Paying for Insight

I’m enjoy­ing Seth Godin’s lat­est book, Linch­pin: Are You Indis­pens­able?. In his chap­ter on “Becom­ing the Linch­pin”, he has a great dia­gram on page 52, which I’ve repro­duced here. His linch­pin dis­cus­sion is a good illus­tra­tion of the vari­ance between price and value. I always cringe when a client reacts neg­a­tively to my billing rate (which is low for the indus­try). If they say, “I wish I could bill my time at that rate,” I know they haven’t got it and may never “get it.” I want to ask them what rate they pay their mechanic or their accoun­tant. It’s a ques­tion of the value con­tributed, not the price paid. This is the prob­lem with peo­ple who try to do too much tweak­ing on the prod­uct of a good designer… they don’t under­stand that they’re pay­ing for exper­tise and then negat­ing its value. Per­haps they’d rather have an expert at min­i­mum wage?

The Worst Available Differentiation Point

price Back in the early days of my busi­ness career, I used to pre­pare insur­ance pro­pos­als. Of course, we always wanted to know what price and cov­er­ages we were quot­ing against — it was nat­ural to want to beat both so we would be in a good posi­tion to get the order for the pol­icy. There were a few times when we couldn’t quite beat the price the client was pay­ing else­where, and as I reviewed some of these pro­pos­als with the bro­ker­age owner, I would ask if I should try to sharpen it fur­ther some­how. Some­times we would try, but if the rates already looked rea­son­able to us, he’d say, “No–if you get it on price, you’ll lose it on price.”