Startups should only use analogies in their positioning & messaging if they pass these 3 tests…

Test #1 — Does everyone in your target audience get the reference?

If not, you’re prospects are going to feel like they are on the outside of an inside joke.

Test #2 — Does the reference align with how a customer expects to get value?

Many founders have used the “We’re the Uber for X” analogy, making it easy for investors.

But most customers didn’t want to operate this way.

Take Homejoy, for example.

They dubbed themselves the “Uber for Home Cleaning”

However, they found that the majority of the market hiring cleaners want repeatability (same cleaner, same time, same schedule) — not ad hoc on-demand service.

When you use a misaligned analogy, you’ll be on the defensive, trying to support the reference.

Andrew Chen has written about this in a blog post titled: “Is startup idea taken?” - and why we love X for Y startups.

Worth a read.

Test #3 — Is the reference concrete enough to understand what the product does?

Many analogies can be abstract.

And abstraction means there are different interpretations of the meaning.

Different interpretations = lack of clarity for the prospect.

This is bad.

———

Check out the image for two examples of X for Y positioning.

Example 1 fails all three tests.

”The psychologist for your product & service”

Test #1 (reliability)

Sure, most folks know what a psychologist is, but when it comes to product development and go-to-market, many folks won’t understand the reference.

Test #2 (expected value)

What is the value of a psychologist?

This could be many different things, making it difficult for the reader to see the value.

Test #3 (clarity)

The out-of-context connection to product building makes this analogy an abstraction.

This will leave many readers (myself included) very confused.

Example 2 passes all three tests

“Superhuman for LinkedIn”

Test #1 (reliability)

If you are in tech or startups, you’ve heard of Superhuman (In part because their product was a big success and also because Rahul wrote a viral blog post about finding product-market fit)

Test #2 (expected value)

Because the use case is identical to the reference (responding to messages), just in a different platform (LinkedIn, instead of email), the value of the analogy is extremely clear.

Test #3 (clarity)

You don’t need to see the product to know exactly what it does.

———

When thinking of using the X for Y positioning, make sure it can pass these three tests.

If it doesn’t, you better find a different way to explain your product.

P.S. “Superhuman for LinkedIn” is a company called Kondo.

We started using the product last year and love it — A must try for anyone that handles a lot of LinkedIn DMs. (And no, I’m not affiliated with them at all… just a dope product worth mentioning)