BY BROOKE NIEMIEC – VP, MARKETING STRATEGY
I was sitting in a marketing strategy planning meeting recently, and the conversation had just turned to the question of prioritization. Within seconds, the phrase “low-hanging fruit” had been thrown around, and its first cousins “quick wins” and “high revenue, low difficulty” quickly joined in. Plagued by an unnerving sense of déjà vu, I started to question the usefulness of these concepts.
Low-hanging fruit actually sounds quite delicious, doesn’t it? There it sits, easily within reach, just a low-effort, casual grab away. But I have to ask, if there is low-hanging fruit out there, why haven’t we picked it yet? This can’t be the first time we’ve had this idea, and theoretically the fruit was ready a while ago, and yet still we sit here having the same conversation.
I think the reason that low-hanging fruit tends to be in a state of permanent unpicked ripeness is due to one of the following:
1. IT’S NOT ACTUALLY LOW-HANGING
This probably sounds wrong, given the fact that the phrase itself obviously suggests that it most certainly is. However, most of the items I’ve seen in the “low-hanging fruit” bucket have been there for years. I think that many organizations tend to underestimate the amount of effort that it actually takes to get even the easy stuff done, so in effect almost nothing is really ever easy. Further, the things that actually are easy almost never get any resources at all; because of course the easy things just take care of themselves, right?
2. WE’RE NOT ACTUALLY SURE THE FRUIT IS WORTH GRABBING
We’ve all theorized that the fruit at the bottom of the tree still tastes good, but there is doubt. Unfortunately, the benefits realized from most of the easy stuff tends to be pretty small, and its impact is never felt. It’s hard to gain momentum and get broad buy-in if you aim for benefits so small that you won’t really be able to tell if anything happened.
Instead of following the traditional path, I suggest you ignore the low-hanging fruit and start medium. What I mean is this. First, you need to select projects that are big enough in scope that the team will be forced to acknowledge the effort that will be required to get something done, thereby securing resources and support for the effort up front. Second, you need to select projects that are likely to reap large enough benefits that people will pay attention. If you want long-term support, buckle down and try something that will get you noticed (Just not in a “Hey, we just spent our entire budget reserve on this risky strategy that may alienate our current customer base” kind of way).
So the next time you are sitting in a prioritization meeting and someone suggests tackling the low-hanging fruit first, I hope you’ll join me in pushing for something a little more medium.
Start Medium
BY BROOKE NIEMIEC – VP, MARKETING STRATEGY
I was sitting in a marketing strategy planning meeting recently, and the conversation had just turned to the question of prioritization. Within seconds, the phrase “low-hanging fruit” had been thrown around, and its first cousins “quick wins” and “high revenue, low difficulty” quickly joined in. Plagued by an unnerving sense of déjà vu, I started to question the usefulness of these concepts.
Low-hanging fruit actually sounds quite delicious, doesn’t it? There it sits, easily within reach, just a low-effort, casual grab away. But I have to ask, if there is low-hanging fruit out there, why haven’t we picked it yet? This can’t be the first time we’ve had this idea, and theoretically the fruit was ready a while ago, and yet still we sit here having the same conversation.
I think the reason that low-hanging fruit tends to be in a state of permanent unpicked ripeness is due to one of the following:
1. IT’S NOT ACTUALLY LOW-HANGING
This probably sounds wrong, given the fact that the phrase itself obviously suggests that it most certainly is. However, most of the items I’ve seen in the “low-hanging fruit” bucket have been there for years. I think that many organizations tend to underestimate the amount of effort that it actually takes to get even the easy stuff done, so in effect almost nothing is really ever easy. Further, the things that actually are easy almost never get any resources at all; because of course the easy things just take care of themselves, right?
2. WE’RE NOT ACTUALLY SURE THE FRUIT IS WORTH GRABBING
We’ve all theorized that the fruit at the bottom of the tree still tastes good, but there is doubt. Unfortunately, the benefits realized from most of the easy stuff tends to be pretty small, and its impact is never felt. It’s hard to gain momentum and get broad buy-in if you aim for benefits so small that you won’t really be able to tell if anything happened.
Instead of following the traditional path, I suggest you ignore the low-hanging fruit and start medium. What I mean is this. First, you need to select projects that are big enough in scope that the team will be forced to acknowledge the effort that will be required to get something done, thereby securing resources and support for the effort up front. Second, you need to select projects that are likely to reap large enough benefits that people will pay attention. If you want long-term support, buckle down and try something that will get you noticed (Just not in a “Hey, we just spent our entire budget reserve on this risky strategy that may alienate our current customer base” kind of way).
So the next time you are sitting in a prioritization meeting and someone suggests tackling the low-hanging fruit first, I hope you’ll join me in pushing for something a little more medium.
Tags: