The Relative Advantage of Solar

Most business schools still refer to Everett Rogers and his theory of how and why new ideas and technologies are adopted by a population.  In his book called Diffusion of Innovations, Rogers introduces five main dimensions that influence the adoption of an innovation: complexity, compatibility, observability, trial-ability, and relative advantage.

An examination of the factor called "relative advantage" reveals why there are so many challenges associated with making solar more widespread.

Relative advantage is the extent to which solar is viewed as better than the method in current practice.  Fundamentally, a new product or service will be successful if it does a better job than existing products at satisfying the needs of a targeted customer group.  But according to diffusion theory, "doing a better job" actually has four components. If a new product or service can surpass existing offerings across all four of these components at once, then we can guarantee that the targeted customer group will purchase it.

The four components expressed in terms of solar electric power are:

- solar must be less expensive than power from a utility (lower price).

- solar must provide better features or functionality than power from a utility (greater benefits).

- solar must not have any switching or adoption costs (easy to use).

- solar must be readily available (easy to buy).

Customers for whom all four conditions apply will purchase solar because there are only benefits and no barriers. And the closer a solar product comes to succeeding in all four dimensions, the greater the chance that the product will be a success.  And, of course, the new solar product will be a financial success if these conditions can be met at a profit.

The convenience and reliability of electric power from a utility makes it very difficult for solar to meet all four criteria.  And notice we haven't even talked about "trial-ability" yet.


Warren Schirtzinger advises solar companies on how to: differentiate their products, grow during an industry shakeout or consolidation, and thrive without government subsidies. He has authored articles as a "Renewable Energy Insider" on RenewableEnergyWorld.com and writes about marketing strategies on the solar strategies blog.  Contact him via e-mail (warren["at"]solar-strategies.com) or follow him on Twitter @SolarStrategies.

Read More

Reducing the Risk of Solar

Solar energy is considered a long decision-cycle purchase. Due to the complexity of the sale and its financial components, consumers educate themselves thoroughly before buying. As such, vendors cannot move a customer through decision stages to close the sale.

With products that are more costly, complicated or high-risk, the customer has more at stake.  If a solar installation goes bad, the customer is looking at losing thousands of dollars, the potential of roof damage/repair, time without basic necessities (electric heating, cooling, refrigeration, etc.), and a significant disruption to his or her life.

Adding to this perception of high risk is the nearly risk-free alternative of buying electric power from the local utility, a proven supplier with an unmatched record of safety and reliability.  Relative to a utility, solar appears extremely risky.

In the world of high risk the customer will not rely on the word of the provider. The customer’s decision process is based on finding objective information from reliable sources, something the vendor cannot provide.

Think about the last time you had to select a surgeon, a family doctor, a lawyer, or an investment broker/advisor -- all high-risk purchase decisions.  Would you entrust your life savings to a financial advisor or broker because of an ad or brochure?  Would you select a surgeon based on his "messaging?"

The only way to increase adoption of a high risk offering is with methods that reduce risk in the mind of the customer -- references from someone the customer trusts, professional credentials/affiliations, a supporting infrastructure, industry standards, evidence of expertise, product quality, and ongoing service.

The solar industry needs to wake up and realize that the McDonald's-happy-meal approach to promotion is useless when the product is high cost and/or the purchase decision is high risk.


Related Articles:
Marketing High Risk Products

Read More

The Relative Advantage of Solar

Most business schools still refer to Everett Rogers and his theory of how and why new ideas and technologies are adopted by a population.  In his book called Diffusion of Innovations, Rogers introduces five main dimensions that influence the adoption of an innovation: complexity, compatibility, observability, trial-ability, and relative advantage.

An examination of the last factor, "relative advantage," reveals why there are so many challenges associated with making solar more widespread.

"Relative advantage" is the extent to which solar is viewed as better than the method in current practice.  Fundamentally, a new product or service will be successful if it does a better job than existing products at satisfying the needs of a targeted customer group.  But "doing a better job" actually has four components. If a new product or service can exceed existing offerings across all four of these components at once, then we can guarantee that the targeted customer group will purchase it.

The four components expressed in terms of solar electric power are:

• solar must be less expensive than power from a utility (lower price).
• solar must provide better features or functionality than power from a utility (greater benefits).
• solar must not have any switching or adoption costs (easy to use).
• solar must be readily available (easy to buy).

Customers for whom all four conditions apply will purchase solar because there are only benefits and no barriers. And the closer a solar product comes to succeeding in all four dimensions, the greater the chance that the product will be a success.  And, of course, the new solar product will be a financial success if these conditions can be met at a profit.

The convenience and reliability of utility-delivered electric power makes it very difficult for solar to meet all four criteria. Grid parity alone is clearly not enough.


Related Article(s)
Does Grid Parity Matter?

Read More

Public Confusion About Solar

There are many things that confuse the public when it comes to solar.  Included on the lengthy list of confusing factors are items such as: incentives, regulations, restrictions, warranties, technology differences and financing options.

But in my mind, the bigger issue comes from the fact that "confusion" translates into "high risk" in the minds of consumers.

Whenever something appears to be more complex or confusing than the status quo (a.k.a. power from the electric utility) most consumers label that item as a source of risk. This perception of risk comes from the potential consequences of making the wrong decision, based on confusing or complex information.

With most consumer products there is little penalty for making a wrong choice. If you buy a pair of blue jeans and they don't look good, the most you've lost is a couple of hours of time and somewhere around $100.

But if a solar installation goes bad, the consumer is looking at losing thousands of dollars, the potential of roof damage/repair, time without electric power, inconvenience, etc., etc.  In other words a massive and costly disruption in their lives.

The perceived risk of solar in the mind of the consumer presents the biggest barrier to mainstream adoption of solar power.


Related Articles:
Marketing High Risk Products

Read More

Is groSolar's new ad campaign the right approach?

groSolar recently announced the launch of a new national advertising campaign that will feature images of real people in real life situations, rather than pictures of solar panels.  According to the company's press release, groSolar's objective is to "communicate the real value of clean energy choices."

This technique is especially common in the healthcare industry.  Doctors, hospitals, clinics, and other providers often show people living a happy, healthy life rather than say, open heart surgery in progress.

The questions is: would you select a surgeon based on pictures of happy people?  Does a value-oriented advertising campaign convince a skeptical audience to buy services from the advertiser?  My answer to these questions would be: not if the product or service is high risk…and solar is perceived as high risk.

Here's the reason why.

Solar requires a complex, information intensive and high risk purchase decision. (Note I said the purchase decision is complex and high risk, not the technology) A solar installation requires a good deal of work on the part of both the consumer and the provider. It is a product/service with a standard base of know-how, but totally customized and personalized. Buyers of solar power want a dealer/installer with a good reputation and would prefer to find one by means of a reference or referral. Information and dialogue are part of the purchase process.  There is the possibility of interaction after the system has been installed and the customer wants to be reassured that he or she can always ask for and receive additional help or information. If the solar installation goes bad, the customer is looking at losing thousands of dollars, the potential of roof damage/repair, time without electric power, and a significant disruption to their life.

With products that are more costly, complicated or high-risk, the customer has more at stake.  So all of the typical methods used in low-risk consumer marketing -- cosmetic factors, product/company name, package color and design, messaging, image, "feel good advertising," celebrity endorsements, logos or symbols to reinforce associations -- are totally ineffective.

The only way to market a high risk offering is with methods that reduce risk in the mind of the customer -- references from someone the customer trusts, professional affiliations, compliance with industry standards, a supporting infrastructure, evidence of expertise, product quality, and ongoing service.

groSolar's ad campaign may raise awareness for the solar industry in general, and that's a good thing. But if the company's goal is to convince customers to buy groSolar's products and services, then advertising is the wrong way to do it.


Related Articles:
Marketing High Risk Products
Solar's Main Competition

Read More

The Long Term Effects of Government Subsidies

There's never been a technology that was perfected before it was released.  Technology products like solar are introduced when their performance is not as well developed as established products along some dimension that mainstream customers have historically valued.

In order to become competitive over time technology-based products must be refined and improved by a sequence of users (starting with innovators and early adopters).  This dynamic, called the technology adoption lifecycle, is critical to the success of any new product or technology.  Without the adaptation and improvement that's demanded by early users, mainstream customers (the bulk of any market) will not adopt the product.

This is important because government subsidies often completely disrupt the technology adoption process.  When mainstream buyers of solar begin to enter the market because of a subsidy rather than product attributes, then forward progress on product adaptation tends to stop.

When I surveyed residential solar owners in the Sacramento area I found that the majority of them were late adopters.  That's because the local utility (SMUD) was offering 4 kW systems for only $7 per month. (after 10 years the customer could buy the system for $2400)  SMUD's offering, which included a lot of product intangibles, caused technology laggards to enter the market prematurely.

This subsidy by a utility in Sacramento completely disrupted the normal cycle of adoption that is needed for a market to be sustainable.  And when the subsidy is removed, the market adoption pattern must start over from the very beginning.  This is why government subsidies are so damaging over the long term.  It's more than just a loss of money when the subsidy goes away.  It's also a loss of a key component of sustainable market development: product and buyer evolution.

Related Articles:
Product Adoption Fundamentals

Read More

Solar Marketing Lessons, Learned in the First Grade

Most of us learned at a very early age that it's not a good idea to kick sand in the face of the biggest kid in school.  Unless you enjoyed getting pounded into the ground like a tomato stake, the best strategy on the playground was to avoid direct, physical confrontation.

This simple lesson in life also applies to the practice of marketing.

The number one rule of marketing is never attack an entrenched competitor in his or her area of greatest strength with an emerging technology. (especially not with an emerging technology like solar)

Yet that is exactly what many people in the solar industry actually do!

Hardly a week goes by without a solar vendor, clean energy lobbyist, solar advocate, industry analyst, PR agency or marketing organization proclaiming that the solar industry needs to emphasize "reliability."  Well like it or not, reliability is a key strength of solar's biggest competitor…the electric utility industry.  Using a less traumatic metaphor this time, claiming reliability as an advantage of solar is like challenging Lance Armstrong to a race immediately after learning to ride a bicycle.

Not only does solar provide something that people already have (electricity), but their current supplier (the electric utility industry) has created an enduring public perception of being the most reliable source of electric power.  For more than 70 years, Reddy Kilowatt served as the official mascot of the electric power industry, and in the process became a permanent symbol of our culture.  Reddy represents specific characteristics and attributes that are the competitive strengths of all electric utilities -- reliability, unlimited capacity, plug-in ready, and constant availability.

Utilities are the 900 pound gorilla of the electric supply "playground" and power from the grid is perceived by the public as the safest, most reliable choice.

Those of us in the solar industry know that PV is in fact very reliable.  But utilities have already captured the reliability square on the game board.  They own that part of the playground. And it's a waste of time and money trying to compete against a public perception, built over 70+ years, that utility power is the most reliable.  There are many other areas in which to successfully compete against electric utilities.

One more thing.  Next time you are playing basketball at the local gymnasium, don't challenge Shaquille O'Neill to a game of one-on-one.  The results won't be pretty.


Related Articles:
Marketing High Risk Products
Solar's Main Competition

Read More

Word-of-Mouth Communication pt2

The content of word-of-mouth communication for solar products -- once underway -- can be enhanced and mildly diverted by the solar supplier. But because it is essentially an underground communications medium, the content of word-of-mouth cannot be substantially changed or improved, once launched. Hence the need to be correct at the start, to assure that the power of word-of-mouth will not turn negative and then increasingly build negative perceptions.

The risk of negative word-of-mouth is always present, particularly for companies where products may be incomplete at introduction. Negative word-of-mouth is substantially stronger, and works substantially faster than positive word-ofmouth. Using a word-of-mouth based strategy for a new product that does not meet expectations will provide rapid and permanent failure.

For all of its difficulties and risks, word-of-mouth has one powerfully vital attribute: it provides a method for reinforcement that is substantially better than any other medium. There is substantial research on the learning process that says, in essence, that the identical message is only effective the first three times it is received. After three exposures, the recipient becomes saturated with the particular message and interest declines rapidly. It is this finding behind the use of changing messages in advertising, behind the campaign concept.

Word-of-mouth provides continually changing messages to maintain and even enhance learning. Word-of-mouth involves multiple sources (the people who talk about solar) with, by definition, multiple messages. People who are the sources of word-of-mouth customize the message to fit their circumstances and experience.

The value of this customization is that it avoids saturation by providing different messages about the same product, avoiding the saturation point of the same message, and stimulating and reinforcing continuing progress through the learning process. It is for this reason that word-of-mouth has such a powerful effect in quickly stimulating purchase behavior.

The infrastructure concept and infrastructure communications recognize this unique characteristic of word-of-mouth and are designed to keep different messages flowing.

Product introductions that recognize this stimulating word-of-mouth effect focus on effective, customized communications to different segments of the infrastructure primarily to assure that word-of-mouth reinforcement communications keep moving, keep evolving and keep on target. Such product introductions recognize the requirement for multiple messages to multiple segments, they understand and plan based on the infrastructure concept, for changing but consistent messages, and they appreciate the fact that word-of-mouth is outside the marketer's control.

In my next post, I'll talk about ways to measure the effectiveness of word-of-mouth marketing.


Related Articles:
Word-of-Mouth Communications Part One

Read More

When Will Solar Go Mainstream?

There is an unfortunate fact about emerging markets that causes great frustration for anyone offering something "new." A recent article on the RenewableEnergy.com website about how most people still view solar as something in the future, but not here today, is a good example.

People do not view something new as "in the mainstream" until they see someone EXACTLY like themselves using it. So a homeowner in Iowa with a 2000 sq. ft house located on a hill, must see another homeowner in Iowa with a 2000 sq. ft house located on a hill using solar before he describes solar as available here and now. You can have millions of people using solar in other parts of the world, on all kinds of different buildings, and it means NOTHING to the guy on a hill in Iowa.

I've studied this peculiar market-behavior pattern for many many years now and it applies to anything new or innovative that is introduced into a marketplace. In every case, the secret to achieving mainstream market acceptance (which includes positive support from NPR correspondents) is extreme vertical marketing. In other words, focus on one vertical market segment at a time because mainstream buyers/users will only accept information from people who are identical to themselves.

Any technology that is considered mainstream today, had to go through a phase of extreme vertical marketing to get there. And I'm not seeing anyone do this yet in the solar industry.

Read More