Original link: https://pt.plus/jobs-orgs-talents/

I recently re-read “Competing Against Luck” (Chinese name: Competing with Luck), and realized that the second half of the book is a little weak. In Section 3: The Jobs to Be Done Organization, I expected to read something about how to design an organization around Jobs to Be Done, but in fact, the author spent 4 chapters, basically just doing Tautology: To design the organization and the processes within the organization according to Jobs to Be Done, decentralize decision-making, optimize resource allocation, etc.

The practical value of these words is rather limited to me. In view of the fact that this book brought me a lot of practical advice in the first half, I began to think about why I was so stretched when it came to this key topic:

• First, the author is not good at organizational design. This book is actually co-authored by Clayton M. Christensen with three authors. I did a quick search. The last author, David S. Duncan, is probably the most related to organizational design, but his main work is in consulting Consultant in the company.
• Second, as a book positioned as a bestseller, organizational design is not a field of general interest. Organizational size and the management level requirements of readers determine that organizational design is more suitable as an in-depth topic for a small number of people.
• Third, organizational design often involves a large number of sensitive facts, which are difficult to disclose in public publications. In the first half of the book, many wonderful consumer research or corporate marketing cases are used-these contents are highly accessible, and organizational design is often an unspoken secret inside the company.

This may be the reason why business schools or consulting firms exist: there are always some things that are better to be whispered behind closed doors, or only on such occasions are there possibilities for in-depth discussions. After reading this part of the content in a cloud, I was disappointed, but also thinking, can I make some deduction based on my own work experience?

Jobs to Be Done

What is Jobs to Be Done?

We define a “job” as the progress that a person is trying to make in a particular circumstance.
…
To summarize, the key features of our definition are: A job is the progress that an individual seeks in a given circumstance. Successful innovations enable a customer’s desired progress, resolve struggles, and fulfill unmet aspirations. They perform jobs that formerly had on ly inadequate or nonexistent solutions. Jobs are never simply about the functional—they have important social and emotional dimensions, which can be even more powerful than functional ones. Because jobs occur in the flow of daily life, the circumstance is central to their definition and becomes the essential unit of innovation work—not customer characteristics, product attributes, new technology, or trends. Jobs to Be Done are ongoing and recurring. They’re seldom discrete “events.”

We define a “job” as the progress a person is trying to make in a given situation.
…
In summary, the main features of our definition are: work is the advancement that an individual seeks in a given situation. Successful innovations enable advances in customer expectations, resolve difficulties, and fulfill unfulfilled aspirations. They work on jobs that previously only had inadequate or non-existent solutions. Work is never just functional—they have important social and emotional dimensions, even more powerful than the functional. Because work occurs in the flow of everyday life, context is central to its definition and becomes the fundamental unit of innovative work, rather than customer characteristics, product attributes, new technologies or trends. Work to be done is continuous and recurring. They are rarely discrete “events”.

Here I directly translate Jobs into “jobs”, not “tasks” or “requirements”. This is a deliberate choice, the word “task” is somewhat passive, and the word “requirement” is also mentioned in the book, the main problem is that it is too vague, lacks specificity, and does not help to identify opportunities for innovation.

A well-defined job offers a kind of innovation blueprint. This is very different from the traditional marketing concept of “needs” because it entails a much higher degree of specificity about what you’re solving for. Needs are ever present and that makes them “I need to eat” is a statement that is almost always true. “I need to feel healthy.” “I need to save for retirement.” Those needs are important to consumers, but their generality provides only the vaguest of Direction to Innovators as to How to Satisfy Them. Needs are any. ll cause a Customer to chooose one product or service over another. me to pick one solution over another—or even pull any solution into my life at all. I might skip a meal. And needs, by themselves, don’t explain all behavior: I might eat when I’m not hungry at all for a myriad of reasons.

Defined jobs provide a blueprint for innovation. This is very different from the traditional marketing concept of “need” as it requires a higher degree of specificity about the problem you are trying to solve. The need always exists, which makes them necessarily more general. The phrase “I need to eat” is almost always true. “I need to feel healthy.” “I need to save for retirement.” These needs are important to consumers, but their ubiquity provides only the vaguest direction for innovators on how to meet them. Requirements are similar to trends—useful in direction, but not at all sufficient to define exactly what would lead a customer to choose one product or service over another. Just needing to eat doesn’t make me choose one solution over another, or even introduce any solution into my life at all. I might skip a meal. Need alone doesn’t explain all behavior: I may eat when I’m not at all hungry for any number of reasons.

Basically, Jobs to Be Done is a way of thinking backwards from the customer’s life/work scenario. It pays more attention to digging into the subtle differences on the demand side to find innovation paths.

If it is close to the demand side, it must be far away from the supply side. If deriving demand from supply is to find a nail with a hammer, then deriving supply from demand requires an extremely strong supply side—this kind of assumption can only be imagined today when technological waves are constantly emerging.

Several elements emphasized by Jobs to Be Done include:

1. Progress: A definite goal, not an occasional event, but a continuous, recurring desire to change.
2. Circumstance Scenario/Environment: “Work” cannot be discussed out of its context.
3. Dimensions dimension: not only functional, but also social and emotional.

Interested readers can find more practical cases in the first part of the original book. The famous “milkshake” case at the beginning is something that many people can quickly understand. As the book says, it is like a miniature In the form of a documentary, the scenes of customers’ lives are restored, and new opportunities for innovation are intentionally discovered.

Organization’s demands

In the discussion of the “Organization” part of the original book, although I was not very impressed overall, I also read that when the company clarified the customer’s Jobs to Be Done, it actually clarified its own mission (Mission): It is to complete the work that the customer wants to complete, which is also in line with its essential setting. The organization within the enterprise should naturally also revolve around this work.

But just clarifying Jobs, or the mission as I understand it, does it mean that the organization can function efficiently? Not so. Organizational design, often reflected in the design of organizational structure, is an explicit and more rigid structure, and this rigidity is often reflected in the comparison with organizational culture and organizational processes:

This article is transferred from: https://pt.plus/jobs-orgs-talents/
This site is only for collection, and the copyright belongs to the original author.