Aiming to please big clients versus little clients
2008-03-11
Thinking about the difference between aiming to please a few big clients versus aiming to please lots of little clients.
From a business point of view:
Many small entrepreneurs think, "If we could just land Apple, Google, or the government as a client, we'll be all set!"
Software companies often do this. They hope to make some technology that a huge company will want to build into every product, or install at every employee's desk.
But there are many problems with this:
- you have to custom-tailor your product to please very few specific people
- those people may change their mind or leave the company
- who are you really working for? are you self-employed or are they your boss?
- if you do land the big client, they practically own you
- by trying so hard to please the big client, you lose touch with what the rest of the world wants
Instead, imagine if you designed your business to have NO big clients - just lots of little clients.
- you don't need to change what you do to please one client - only the majority (or yourself)
- if one client needs to leave, it's OK, you can sincerely wish them well
- because no one client can demand you do what they say, you are your own boss (as long as you keep clients happy in general)
- you hear hundreds of people's opinions, and stay in touch with what the majority of people want
Now, let's think of this from a music point of view:
Some musicians think, "If I could just land a deal with Interscope or Warner, I'll be all set!"
But look at the above lists again. It all applies.
The dangerous thing about the record deal mentality is you start changing what you do to please the one or two people at companies who have shown an interest in your music.It not only hurts your music, but puts you on shaky ground when (not if) that person leaves the company.
By making a plan to only please your fans, labels be damned, then not only do you stay in touch with what people love, but it puts your career on much steadier ground.
It's the long tail baby!
Very True. But there are those few artists on major labels who manage to keep doing things exactly the way they want to (as if they where indie) Beck, one of my favorites, comes to mind.
Still though, thinking of all your fans as "lot's of little clients" is a good way to look at it.
Andrew Dubber has definately bought this idea of the "long tail" across really well. Selling a bit of more is the key, the internet sure breaks the traditional rules of economics, and with that musicians have to think of reframing the way they think of the economics of music.
Hey Derek, thanks for saying this! I set up www.ComeSeeMyShow.com this same way! It's for up-and-coming musicians & actors & artists to advertise their shows, but one of my friends keeps saying, "And when it's really successful you'll get ads for Beyonce and Rolling Stones and...". But there are a million times more up-and-comers than there are superstars! Beyonce and Rolling Stones aren't going to fill the calendar with live shows. The fuller the calendar, the more people want to visit, which is better for all the artists posting their shows, and that's better for the visitors, and everybody wins!
... a firm nod of agreement!
Wow Derek, this so describes my day job.
This is exactly what happened with my Brother's company Blaxxun. They were working with Virtual Reality years before second Life existed. But they were trying to aim for something that would appeal to large businesses for virutal conventions. My brother said that it would be too difficult to reach lots of little customers, so they didn't try. The Result--Blaxxun is out of business and second Life did what they envisioned themselves doing.