A Masterclass on Building SaaS Products That Customers Adopt with Stephen Wunker, Author Jobs To Be Done

Stephen Wunker Managing Director New Markets Advisors chats with Shripati Acharya, Managing Partner Prime Venture Partners.

Stephen is a frequent writer and speaker on how firms can create new growth platforms. His award-winning books include Capturing New Markets, Jobs to be Done , and Costovation.

Listen to the podcast to learn about

02:00 - Jobs to be done for SaaS Companies

11:30 - How to Find Underlying Motivations of Your Customers

22:00 - How NOT to use Jobs to be done Framework

34:45 - How Often Should a SaaS Company Talk to Its Customers?

40:00 - The Best Innovation Book

Read the complete transcript below

Shripati Acharya 00:40

Hello and welcome to the Prime Venture Partners podcast. My guest today is Stephen Wunker, author of three award-winning books, capturing New Markets: How Smart Companies Create Opportunities Others Don’t, Jobs to be Done: A roadmap for customer centered Innovation and Costovation: Innovation that gives your customers exactly what they want and nothing more.

This is the second time we are hosting Steven on this podcast. We had the privilege of having him earlier back in the summer of 2020. Steven is a thought leader and advises companies both large and small on innovation and growth. He was a long-term colleague of renowned Harvard Business School Professor Clay Christensen, and helped him build his consulting practice.

He now leads new markets advisors. A firm dedicated to empowering companies to innovate and grow. He has published widely in journals such as Forbes and Harvard Business Review. And his television appearances include Bloomberg and the BBC. Welcome Steven to Prime Podcast. I’m delighted to have you with us.

Stephen Wunker 01:45

It’s great to be back.

Shripati Acharya 01:47

So to set the context, Stephen, and can you explain what is Jobs to be Done Framework and how it differs from traditional market segmentation methods?

Stephen Wunker 01:55

So Jobs to be Done tries to step behind what people are buying today or what they say they want and really discover the underlying motivations that drive purchase and usage behavior, whether that’s a B2C or a B2B context. And in doing so, it often reconceives what the competitive landscape is. Oftentimes your competitors are not just your direct ones, but totally different ways of getting certain jobs that people are trying to accomplish done for them. So by doing so, it’s a way to really generate innovative ways, not only of designing a product, but also of selling and marketing that product.

Shripati Acharya 02:45

Got it. I recall the last time you used a great example, which was how an ice cream is not really a way of satisfying one’s sweet tooth, but really it is about the family coming together, about unwinding, about just relaxing, and when you think about it that way, the competitive elements there are much broader that the TV could be a competitive element for an ice cream, which you otherwise would eat together with the family.

Stephen Wunker 03:15

Absolutely right. This happens in so many walks of life. This past weekend, I have a 14-year-old son who went to see a horror movie. And I asked him, “but you don’t like scary movies. Why are you going to go see a horror movie?” And he said, “Dad, I’m not going to see the movie. I’m really going to hang out with my friends.” Aha. So that was his job to be done. There were a lot of different ways to hang out with his friends. It so happened that they chose a movie and the fact that it was a horror movie was sort of incidental to the whole thing.

Shripati Acharya 03:50

Yeah, I mean it is fascinating that when you start peeling the layers, one would never associate ice cream with indulgence and spending quality time with friends and family, it just doesn’t come together. But now you have recently published a mini book titled Jobs to Be Done in Tech. So what is unique about tech as it relates to Jobs to be Done?

Stephen Wunker 04:10

So look, even more than I would say any other field, there is such an open canvas in tech with what you can create. So you can’t just ask people what they want because oftentimes they are very focused on what they’re doing today and the existing competitive scene, you can’t necessarily just focus on what the pain points are with their existing approaches because oftentimes those approaches are totally unsuited or very narrowly defined versus what you might be able to actually accomplish for them.

So in tech, more than I’d say any other industry, you need to step back and understand those underlying motivations. But to do so, you have to be very rigorous in that the virtues of tech and having such an open canvas are often some of the potential drawbacks as well. You could start boiling the ocean and look at all manner of things that customers are trying to get done. So you need to be able to be both open as well as very specific about what you’re trying to achieve through your research.

Shripati Acharya 05:25

Makes sense. And it is very true that the customers themselves might not know what the possible solutions are in the first place and many a time, their problem description itself might be lacking. But perhaps you can jump into an example and help illustrate this. So can you tell, just taking an example, and you have worked on SaaS, so a SaaS example would be terrific to understand this.

Stephen Wunker 06:00

Sure. So let’s take the general job of implementing a system of OKRs, objectives and key results, which is a sort of more updated version of looking at key performance indicators and measuring whether individuals or departments are doing what they’re doing or supposed to do, but without overmanaging, overprescribing exactly what specifically they must get done. Now a lot of companies when they go to implement a system like that, they just try to do a hard switchover and they struggle in doing so.

And then when they actually do the switchover, they track the objectives and the key results in SharePoint or in Excel in sort of cobbled together systems, which makes it very difficult to understand how your objectives might relate to a colleague’s objectives and also understand where everybody is at in terms of getting their key results. So there’s a handful of companies that have moved into the space to provide systems to do so.

We worked with one of them that really wanted to understand if their real competition is not likely their direct competitors, which probably constitute about 10% of the market in total, but the 90% of companies that are doing cobbled together solutions or simply using Excel, how do they compete against Excel and cobbled together solutions while also beating their existing competitors.

So in doing so, they were able to understand that the jobs that people had to get done weren’t just about tracking objectives and key results, although clearly the tracking and the reporting, the monitoring, the setup configuration, all that did matter. But there was a whole set of broader jobs that customers also had around educating people on how to set appropriate objectives and key results on understanding when or when not those had to be revised, how those should relate to past key performance indicators, how you were actually going to measure partial accomplishment for instance, of a key result.

So by setting that overall context, the company could then not only ensure customer success and have a much broader rollout of the system, and when you’re charging on a per seat basis, that’s very important to do, but also could ensure longevity of the accounts that it had secured. So one example, but it’s a way of really reconceiving what business you’re in. For this company, it wasn’t about just tracking objectives and key results, it was ensuring the success of a switchover to OKRs.

Shripati Acharya 09:05

Got it. So there’s actually a whole change management piece which was critical to that aspect. So if we could just peel onion here a little bit, how did that really result in different … just taking a product lens, in different product features or different product design. How did that impact that then versus just treating it as an objective and key result, tabulating or visualization solution?

Stephen Wunker 09:35

So for this company, they came to a realization, which is the same that a lot of SaaS companies come to and that you need to cater for different paths of adoption. So in this case, OKRs could be adopted just for instance by a product team, and you had to enable bottoms up adoption in an organization.

So there had to be a very simple, straightforward product oriented offer. But the big wins were for enabling OKR rollout, for instance, a large automaker, and that’s a huge accounting. So if they could do that, then they needed a much broader set of offerings that you would only expose to the right sort of prospects, not only because of confusing the overall customer experience, but also due to scalability of some of the service offerings that had to be associated with the products.

So they had to have two different executions which had the same core engine, but they appeared very different depending upon whether it was bottoms up or tops down implementation of the system.

Shripati Acharya 10:55

And you’re saying that depending on the size of the organization or maybe some other choices the organizational management makes, you might actually choose one or the other?

Stephen Wunker 11:05

That’s right, that’s right. And so they had to develop a system that could be acceptable for both situations. Now they could have made a strategic choice, they were just going to focus on one scenario versus the other, but sometimes that’s … well, that sounds good in theory, in a very fast moving market like OKRs, that was not appropriate for them.

Shripati Acharya 11:30

And how did they go about finding that? Is it just when you’re talking about these underlying motivations, is it just through interviews or focus groups? What are you doing? Are you doing anything different or is it just the traditional discovery process that you go through?

Stephen Wunker 11:50

So, good question. We are huge fans of doing in-depth interviews, not focus groups. We’ll do focus groups in consumer good situations where there’s a social component. And there’s a lot to be learned through CPG marketing.

But in this case, big fans of in-depth interviews and then surveys on the back of the in-depth interviews. We will occasionally do ethnography or screen sharing to understand what tools people are using today. We did that a little bit in this circumstance as well, but we use the interviews to really dig out the why, why, why. We want to understand the context in detail. We want to understand the person’s priorities and we want to speak with both users as well as buyers. Particularly in a SaaS context, those are often different people.

Typically, in those interviews, we’ll use a funnel shaped structure. So we want to start very broad, in what are people’s priorities, what are their frustrations, what do they find tedious? What’s changed in the past year that has made those particularly worse or better in terms of their major issues? How does that relate to their priorities going forward? And you see, we’re starting to get a little bit more specific over time.

So you told us in the screener that you are rolling out OKRs. Tell me about how that’s been. Yeah, how did that start? Where did the ideas start? Okay, now how are you tracking those OKRs and who looks at that? Who gets the reporting on that? How do you assess whether you’re tracking those effectively? So we’re getting more and more and more specific, and we’re doing that because we want to look at how we can expand the canvas and yet we also have specific things that we need to cover and then we will really drill in.

But once you get very specific, it’s hard to helicopter up and then be very general again. So we’re looking to be surprised at the outset about the process, about dimensions of performance that our client may not have really considered in the past. And then as you get more specific, we want to get to that actionable detail that people in product or marketing might be able to use in very specific ways.

Shripati Acharya 14:25

Got it. So if I have to look at this OKR example, it’s I guess change management and affecting that probably came up as a big factor in the design of the product. Can we use any other examples which come to mind in tech?

Stephen Wunker 14:45

Sure. Let’s talk about a client that we actually discuss in the working paper Jobs to be Done in Tech, which is called Firstbase, which is an Andreessen Horowitz backed Venture. So Firstbase provides remote work solutions to a range of organizations from fast growth tech companies to law firms that might have a lot of people who have moved remote and are looking to stay remote.

And those can be software oriented, but a lot of it is around physical gear, laptops, ergonomic desks and chairs and ring lights, getting the right equipment to the right people, understanding who has what in what condition, managing those devices and then importantly retrieving those devices when somebody leaves an organization is a major headache.

And so Firstbase was created to manage that. So it is both a software offering and a management and physical assets offering. Software in terms of not only the device management, but understanding who has what in what condition and what has to be done about it.

Shripati Acharya 16:00

So let me take a guess here, so the obvious thing here, I would say their customer requirement here might be, Hey, I need to get this person connected. I have a remote workforce. So I would think that what are their needs? They need a laptop, as you said, they need a light, they need a desk, they need a chair and maybe they need Zoom or whatever it is the software required to do it. Maybe some kind of time management stuff to enable them to manage their time of somebody else. If it’s a hourly workers, those are the kind of product requirements which come to mind.

Stephen Wunker 16:40

That’s right. So if you consider then different customers that they would have, one set would be these fast growth tech companies, where they need to get equipment out to people often in very remote places, they’re Azerbaijan or whatever, but it has to be secured equipment and it has to be done very quickly.

And for the HR departments or the facilities departments, which sometimes monitor physical assets as well, their Jobs to be Done are around reducing their headaches and reducing the staff needed to manage the process. Now that’s very different to a top tier law firm or investment bank, which doesn’t have such a fast growth in its headcount, but wants to ensure the most awesome onboarding and even offboarding process possible. Slick everything, nicely branded, works totally out of the box concierge service for having any sorts of issues, very different set of jobs that those folks are trying to get done. And then the services as well as the products that have to be wrapped around. And there’s some other segments out there too.

So by defining different segments based upon Jobs to be Done and then understanding what sort of offerings relate to that, they could prioritize those segments and develop as well as market very specific offerings designed for those segments.

So for the tech company you’re talking about reduced headcount in terms of managing these assets and the time to get somebody onboarded. For the law firm, you’re talking about employee delight and maybe even retention. Preferably in different metrics of performance.

Shripati Acharya 18:35

Got it. And so how did the product itself change, as far as Firstbase itself is concerned?

Stephen Wunker 18:40

So if you’re going to be talking about speed to get somebody onboarded, you don’t want it to be infinitely configurable. So there had to be a fairly standardized process working with value added resellers to get machines flashed and shipped with a minimum degree of employee choice.

Whereas for the young lawyers, a very different situation. You want to have a six-foot desk or … sorry for using imperial measurements for you, your two-meter desk. Okay, you can do that. You want this kind of light, you can do that. So really ways to pamper as well as to ensure that, did everything arrive appropriately. Are you all set up right? So sort of that white glove service to create real delight. Harder to scale, but also quite valued.

Shripati Acharya 19:50

So what do you think is a feature set which would not have been discovered if you had not used the Jobs to be Done Framework? I mean, I’m just curious, just a regular conversation, Hey Mr. Lawyer, what do you need? I would’ve said, I’d like a desk and I like these kind of things. But what do you think the Jobs to be Done Framework actually enabled you to do to discover any non-obvious stuff is I guess my question here.

Stephen Wunker 20:25

So in their case, I would say the biggest differentiator that they found was actually in offboarding employees. There were many differentiators, but an employee who leaves, getting their equipment back or saying at some point just keep it ‘cause it’s not worth it.

And managing that and making that seamless and diffusing what might sometimes be a bit of a tense situation, solved a major headache for these employers. That oftentimes it may not have been the majority of cases, but when they came up they were very impactful. So being able to do that was a significant way that Firstbase could differentiate from others who purport to help manage remote workforces.

Shripati Acharya 21:20

So I’m just curious now, which is that when you’re interviewing somebody and having these deep ethnographic interviews, won’t you end up with literally dozens of jobs? I mean, yeah. Okay. You want onboarding, it also depends on who you are talking to and different stakeholders in this. So for instance, I don’t know on the employer side there might be the tech guys involved, IT guys involved, maybe there’s a HR involved, maybe there is other people involved.

Stephen Wunker 21:55

So great question. There are some really bad ways to do Jobs to be Done out there. Well, one popular way is to get, as you say, dozens of jobs and then ask people, well how important is that to you? Please rate it one to five. How satisfied are you in that? Please rate at one to five. And then you do a scatter plot.

So first of all, a scatter plot with 85 different points is not very useful in designing a proposition. Second of all, I will tell you that the importance and satisfaction ratings will largely align. And so you get basically a linear plot on your scatter plot. Well yeah, what are you supposed to do with that?

So we actually learned from some top consumer goods companies how to do this in a much better way. And then we tried to adapt that into tech marketing. So in CPG, consumer packaged goods, you can’t distinguish a product on 15 different dimensions. It’s not going to register. And they’ve been very clear. And other automakers are clear as well.

People are not going to be considering 15 dimensions when they’re buying something. Maybe if it’s some complex RFP, fine, but ordinary people, or even in B2B consideration meetings, it just doesn’t happen that way. They focus on three or four factors and that’s how the decision gets done.

So how can you ensure that at a high level, you can distinguish yourself on those three or four factors and then you can ladder that down into progressive layers of detail. So for us, we call those, those north star jobs. What are those handful of north star jobs that somebody can keep in their mind at any one time and that really drive either the purchase decision or their satisfaction with the usage?

And then let’s get more specific around the specific Jobs to be Done underneath those North Star jobs. And you might go into layers of sub jobs and sub jobs beneath that as well, depending upon how complex the equipment is. We’ve just done a bunch of work around hospital diagnostic equipment for blood analyzers, extremely complex, lots and lots of jobs. And then beneath that, you start looking at the success criteria for accomplishing those jobs well. And what are the current approaches that people have to getting those jobs done today? What are the pain points around that? It’s a construct we call the jobs atlas. The job in and of itself is very important and frames the analysis, but it is not enough.

So once you have all those layers of detail, then you’ve got something that’s both very granular, but also things that are related to much higher order sorts of needs that people have.

And you also, by doing that, ensure that even when you get down to the level of very detailed success criteria or even features, you’re doing that in a way that actually makes sense to the customer. We once worked with a social media company that had done sort of their own homegrown look at Jobs to be Done for people on the social media platform.

And they were looking at some of the interactions and they said, okay, so at this point the person’s job is to jump into the conversation. No, no, no, that’s the job you wish they had from your perspective.

But that is not how a consumer is going to talk, that is not relating to their north star jobs. It might be an action they take, so that’s fine. But the job and the action are different things. The job might be more like self-expression or feel satisfied by responding to some incendiary comment, but the job is not jumping into conversation. That’s a way that they get the job actually accomplished. It’s not the job in and of itself.

Shripati Acharya 26:15

Okay, understood. And in this particular case, when you actually figured out that … coming back to the example which you were citing earlier, the off boarding piece, how did you determine that that was such a key aspect of it? Now that you mentioned it, it actually does appear like a key aspect. I can understand why that would be. There are security implications, there’s all these other implications as well as where of course I’m giving a good experience to the employee who’s leaving, et cetera.

So when you’re considering all these things, how do you say, okay, this one actually does appear. Is it stuff which you cannot correlate through different stakeholders all kind of referring to the same thing? Or is it…

Stephen Wunker 27:00

So we try not to lead the witness in the in-depth interviews. Surveys are different, surveys you have to be very close ended. But in the qualitative, we want to listen while we’re still sort of at the top end of the funnel about the whole set of things.

And people might say, “well, I only had three cases of off boarding to do this week, but that was such a headache, let me tell you, between those that took probably six hours.” “Tell me more.” And then, okay, now that is an interesting surprise and now we can put that in a survey and get more specific about how many hours a week do you spend on this? What’s your level of frustration with this process versus another process? What do you do to manage that versus onboarding? We may have very different approaches actually that people are taking.

So now we know to look there. So this is why … look, I’m all in favor of moving very fast, but if possible you would want to do a survey after doing the qualitative research because the qualitative uncovers the surprises for you. And then the quantitative tells you who has that issue, how common is it? Does it coincide with other particular issues? How can we assess it versus other priorities they might have that might help with making trade off decisions, but you won’t even know to ask about it unless you did the qualitative first.

Shripati Acharya 28:35

Got it. So are there any challenges or limitations you have encountered when using Jobs to be Done Framework in tech products? Or do you think it’s actually fairly comprehensive and better than what we are doing today?

Stephen Wunker 28:50

So I think there are a lot of challenges that people have. So we have a book, Jobs to Be Done, which is sort of the book length articulation of what to do. And then we have the working paper Jobs to be Done in Tech that gets in a more concise fashion looking at what we do there.

But I’ll give you a few, and we’ve already talked about some, like getting the 85 different jobs that can’t do it. You need to ensure that a job is not just a problem to be solved. Problems to be solved may be Jobs to be Done, but not all Jobs to be Done can be articulated as problems to be solved. Impressing my boss, proving that I made the right purchase decision. Those are Jobs to be Done. Those are not problems to be solved, but they’re often very important in a SaaS offering.

Reporting functionality is often really critical, not just for getting the core jobs done, but to impress the boss, to justify the purchase decision for instance. So disentangling those concepts is a important thing for folks to do. Also, they need to ensure that they’re asking not only about functional jobs, but emotional jobs. I’ll tell you Shripati, every market that we have worked in, surgical equipment even, every market has an emotional component to it. So human beings are not robots.

And if you can discern what those emotional Jobs to be Done are, that’s gold. Because you can price at a premium for emotional Jobs to be Done. It’s very hard to do an apples to apples comparison between vendors on emotional Jobs to be Done. But those are often some of those key factors that actually drive a purchase decision. And by the way, they also explain why you might have the most awesome platform in the world, but it’s only being adopted by 10% of the potential seats in a company. It’s those emotional barriers to adoption that you’ve got to get very specific about and figure out how to circumnavigate.

Shripati Acharya 31:05

That’s fascinating. You often never hear when you’re looking at the product feature set or the value proposition of a new product, is all these emotional aspects that you’re talking about. But it’s absolutely true. I think that they’ll play a huge part. So for an entrepreneur who is launching a new B2B product, how many such interviews would they really need to do in your opinion before they start getting a reasonable sense of what are the underlying jobs here? I mean, just from your experience? I’m curious.

Stephen Wunker 31:45

So it depends upon how diverse a customer set is and also to some extent how hard they are to recruit. So when we’re talking with directors of hospital labs, there’s not a lot of diversity there. Maybe bigger or smaller, but it’s a very process-driven environment so we can get by with 15 interviews and it’s okay.

We had an article published about some of our work in the New York Times with Twitter, looking at their APIs. And the Twitter API is used in so many situations. So I’ll tell you, for the initial project we did on that, it was 68 interviews and we probably could have gone to more. There was just such a diversity of use cases. So you want to understand what you think drives people to be different, their sophistication, their budget, their size, their job function, whatever, and understand how much diversity you have. For any particular type of customer. You would typically want to have at least five interviews.

So rather than give you a macro number, I’d rather give you the micro number and then you can do the math up to what your full sample should be. And by the way, Shripati, there is an emerging school of thought around doing interviews of users or customers every week, do two to three interviews every week. We’ve seen this in books like continuous discovery methods, for instance. That’s great for some things. If you’re working on usability, awesome.

If you’re trying to hone a feature set, terrific. That is not going to give you the breakthrough insights. If you’re doing it every week, by definition, you are not looking for a breakthrough every week, it doesn’t happen that way. You need to step back and really do more interviews and do them periodically and force yourself to think about what’s surprising, what are the new vectors of performance that might be out there. And then, yeah, the virtue of that too is that you don’t have to do that all the time ‘cause your product may change, but the underlying Jobs to be Done don’t change that much. So there’s a shelf life to that research.

Shripati Acharya 34:15

Got it. So you would say that as the roadmap changes, while you can keep adding different features, you don’t necessarily need to do the deep ethnographic research every single time. How often do you actually recommend to your customers? I mean I’m again referring to your, let’s say the B2B SaaS customers about how often should they go back to their customers and actually have this conversation?

Stephen Wunker 34:45

In most B2B SaaS environments, I’d say every two to three years. Now that depends. If you’re doing hospital laboratory information systems, that can be every five years, that’s fine. That doesn’t change very often. But in companies’ practices for remote work, that is changing pretty often. So yes, you want to be out there pretty often in a corresponding way, as much as you think their priorities are changing, right? Yes, you want to understand their current approaches and usability issues more frequently, but to step back and say, are the priorities fundamentally changing? That’s a pretty good cadence.

Shripati Acharya 35:25

Fair enough. I mean, tech also has this other aspect, which is that sometimes the landscape changes quite dramatically. For example, we have all the buzz around OpenAI’s ChatGPT-3 now, and there’s a lot of conversation among startups about how they should use it, where it’s going to save effort, where it’s going to increase the amount of output, et cetera. And then finally, whether it is ultimately going to be differentiated or not, if everybody’s going to do it. I mean, any top level thoughts on how one should think about these disruptive changes, which you encounter probably more in tech than in other areas.

Stephen Wunker 36:10

So we would typically step back and try to associate GPT for instance, with what jobs that might accomplish. So it might be related to customer engagement. Think about it from the customer standpoint or finding results more quickly or with a little bit of context, and so making results, like searching on a site for some functionality, a little bit more usable. Okay, great. Now let’s try to understand when those occasions might arise, and that’s then where we’ll focus the lens on the Jobs to be Done.

So rather than just asking people, where would you like to use this? Or can you use it today? We’re trying to really uncover all those potential situations where it might resolve a friction point.

I am a little dubious about whether these can be long-term differentiators or not. But look, just like a nice UX. A UX is typically not a long-term differentiator either, but having a slick consumer experience does matter.

And so if AI can help make that consumer experience a little more slick, a little more time saving or on target, great. So that’s where I suspect you’ll see a lot of the deployment of these tools, at least initially. To really base a long-term differentiation on that is a risky proposition, particularly when the tools are available to other companies as well.

Shripati Acharya 38:00

Fair enough. Yes, actually, I mean it’s stunning. It might be just one of those fastest adoption of tools. I think everyone from high schoolers to everyone’s using ChatGPT. Very well, Stephen. That is a terrific run through Jobs to be Done. Anything else which you would like to comment on or cover, which we haven’t talked about?

Stephen Wunker 38:25

Just a reminder to people, as they do this research, they need to make sure that they are not defining these jobs in terms of what the company wants the job to be. They need to really step back. I worked with a bank once that had their own homegrown Jobs to be Done Framework around getting a home loan.

And they said, well, okay, the key job to be done is to get the home loan. No, no, no. The key job is to buy a home or even to know if you should buy a home. So I mean, I could tell that just having recently bought a home. But you see this all the time, so make sure you’re seeing it from the customer’s standpoint. And then yeah, you want to try to make it very actionable and relatable to what you can actually do, but create that ladder of inference, that will go a long way to getting you to success.

Shripati Acharya 39:25

Well, wonderful. Thanks a lot, Stephen, as always. And if somebody, an entrepreneur who’s starting out to build a product, what would you recommend as the best way to get started on this?

Stephen Wunker 39:40

So with Jobs to be Done, I would say download our mini book, it’s free, Jobs to Be Done in Tech.

Shripati Acharya 39:45

Where can we download it from?

Stephen Wunker 40:00

Well, if you just search that title Jobs to Be Done in Tech, it’ll come up. But it’s also on our company’s website, newmarkets with an S, newmarketsadvisors.com. So that is an easy way to get started. I do encourage you to look about the overall context of these things.

The best innovation book I ever read was sadly only right before my interview with the man, but it’s called The Innovator’s Solution by Clay Christensen. And it’s Clay’s second book, actually, his first Innovator’s Dilemma is probably the best known.

But the second has a lot of very actionable approaches, including Jobs to be Done by the way, this is where he introduced the concept of Jobs to be Done. But there are other concepts he introduces too. So I highly recommend The Innovator’s Solution. It’s a fantastic book.

Shripati Acharya 40:40

Wonderful. And of course, Stephen’s book, Jobs to Be Done itself would be a great primer for that. So thanks again, Stephen, for coming again on our podcast and having it more focused on the tech landscape, it was a terrific conversation. Cheers.

Stephen Wunker 40:58

Great. Thanks. I really enjoyed it.

Enjoyed the podcast? Please consider leaving a review on Apple Podcasts and subscribe wherever you are listening to this.

Follow Prime Venture Partners:

Twitter: https://twitter.com/Primevp_in

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/primevp/

Let us know what you
think about this episode

If you believe you are building the next big thing, let’s make it happen.