There are proponents of both cases for building a business. Should you identify the vision and strategy for one amazing product and chip away at it until it becomes a success, or should you try 10 small experiments, see what sticks then focus on the winners?
David Heinemeier Hansson of BaseCamp started his venture with a dozen different web apps, developed more or less in parallel for several years. After a while it became apparent that one of them was vastly more popular than all the others and those lagging Apps were eating up precious attention that could otherwise be better spent focused on making their Basecamp app even more awesome. Eventually they sold off the other assets and doubled down on their winner.
Ford on the other hand started out famously with one car that was available in just one color. The model-T was a singular project and the focused effort one building just one thing really well is what helped Ford compete and survive in those early years of the automotive industry. Had Henry Ford decided to develop 10 models of car at the same time it’s unlikely there would be a Ford Motor Company today.
Had DHH decided to start his company based on just one of those 12 app ideas, there’s less than a 10% chance he would have picked Basecamp and ended up with the winner he has today.
It seems that in both those cases one approach or the other was a requirement for their success.
However there is another strategy that attempts to strike a balance between these which is the pivot. With this approach you focus on one vision until it can be validated by the market and at a certain point if things look like a dud then you re-align the company on a new vision. This has the advantage that you maintain the efficiency that comes with a focused mission, but if the market doesn’t resonate with the product you can keep the company together, re-used some of the assets you’ve built and test another market with a renewed focus and determination. Hopefully it doesn’t take too many pivots to find something that fits.
How do you know what is the best strategy for your business? I think it comes down to how the development cycle matches with the marketing cycle. A lag creates gaps where the development team may not have market driven direction to go, and the marketing team may not have anything new and hot to sell. Filling the voids (if you have them in your business) may be an opportunity to develop a new idea, or an indication there is an opportunity to re-structure and tighten up the slack.