Problem-focus or Solution-focus?

(Why they're different, and why it's important to choose.)

If I had to boil it down to its core parts, I’d say that a POV is essentially comprised of two halves. There’s problem half, which explores the challenges your customers face, the pains they feel, and ultimately the reason they can’t achieve what they want to achieve. And then there’s the solution half, which is a bit more focused on you and your product. This is how you solve the problem you outline in the first half.

Both halves are crucial. You can’t have just one or the other. If you only communicate the problem, then customers will be confused about what to do next. You would be the equivalent of that person who always turns up to meetings, shoots down everyone else’s ideas, but doesn’t give their own.

If you only communicate your solution — and this is the most common mistake I see companies make with their POV — then you’re missing out on all the context. People might know what your product does, but they won’t know why they need it in the first place. So you need both. Let me make that clear.

But the focus of your POV is likely going to be on one or the other, the problem or the solution. And there’s a valid reason that has to be the case. And it comes down to this: Which bit is new?

I’ll explain what a problem-focused and solution-focused POV both look like, and that should help you understand what I’m talking about…

Okay, what’s a problem-focused POV?

This is where the majority of your communication around your POV focuses on the problem. Makes sense, given the name. But what I really mean by that if you take all the stuff you use to communicate your POV — web copy, pitch decks, content, etc. — you’d see that the majority of what you talk about is the problem.

Now, this is the rarest situation of the two. And here’s why:

You should focus on the problem when you’re solving a new problem.

In other words, you’ve identified a problem that nobody else is trying to solve. In fact, it’s so new that even your prospects aren’t fully aware of it yet. They’re starting to feel the symptoms of it, but they haven’t diagnosed the problem yet.

And so most of your marketing efforts have to go towards marketing the problem. Because if you can’t make prospects aware of the problem, they’ll never care about the solution.

This is a rare situation for two reasons:

1 — It’s not often that you come across an entirely new problem. It takes a deeper level of insight and observation to find.

2 — It’s a much harder route. It takes a long time to educate the market about this new problem. You have to convince them they need a solution in the first place.

Of course, there is a huge upside to this route. If you can successfully find a new problem AND convince the market they need to solve it, then you become the de facto solution. You’ll be in the driving seat.

Can you give me an example?

I certainly can.

Operator are still yet to launch fully and so they’re building a waitlist. So far, so normal. But the difference here is that their current site doesn’t really mention their product at all.

I know. Crazy.

Instead, they’ve put together a manifesto for people to read through. Centered around something they call, “The Great Ignore”, their manifesto shines a light on a problem that many people probably haven’t thought about.

Instead of leading with their product, the team at Operator were fully aware that their first job would be to sell the problem. And they’re now building a list of prospects who resonate and identify with that problem.

With my critical cap on I’d argue that a bit of info about what they’re actually building would be useful here. They’ve gone with a 100-0 split in favour of problem. I would recommend more like 80-20 for their situation.

But still, the point remains that this is a great example of going all in on a problem.

Okay, so what’s a solution-focused POV?

Essentially, this is the opposite. This is where the majority of your marketing and comms focuses on your solution. Sure, you should still be clear on the problem you’re solving, but you can quickly gloss over that in favour of talking about what your solution does.

This is much more common. And the reason for that is because it’s about solving an existing problem that people already know they have. Which is why it’s easier. Unlike with the problem-focused POV, you don’t have to educate your prospects about the problem. You don’t have to convince them they need a solution.

Where this gets tricky, however, is that because it’s way more common, you have way more competition. And these competitors are solving the same problem as you. Which means you’ll end up saying the same thing.

Unless, of course, you have a different way of solving the problem. That’s the key to success with a solution-focused POV. If you’re solving an old problem, your solution has to be new instead.

And then your marketing should focus on what’s different and new about how you’re solving the problem.

Can you give me an example?

Check this out:

Rytr is one of many AI copywriting tools. There are loads of them. Too many, in fact. Luckily, Rytr realised this and so they declare their difference right at the top of their homepage.

By leaning into the idea of “human-sounding content” they push away from others in their category. More importantly, they emphasise a key issue with their competitors — “robot-sounding content” — and show how their solution is different.

Notice that they aren’t there to sell you in on the big problems that an AI writing tool solves. They assume you already know about those problems and are wanting to solve them. Their job is to make you choose their solution over the others.

But which should I choose?

Well this entirely depends on what you’re trying to do. Have you found a brand new problem that nobody else is currently trying to solve? Then you need to go with a problem-focused POV. Or are you solving a common problem but in a totally different way? In that case you want a solution-focused POV.

The underlying point is that at least one of the two — either the problem or the solution — has to be new.

New Problem + New Solution = Strong POV
Old Problem + New Solution = Strong POV
Old Problem + Old Solution = Weak POV

Thanks for reading,
Joe