Harvard Business School Professor, Clayton Christensen, first introduced the jobs-to-be-done mechanism. He believes that this mechanism is an effective way for the success of new products instead of analyzing existing data. This mechanism works by firstly surveying and interviewing the customers, asking them what job the product does for them and finally, deciding on the jobs to be done. This knowledge allows the company to produce a better product for customers. Christensen gave an example of a milkshake company. After a thorough documentation, he found out that most customers bought the milkshake in the morning before they commute and the reason for it was that the thick liquid of the milkshake gave them a sense of enjoyment. Through this mechanism, the company managed to increase their sales of milkshakes having known the job to be done, which was to create an even thicker milkshake.

Personally, I agree with Professor Christensen to a certain extent. The “job-to-be-done” is not always obvious from the customer’s point of view. It takes a lot of tedious and careful documentation of consumer’s behaviour towards the product. Companies should never assume they know what a customer wants; instead they should identify and collect data about consumers’ behaviour and what job they want your product to do for them. However, I disagree with Professor Christensen when he stated that analysis and planning are the reasons why most new products fail. One of the reasons why most new products fail is probably because they do not meet a perceived need, but it is certainly not because of analysis and planning.