RESULT OBTAINED
Decision concept
Value proposition: making explicit why a target should choose
What must be established
A useful analysis keeps its controls visible.
- 01
Name a concrete target and a concrete choice situation.
- 02
Compare the result with the status quo and the substitutes.
- 03
Provide evidence proportionate to the importance of the promise.
Decision reference
Make the next choice more explicit.
DECISION SUPPORTED
Which priority result does the offer make better than the alternatives for a precise target?
DELIVERABLE TO KEEP
A testable proposition and the pieces of evidence needed for its credibility.
NEXT ELEMENT TO EXAMINE
DifferentiationExplore →Write a complete choice hypothesis
The proposition specifies for which target, in which situation, against which alternative and according to which result the offer should be preferred. It also names the cost, effort, risk or feature the target agrees to give up. The customer’s vocabulary does not replace the evidence of behaviour.
- Target and situation
- Real alternative
- Priority result
- Accepted trade-off
Calculate a net value without hiding the assumptions
The illustrative model proposes: net value = time saved + risk avoided + revenue added − switching cost. Each term keeps its unit, its horizon and its source. Risk avoided = difference in probability × impact over the same period. A declarative probability remains an assumption and is the subject of a scenario, never of a certain value.
- Same horizon
- Full costs
- Sourced probabilities
- Low, central and high scenarios
Build a ladder of evidence
Start with declarative understanding, then observe a behaviour, a conversion or a comparable result. A testimonial proves a situated experience, not a general effect. The proposition is reviewed if the preference does not translate into behaviour, if the switching cost exceeds the estimated value or if an alternative narrows the gap.
- Declarative
- Observable behaviour
- Comparable result
- Review trigger
29 · ORIGINAL ASSET
Quantifying a value proposition without over-promising
Value equation
The model adds time saved and risk avoided, then subtracts the switching cost. Each term must keep its evidence.
Download the model ↓Time€7,650
+Risk avoided€18,000
−Switching€6,500
€19,150 estimated net annual valueTeaching case · simulated data · no real-world market conclusion.
- Harvard Business School, Strategic Positioning (opens in a new tab)Institutional source linking value proposition, distinctive value chain and strategic trade-offs.
- UK Government, The AQuA Book, 2025 (opens in a new tab)Official framework for making the assumptions, uncertainties, permitted uses and limits of a calculation visible.
MOVE FROM ANALYSIS TO YOUR DECISION
Test the preference, credibility and defence of the positioning
MOVE FROM ANALYSIS TO YOUR DECISION
Test the preference, credibility and defence of the positioning
RETURN TO THE DECISION SYSTEM
See the canonical definition of marketing strategy→