RSS
I wan’na be like you
Ever seen this?
It’s a probability curve. A bell curve. A “normal distribution” curve. And it explains why most of us don’t stand out.
We all fall into that curve somewhere. But most of us—indeed, 95% of us—fall into that big, gray chunk in the middle.
Every now and then, though, someone or something different comes along. Someone or something that’s hanging out there in the tails. The outliers. They come along and do something, or make something, great.
And what does everyone do? Copy it.
They add bulk to the middle of that curve…and ensure they won’t be the next outlier. But you don’t stand out by blending in. You don’t.
Who stands out? The fringe. The ones doing something different. Something better. Something new.
So stop copying. Copies lose resolution.
Do what you do well.
Image source: http://content.answers.com/main/content/img/oxford/ Oxford_Statistics/0199541454.normal-distribution.8.jpg
Categories Branding, Outside the Square, Strategy and Management
Twitter
LinkedIn
To play devil’s advocate, how do you then explain the ubiquity of popular movies, TV shows, music, and Video Games? In such cases it’s typical that outliers remain outliers. Likewise, if you want to bring a social media landscape into this discussion; general trends indicate consolidation instead of differentiation. Companies and individuals are flocking to sites like twitter, facebook, etc. instead of creating their own individualized versions of such networking tools.
Of course, you can be original in your approach to using FB/Twitter/etc, but the fact is you’re still more likely to get noticed than if you go through the pains of setting up your own social feed.
Oh, you can still be successful by sticking with the middle of the pack–and your examples prove that point–but you’re not going to stand out that way. In the heavily “me, too” categories like movies, TV, music, and video, there’s usually one outlier that starts the trend (let’s use “Friends”), and then a ton of others try to do the same thing…and that’s what makes up the bulk of programming. Because it’s safe, it’s somewhat predictable, and it’ll work well until a new outlier comes along that captures folks attention and shifts the curve again.
My point is more about the differentiation of content, not delivery. Yes, in social media, there is a move towards consolidation, but plenty of folks are predicting 2010 as the year that “velvet rope” social networks (private, invitation-only spaces), which is all about differentiation.
The real key to standing out is to be on the bell curve you want to be noticed on…but to be an outlier. As you say, it’s a lot easier to get noticed when you break a familiar pattern than when you try to create an entirely new one.
I think we just disagree on what constitutes an “outlier”. Friends, to me, still fits into the realm of derivative sitcom. The 3 guys/gals formula was perhaps unique in 1994, but the laugh track writing and underlying romantic tension were nothing new. Seinfeld would perhaps be a better option, but one could make the case that Woody Allen set the stage for its popularity.
Also, wouldn’t velvet rope social networks by their very nature constitute a plurality instead of a mainstream movement? If something is invitation only how could it ever be truly popular? That model does not lend itself to the creation of a sizable new bell curve.
Your overall message of “stop copying” makes perfect sense. I just think I disagree with the supposition that “stop copying” inherently should mean “do something completely new” as in outside of the 95%. One could also include “stop copying, start improving” or “stop copying, start polishing” or “whatever you do, be sincere”. After all, many incredibly popular and now widely copied things (from Facebook to World of Warcraft to Twilight) weren’t created in one shot. They were built on the stepping stones of what came before.
I actually think we do agree on what constitutes an outlier, and in what the overall takeaway is. As I said in my earlier reply, the key to standing out is to be on the bell curve you want to be noticed on. It is indeed a heck of a lot harder to start a new curve where one doesn’t exist, which is why I suggest that to stand out you need to do something different, or new, with what’s already popular. I never meant to suggest (and so deeply appreciate your persistence on clarifying this point) that “stop copying” equaled “do something completely new.”
The intended point was, for those seeking to stand out, to determine where they were on the curve and figure out how to move where they’d be more noticed.
On the point of velvet rope networks I also agree, though perhaps to a different point. They represent a plurality, yes, but those pluralities are (to my mind) representations of how and where new bell curves can spring up around outliers of old curves. The scale will likely always be different, as you say. I’m obviously a proponent of Chris Anderson’s thoughts on Long Tail markets: I think the days of giant, and relatively few, bell curves of popularity are over (he explains why far better than I, to be sure).
Regardless, people and business still want and need to find ways to build up a following (even if smaller) behind who they are and what they do. I’m suggesting the best way to do that is to figure out how to operate on the fringe of one curve as the means to eventually building another.