10 Big Reasons Why Most Innovative Products & Services Fail

10 Big Reasons Why Most Innovative Products & Services FailWhy innovative new products fail? Because marketers believe they know the industry, the product market and the customer and their needs.  And after going through cycles of input gathering and any orginal innovative ideas were ultimately turned into something that a lot like their existing products with minor improvisation. Sounds familiar?

Too many firms “innovate” with very few real insight about the market, their customers, or customers’ aspirations, needs or wants. Rather than go out and understand what customers need and expect, they rely on anecdotal evidence and market research, or simply perform some “ethnographic” study performed by traditional marketing research companies. “ethnographic” field work performed withour an anthropologist is like going to bungee jump without an instructor.  This is a key failure point of the first order, like jogging on the rooftop blindly down a path that ends off the building.

What leads some innovative products and servies to succeed and others to fail? The answer to this question encompasses a number of different factors. In some cases, the product cannot deliver the promised performance, capability or attract sufficient interest.

Even if potential can be demonstrated early on, it may take a substantial amount of time to reach the projected adoption figures. Or the product’s innovative feature is being replicated by an existing product as an added function and there is no need for a stand alone new product. Or the economics of the new product is not attractive enough and cannot hit a critical mass. Insight into the minds of the early adopters can greatly reduce the risks of failure, which is generally due to one or more of the following reasons:

1. The innovative new products are not shown in the right user context thus creating a misunderstanding of the applications.

2. The new technologies behind the innovative product are not linked to an exciting and worthwhile market opportunity or are too niche.

3. The innovative new products are not positioned within any product category and also fail to open up a completely new category.

4. There is insufficient knowledge and resources for marketers to drive consumer adoption.

5. The core functions of the innovative new products cannot support themselves as stand alone products and only work as features.

6. The promised performance of the innovative new product does not materialize and does not provide enough customer value.

7. The innovative new products were distributed through the wrong channel and compromise the value propositions.

8. The innovative new products perform only a small function and can be included by others in other products as an additional feature thus diminishing the demand.

9. The expectation of consumers adopting the new products is over estimated.

10. Products are pushed to a skeptical customer group and fail to neutralize the perceived risks associated with the new product.

The innovative new products require an ecosystem of support which did not exist or were not built fast enough. Determining the suitability of market research for innovative new products or services is a challenge. Insights are not only needed in the early phase of idea gathering, it is equally critical at the pilot stage. Many traditional market research methods are inherently more tactically focused (orientation on the customers of today) and lead to the development of small improvements in existing products and the big ideas eventually diluted.

image credit: virtualbusiness

Like Innovation Excellence on Facebook
Don’t miss an article (4,600) – Subscribe to our RSS feed and join our Innovation Excellence group!

Idris MooteeIdris Mootee is the CEO of Idea Couture, a strategic innovation and experience design firm. He is the author of four books, many published articles, and a frequent speaker at business conferences and executive retreats.

Idris Mootee




Cultivating food from the air we breathe: How decades-old NASA technology is still delivering disruptive tech today

By Dan Blacharski | June 29, 2021

The “Replicator” machine seen on the “Star Trek: The Next Generation” television series was imagined as a 24th century technology…

Read More

Il Sole 24 Ore and qiibee launch the first book ever made on Blockchain & NFT

By Francesco Pagano | June 23, 2021

The first book in the world made on blockchain, the first ‘decentralized’ discussion on leadership, completely shared and co-created with…

Read More

No Comments

  1. Brian Croswhite on August 23, 2012 at 10:56 am

    So, if that’s the malady, what’s your prescription?

  2. Paul Burgo on August 24, 2012 at 10:16 am

    I would have to disagree with your statment regarding market research. You would need to specify a bit more as to the type of market research being performed.

    If you’re speaking of secondary research, then you are probably correct, although, good secondary research can be valuable. The problem is sifting through all of the available secondary research to identify the good and the bad.

    Primary research, on the other hand, is totally necessary if you want to succeed with any innovation efforts. In order for you to identify and evaluate a new innovative product idea, you need primary market research. If the data indicates that the idea is in fact a good fit for the market or markets, then one would also need to perform a deeper dive based on specific goals. this may include, spcific market metrics, customer data, and a strategic plan assesment by a knowledgeable strategic consulting firm, all of which are market research.

  3. Foo Bar on August 24, 2012 at 5:17 pm

    The prescription to solve this? Easy: Run through each of those 10 points and do the opposite.

Leave a Comment