5 ms·

MBA ideas of an economic moat - lock-in, stickiness, etc - are "dark patterns". But there are "light patterns": you can stay ahead in a technological race if y

MBA ideas of an economic moat - lock-in, stickiness, etc - are "dark patterns". But there are "light patterns": you can stay ahead in a technological race if you keep running; sales are easier if you are known as better; you get more informative feedback if you have more users, etc.

matz1 8y ago
Dark pattern is just a tools, it is especially useful when the product is not that good. Sometime as a sales or marketing person you are not really in control of the product, in these case these "dark" pattern are useful.
radiusvector 8y ago
> MBA ideas of an economic moat - lock-in, stickiness, etc - are "dark patterns". Dramatic statement. I am an SWE and an MBA. There are merits to thinking about every aspect of the business. Tech/Product is just one - an important one in a Saas company, but still just one. > But there are "light patterns": you can stay ahead in a technological race if you keep running; This is another way of saying "build it and they will come". You have to combine good business/economic sense with great products. Apple didn't just get to be Apple by staying ahead in a technological race. Arguably, they are behind a lot of other phone makers in specs. But they have a lot of people thinking about ecosystems, lock-in, marketing and other "MBA" concepts.
- ColanR 8y ago
  > There are merits to thinking about every aspect of the business. This isn't a refutation of the parent - all you've said is that sometimes those dark patterns are worth exploiting. I'm rarely one for defending an absolute, so I think it would be far more interesting to say why it is worth using a 'dark pattern'. So far, it just feels like you're deflecting through masking the issue.
  - sonnyblarney 8y ago
    " all you've said is that sometimes those dark patterns are worth exploiting" Those are not 'dark patterns', moreover, the notion of building a quality experience is not beyond MBA's either.
  - brlewis 8y ago
    "Dark pattern" has a more specific meaning than it seems like you're using here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_pattern https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_pattern
    - kbutler 8y ago
      "dark pattern" was a phrase in use before that neologism. https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q="dark%20pattern" https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q="...
- kettlecorn 8y ago
  Apple's core strength has been product design sensibility. Their ability to exploit lock-in, to market well, to build an ecosystem have all derived from that original strength. > But they have a lot of people thinking about ecosystems, lock-in, marketing and other "MBA" concepts. People need to think about creating something of value that people want to use before they worry about locking them into an ecosystem.
  - AstralStorm 8y ago
    Corollary is that lock in based only on inertia does not last top long. You have to be at least good enough for your core. As in, nothing vastly better has to be present.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
airstrike 8y ago
This nonsensical hate on MBAs has to got to stop. It's just so shallow.
- ataturk 8y ago
  But it's not--MBA is groupthink. The biz schools turn out cookie-cutter professionals who are of average intelligence and just aren't very dynamic people and the further down the school rating you go, the more cookie-cutter and awful it is. That some MBAs go on to innovate is only because they buck the indoctrination. Am so tired of factory-farm management!
- vraivroo 8y ago
  There's nothing nonsensical or shallow about it. MBAs have a well-earned reputation for focusing on profit at the expense of quality and are responsible for the death of many of the products we once loved. Rather than insult people, why not be the MBA who changes things for the better?
  - airstrike 8y ago
    I already am.
ace_of_spades 8y ago
I agree with the general sentiment of your statement. Isn’t it ironic that the strongest defenders of capitalism are the ones which are trying the hardest (and often succeeding) to monopolize (a niche of) the market? While I would not argue that there are never arrangements in which centralization and support of monopolies may make some sense (e.g., to speed up coordination or make it easier to enforce regulations), there should probably be more consideration about the societal down sides of “economic moats”. One interesting example for the economic and societal benefits of this “collaborative” kind of thinking could probabaly be the dutch health care provider buurtzog, which has been scaling like crazy but also seems to have been engaging with a variety of partners to actually help other people understand and replicate what makes buurtzog work. I bet that exchange was fruitful and interesting to both sides (there is always more to learn) but also premised on the idea that the primary goal of any business should be to help solve a problem and not to (primarily) defend its own existance. Encouragingly, both things generally correlate if done in the “right” order but it’s also hard work. https://www.buurtzorg.com/collaboration/our-partners/ https://www.buurtzorg.com/collaboration/our-partners/ P.S. I know I am somewhat simplyfing here as there are certainly different phases in a businesses lifecycle where different trade-offs may be applicable. I am just commenting on a general mindset which seems to be pretty prevalent.
mac01021 8y ago
I always thought the economic moat was supposed to be some feat of R&D that is hard to replicate. Like figuring out how to make an AI that functions as a human-quality call center representative. It's not that there's a network effect or something, just that noone else can figure out how to do it without a tremendous investment. That's more light than dark, right?
- Simon_says 8y ago
  Yes, delivering a better product is light. Delivering an equal or worse product but forcing your customers to pay you anyways is dark.
  - woah 8y ago
    What about delivering a product in a way that makes it impossible for anyone else to attempt to deliver a better product than you? For example, there might be a smart search algorithm researcher who could make a better search engine than Google, if given access to their data. But without the data, it doesn’t matter how good their algorithms are, the search will be worse. Googles moat is so good that it precludes the very existence of viable competing services. Is this a dark moat or a light moat?
    - mattnewport 8y ago
      > Googles moat is so good that it precludes the very existence of viable competing services. So how do you explain the existence of viable competing services? Plenty of people have switched to DuckDuckGo and while it still has a tiny fraction of Google's market share it appears to be viable and growing. Microsoft still operates Bing. Again its market share is tiny but at this point I imagine they continue to operate it because it is somewhat viable and not just for strategic reasons.
- anongraddebt 8y ago
  A 'moat' simply refers to the ability of certain firms (over the long-term) to sustain or increase profitability and/or market share within a given industry. For most firms, profit and market share erode over the long-term. The discussion of light vs dark patterns in this thread is more confusing than clarifying. Moats come in all shapes and sizes because a moat can pretty much be anything that satisfies the definition above; which doesn't preclude moats from frequently being of a certain kind(s).
kopos 8y ago
Or to paraphrase while the “dark patterns” require moment of inspiration creativeness, being better most of the times rehires diligence and discipline which are much lower hanging fruits. But it’s also a real danger to just thinking in absolutes like “the best product always wins” are also supremely context dependant. For every example there is always a counter example

matz1 8y ago

Dark pattern is just a tools, it is especially useful when the product is not that good. Sometime as a sales or marketing person you are not really in control of the product, in these case these "dark" pattern are useful.

radiusvector 8y ago

> MBA ideas of an economic moat - lock-in, stickiness, etc - are "dark patterns". Dramatic statement. I am an SWE and an MBA. There are merits to thinking about every aspect of the business. Tech/Product is just one - an important one in a Saas company, but still just one. > But there are "light patterns": you can stay ahead in a technological race if you keep running; This is another way of saying "build it and they will come". You have to combine good business/economic sense with great products. Apple didn't just get to be Apple by staying ahead in a technological race. Arguably, they are behind a lot of other phone makers in specs. But they have a lot of people thinking about ecosystems, lock-in, marketing and other "MBA" concepts.

ColanR 8y ago
> There are merits to thinking about every aspect of the business. This isn't a refutation of the parent - all you've said is that sometimes those dark patterns are worth exploiting. I'm rarely one for defending an absolute, so I think it would be far more interesting to say why it is worth using a 'dark pattern'. So far, it just feels like you're deflecting through masking the issue.
- sonnyblarney 8y ago
  " all you've said is that sometimes those dark patterns are worth exploiting" Those are not 'dark patterns', moreover, the notion of building a quality experience is not beyond MBA's either.
- brlewis 8y ago
  "Dark pattern" has a more specific meaning than it seems like you're using here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_pattern https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_pattern
  - kbutler 8y ago
    "dark pattern" was a phrase in use before that neologism. https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q="dark%20pattern" https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q="...
kettlecorn 8y ago
Apple's core strength has been product design sensibility. Their ability to exploit lock-in, to market well, to build an ecosystem have all derived from that original strength. > But they have a lot of people thinking about ecosystems, lock-in, marketing and other "MBA" concepts. People need to think about creating something of value that people want to use before they worry about locking them into an ecosystem.
- AstralStorm 8y ago
  Corollary is that lock in based only on inertia does not last top long. You have to be at least good enough for your core. As in, nothing vastly better has to be present.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

airstrike 8y ago

This nonsensical hate on MBAs has to got to stop. It's just so shallow.

ataturk 8y ago
But it's not--MBA is groupthink. The biz schools turn out cookie-cutter professionals who are of average intelligence and just aren't very dynamic people and the further down the school rating you go, the more cookie-cutter and awful it is. That some MBAs go on to innovate is only because they buck the indoctrination. Am so tired of factory-farm management!
vraivroo 8y ago
There's nothing nonsensical or shallow about it. MBAs have a well-earned reputation for focusing on profit at the expense of quality and are responsible for the death of many of the products we once loved. Rather than insult people, why not be the MBA who changes things for the better?
- airstrike 8y ago
  I already am.

ace_of_spades 8y ago

I agree with the general sentiment of your statement. Isn’t it ironic that the strongest defenders of capitalism are the ones which are trying the hardest (and often succeeding) to monopolize (a niche of) the market? While I would not argue that there are never arrangements in which centralization and support of monopolies may make some sense (e.g., to speed up coordination or make it easier to enforce regulations), there should probably be more consideration about the societal down sides of “economic moats”. One interesting example for the economic and societal benefits of this “collaborative” kind of thinking could probabaly be the dutch health care provider buurtzog, which has been scaling like crazy but also seems to have been engaging with a variety of partners to actually help other people understand and replicate what makes buurtzog work. I bet that exchange was fruitful and interesting to both sides (there is always more to learn) but also premised on the idea that the primary goal of any business should be to help solve a problem and not to (primarily) defend its own existance. Encouragingly, both things generally correlate if done in the “right” order but it’s also hard work. https://www.buurtzorg.com/collaboration/our-partners/ https://www.buurtzorg.com/collaboration/our-partners/ P.S. I know I am somewhat simplyfing here as there are certainly different phases in a businesses lifecycle where different trade-offs may be applicable. I am just commenting on a general mindset which seems to be pretty prevalent.

mac01021 8y ago

I always thought the economic moat was supposed to be some feat of R&D that is hard to replicate. Like figuring out how to make an AI that functions as a human-quality call center representative. It's not that there's a network effect or something, just that noone else can figure out how to do it without a tremendous investment. That's more light than dark, right?

Simon_says 8y ago
Yes, delivering a better product is light. Delivering an equal or worse product but forcing your customers to pay you anyways is dark.
- woah 8y ago
  What about delivering a product in a way that makes it impossible for anyone else to attempt to deliver a better product than you? For example, there might be a smart search algorithm researcher who could make a better search engine than Google, if given access to their data. But without the data, it doesn’t matter how good their algorithms are, the search will be worse. Googles moat is so good that it precludes the very existence of viable competing services. Is this a dark moat or a light moat?
  - mattnewport 8y ago
    > Googles moat is so good that it precludes the very existence of viable competing services. So how do you explain the existence of viable competing services? Plenty of people have switched to DuckDuckGo and while it still has a tiny fraction of Google's market share it appears to be viable and growing. Microsoft still operates Bing. Again its market share is tiny but at this point I imagine they continue to operate it because it is somewhat viable and not just for strategic reasons.
anongraddebt 8y ago
A 'moat' simply refers to the ability of certain firms (over the long-term) to sustain or increase profitability and/or market share within a given industry. For most firms, profit and market share erode over the long-term. The discussion of light vs dark patterns in this thread is more confusing than clarifying. Moats come in all shapes and sizes because a moat can pretty much be anything that satisfies the definition above; which doesn't preclude moats from frequently being of a certain kind(s).

kopos 8y ago

Or to paraphrase while the “dark patterns” require moment of inspiration creativeness, being better most of the times rehires diligence and discipline which are much lower hanging fruits. But it’s also a real danger to just thinking in absolutes like “the best product always wins” are also supremely context dependant. For every example there is always a counter example