February Newsletter: Doing the most with Jobs to Be Done

Dear Friends,  

There’s a lot of appetite these days for understanding and applying Jobs to Be Done Theory. In fact, over the last two years, those of us at the Institute have noticed that Jobs to Be Done is (consistently) the second most-viewed page on our website (just under Disruptive Innovation)—but that hasn’t always been the case.

There are a couple of assumptions we can make about why understanding the circumstances—or forces—that drive people and organizations toward and away from decisions is gaining popularity among innovators: 1) The market is crowded, and going beyond superficial categories to expose the functional, social, and emotional dimensions that explain why people make the choices they do sharpens the competitive edge, and/or 2) In a world where divisive politics seemingly spur emotional reactions even in the consumer market, understanding these social-emotional drivers is essential for marketing, branding, and sustainability. Of course, these are just assumptions, and we’d love to hear from you:

• What excites you about Jobs to Be Done?

• How are you finding this theory useful in your work or field?

Jobs to Be Done Theory is also becoming a major focus within the next year of our research. Here’s how:

Curbing children’s sugar consumption

As a country, we overconsume sugar. This is bad for all of us, but especially for kids. To put it into perspective, American children consume 65 lbs. of sugar annually, or roughly a bathtub full of sugar.

And for kids, sugar-sweetened beverages (e.g., soft drinks and sports drinks) are one of the leading causes of sugar consumption.

In her upcoming research this spring, our Director of Health Care Research Ann-Somers Hogg, reveals insights into parents’ Jobs to Be Done who have significantly reduced or stopped altogether their child’s consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages. Her research will differentiate between the perceived reasons for allowing children to drink these beverages, as well as the perceived barriers to limiting consumption, and the reality behind both.

Why does this matter? “Because with knowledge of what truly drives behavior change, we can empower providers, public health authorities, and policymakers with the language that will reduce consumption, and improve health,” says Ann Somers.

Understanding the complex relationship between youth and AI companions

In her initial research on AI within high school and postsecondary education navigation & guidance, Director of Education Research Julia Freeland Fisher discovered four distinct drivers of student engagement with bots. While two drivers corresponded to staffing shortages, two were more broad…and concerning: young people turned to bots when they felt shame or fear about talking to humans, and when they had a desire to avoid human interaction altogether.

That's a troubling finding, given widespread loneliness and the direction the tech is headed. AI Companions—tools that provide users with personalized interactions, conversation, and support, often mimicking human-like communication and adapting to individual needs over time—are emerging at an impressive clip across consumer markets. Research suggests that relative to other AI tools, like content generation, content editing, or edtech apps, these companion apps garner the highest rates of user engagement, by a wide margin. Put differently, AI companions are gaining a foothold and may be well on their way to disrupting human connection as we know it.

Warranting a deeper dive, Julia’s forthcoming research will aim to investigate young people's Jobs to Be Done when turning to these companion apps.   

Craving more Jobs to Be Done research? Be sure to check out some of our most recent reports on why more families are turning to microschools, as well as some of the barriers to solar power adoption in Nigeria.

We have numerous resources about Jobs to Be Done on our website, including this quick-hitting video explaining its unique power in any market.

But one of our favorite resources is something we used to circulate amongst ourselves in ensuring accurate research: 3 critical must-knows that help perfect Jobs to Be Done Theory’s application (you can download the infographic here):

1. A person or organization can have multiple “jobs.” Jobs incorporate functional, social, and emotional forces at play in decision-making.

Example: A person hiring a new home may have the job: “Help me have a space large enough for my expanding family” (functional). Their job may also be: “Help me feel like I have achieved a milestone in my life” (emotional).

2. Jobs can change over time or as needs or goals are met or unmet. Circumstances are subject to change.

Example: When a school district implements a new technology, the job of leadership could be: “Help me remain compliant with state funding.” Over time, as the district discovers best practices and increases teacher approval of the tech toward improving student outcomes, the district’s job may change to: “Help me be an innovative leader among districts in my state.”

3. Jobs is not asking why someone made their decision. Jobs to Be Done methodology is about uncovering a story and discovering underlying circumstances common across specific groups of individuals.

Example: Standard market research may ask someone why they purchase a Milkshake from a drive-through, and answers typically focus on flavor. However, Jobs to Be Done may reveal that the circumstances driving decision-making in many customers’ days are, in fact: “Help me relieve stress with an easy-to-hold snack.”

In ending this monthly newsletter, we’d love for you to take a look at Rodrigo Fernandes’ recent piece on why two seemingly contradicting theories—Customer-Centricity and Disruptive Innovation can work together to help companies reach both their high-value customers and identify opportunities for disruption.

Our questions are:

• How are Customer-Centricity and Jobs to Be Done similar or different?

• Could the understanding of both better solve people’s needs?

As always, connect with us, tag us on LinkedIn, or contact Meris Stansbury, senior director of communications: meris@christenseninstitute.org.  

All our best,

The Clayton Christensen Institute team

As always, if you’d like to continue your support for the Institute team and its mission, please consider donating here.

Tax deductible: as a 501(c)3 nonprofit organization, The Christensen Institute is reliant on the generosity of its donors. All donations are tax-deductible to the fullest extent of IRS regulations.