Leading. Solution. Best. Innovative. These are the top 4 most overused buzzwords in public relations, according to Adam Sherk and PRFilter, a website that searches and aggregates press releases. Here's the Top 10 list and the number of times each word was used in press releases in a 24 hour period:

1. leading (776) 
2. solution (622) 
3. best (473) 
4. innovate / innovative / innovator (452) 
5. leader (410) 
6. top (370) 
7. unique (282) 
8. great (245) 
9. extensive (215) 
10. leading provider (153) 

What does this mean? Clearly, these words lose their impact through overuse. While intended to convey uniqueness and value, instead these words communicate "ho hum," "me too," "jargon," and "I don't really know my customer." Digging deeper, I believe the biggest offender is "solution." What customers talk that way in everyday life?? Aside from being generic and ubiquitous, the term "solution" has a very sterile feel to it that weakens your intimate connections with customers.

So what's the alternative? Stay real. Get to know your customers. Find out what the "solution" is, and what problems you can help them solve. That's what you talk about in press releases, in sales training, and especially with customers.

------------

(Click here for the full list in PR Daily, and thank you Tom Gable, San Diego PR expert, for posting the link on LinkedIn.)

Apple has become synonymous with product innovation. We have a number of clients in the life sciences, in healthcare, and even in public health who say they aspire to be like Apple. What they really mean is they want to make very hip, cutting-edge, trend-setting products. They want customers with cult-like devotion. And they want to score major "cool points" -- lots of 'em. All while making a ton of money.

Which is a problem. Why? It reminds me of a large, national, nonprofit we work with that said they want to be world class. The question was, are they willing to pay the price of being world class? Like letting go of mediocre employees, investing in top training programs, rewarding high performance, etc. 

Similarly, companies that want to establish a value discipline of innovation need to be willing to pay the price. In the development phase alone, Apple makes a huge investment. For example:

• A small team of extremely well-paid, top-notch designers with a maniacal focus on perfection.
• Who create 10 perfect mock-ups for each potential new product feature, from which three mock-ups will be selected for further exploration, to result in the feature in as perfect a form as possible.
• Which means Apple knows in advance that they will get rid of 90% (9 of 10 mock-ups) of what they create.
• And happily makes that investment.
• Fueled by leadership that is relentlessly committed to winning by innovating.

Which results in game-changing, industry-inventing, highly profitable products with incredible demand.

And Apple's style of innovation invite a fundamental re-positioning of form and function. As Alain Briellat put it in his excellent analysis:

"Apple doesn’t sell functional products; they sell fashionable pieces of functional art."

So... two simple questions for you, dear reader:

1) What do you sell?

2) Are you willing to invest what it takes to be a top innovator in your space?

------------------------

P.S. Check out these classics: Peter Drucker on The Discipline of Innovation, and Treacy & Wiersema on Value Disciplines.

Imagine this: Instead of your credit card, you pull your cell phone out of your pocket to pay for groceries or gas or clothes. The wireless industry has been talking about “mobile commerce” for years, but apparently there have been a lot of hardware problems to overcome. So companies are now looking to software instead. And it appears mobile gift cards are the low hanging fruit. Why? There is a felt need: People have trouble remembering what gift cards they have, keeping track of their gift cards, and having them on hand when they need them. (Of course, retailers who figure unredeemed gift cards into their profitability forecasting may see solving these problems as a downside).

Here's a Target example.

What's the marketing strategy? Some companies like Transaction Wireless are taking a "push" strategy with technology that lets retailers sell gift cards on their websites or Facebook pages, and then delivers the virtual card to the customer's cell phone or e-mail account. Firethorn is using a "pull" marketing approach with their app called SWAGG that lets people use their cell phone to buy and store gift cards from retailers they like. This requires building a consumer brand. Similarly, FastGift is all about consumers buying gift cards and e-sending them to cell phone of friends and family. They're branding it as a mobile gift-giving service.

I think we'll see mobile gift cards catch on in the U.S. rather quickly, simply because of the convenience factor. With mobile banking, mobile airline boarding passes, and high profile mobile retailers becoming mainstream, security and privacy concerns are dwindling. This is a nice example of how push and pull marketing both have their place in advancing disruptive innovation.

For India, GE Healthcare produced a hand-held electrocardiogram (ECG) device with cutting-edge technology that is much smaller, much simpler, and less than half the cost of traditional ECG machines. Here's one of their launch videos:

GE's inexpensive pocket-sized ultrasound device, designed for the Chinese market, turns out to have broad global appeal. Tata Motors in India has produced the Nano, a $2,200 car, which has stimulated "cheap car" development in the U.S. and many other markets.

There are numerous examples of high quality products and services produced and sold in India, China, and other countries at far lower cost than in the West. Emerging markets (formerly known as developing countries) invite us to make do with less. That leads to frugal/disruptive innovation.

I believe these five principles are key to creating a frugal innovation mindset and successfully innovating: 1) Start with a blank slate - zero-based thinking, not with the deductive approach of simply stripping away features from the existing expensive product. 2) Think of the end user customer as different, not deficient. Don't compare with the stereotypical Western lifestyle. 3) Don't overgeneralize and assume all people in an emerging market are the same. Segmentation principles apply as they do anywhere else. 4) Proactively consider and take advantage of the numerous brand enhancement and cause marketing opportunities. 5) Think simple, which means less is more. What's the minimum feature set your customer needs?

Don't be surprised when your simpler cheaper product has greater appeal than your traditional product in developed markets too. In fact, plan on it.

Who knew that the sipholes in coffee cup lids at Starbucks, Dunkin Donuts and other caffeine purveyors were affecting the human condition? I just ran across the little green siphole plugs that prevent coffee spilling, splashing, staining and other evils.

I applaud the inventor's open mindedness that led to his epiphany and turned a problem into a solution. You can see how they work in this 32 seconds of action-packed video:

However, what is most interesting to us marketers is the creation of a "need." Now coffee drinkers everywhere will be worried about unplugged sipholes! Some experts say that revealing unmet needs (are there other kinds?) is what marketing is all about. I believe we need to tread lightly here. As a culture, we are trained to confuse wants and needs. Like when my kids used to say "I need candy" in the supermarket. In my book, these little green plugs are about a "want" - plain and simple. While there's nothing wrong with innovating new problem-solving products, as marketers and consumers we need to be aware and honest about whether we are really satisfying a want or a need.