md

What This Case Illustrates

This case illustrates the principle that the scope of competition should be defined by the customer problem rather than the product category, and the principle that comparison metrics should be expressed not as technical specifications but as numbers and conditions the customer can judge.

Content

The direct competitor to the ocean radar is other radar systems. But if the customer’s purpose is “obtaining ocean current data,” a buoy — a piece of equipment in an entirely different form — also becomes a substitute. In other words, even when the product form differs, if it solves the same customer problem, it should be treated as a competitive relationship.

When comparing these competing alternatives, you itemize factors such as installation space, modulation method, data acquisition interval, system configuration, and selling price. Instead of a declaration like “our technology is superior,” the advantage is only actually explained once it is expressed as a concrete, customer-judgeable number, such as “shortens the data acquisition interval from 60 minutes to 30 minutes.”

Source

The Meticulous Way to Do a Startup, PART 5, Ocean Radar Competing Products/Substitutes Case and “Competitive Product Comparison Table,” pp. 196-201.