In my last post, I described the “why” and “how” behind the Jobs To Be Done (JTBD) approach. In this post, I’ll detail what we learned when we applied the JTBD framework to study parents who recently moved their kids to a microschool and educators who recently launched a microschool.
Understanding Pushes, Pulls, Anxieties, and Habits
Deciding to enroll in a new school – let alone launch a new school – is no trivial matter, and there are powerful forces that influence that decision. As Tom Arnett notes, “these forces can either propel the family toward your program or hold them back.” These forces are described as pushes, pulls, anxieties, and habits. Arnett’s recent paper for the Clayton Christensen Institute has this excellent explanation:
Push represents the moments of struggle that nudge people to seek better alternatives. For families looking for new schooling options, these are often the problems and frustrations they experience with their current educational setting. The stronger the Pushes, the more likely a family will take action.
Pull represents the features of various solutions that make those solutions attractive. These features might be a unique pedagogical approach, a strong sense of community, or a flexible program schedule.
Anxieties are the concerns or fears about new solutions that create resistance to change. For families, these might be worries about the cost of tuition, concerns about how well their child will adapt to a new environment, or uncertainty regarding how well an unconventional option will prepare their child for college.
Habits refers to the current practices or routines that keep people tethered to the status quo. Even when families are not entirely satisfied with their current situations, the ease and familiarity of what they’re used to can be a strong force inhibiting change.
Source: Thomas Arnett, Clayton Christensen Institute
Families and educators will only take the leap to enroll or start a microschools if the Pushes and Pulls they are experiencing are stronger than the Anxieties and Habits.
Each Job To Be Done has functional, emotional, and social needs that the adopter is trying to fulfill. The functional dimension is around the practicality of the solution, emotional is about how the adopter wants the solution to make them feel, and social is how they want the solution to impact their perception within their communities. You’ll see how they play out in the various JTBD for parents and founders below.
Lastly, JTBD focuses on the true competitive set of options beyond just School A and School B that may be competing with the job to be done. A parent who may feel like their current school is too focused on academics may have their JTBD fulfilled by extracurriculars outside of the school day. I’ll provide those in the analyses below.
That’s a lot of framework, but it’ll become a lot clearer in the profiles of parents and founders below. If you want a deep-dive on the frameworks or the parents’ JTBD, read Tom Arnett’s paper for CCI or browse through the numerous docs found at the Re-Wired Group’s website.
Below, you’ll find a simple description of each of the 7 identified jobs to be done (3 for parents and 4 for founders). They’re based off of around 20 intensive interviews with parents who recently switched their child to enroll in a microschool and founders who recently launched a microschool.
Following the descriptions, I’ll add some thoughts at the end.
Parents’ Jobs To Be Done when enrolling their child in a microschool
The research uncovered three Jobs To Be Done driving parents’ decisions to switch to a microschool.
Founders’ Jobs To Be Done when launching a microschool
The research uncovered four Jobs To Be Done driving educators’ decisions to launch a new microschool.
Closing Thoughts
We partnered with the Re-Wired Group, VELA, and Clayton Christensen Institute to conduct this research primarily to inform the field of microschool leaders and supportive organizations, who can hopefully use the insights to better align their services to the needs of families. In the year or so since we started, it’s amazing how many conversations you’re in where you think, “she sounds like a Job 2 founder” or “he sounds like a Job 1 parent.”
If you are a microschool parent or founder, do you see any glimpses of yourself when you think back to the progress you were trying to make when you leaped into this world? Let me know in the comments!
Harvard Business School professor Theodore Levitt famously said, “People don’t want to buy a quarter-inch drill. They want to buy a quarter-inch hole.” This insight is just as true for microschools as it is for any other service. Most people are not enamored with the concept of a microschool, just like they are not all that impressed with how charter schools’ governance models differ from district schools or how tax credits are different from vouchers. People are motivated by the progress they hope to achieve with a product or service.
The opportunity for lots of value destroying exists, particularly from those who are interested in “scaling” microschools with little regard to whether their proposed interventions solve needs of the purchaser at all. As Clayton Christensen observed, confusing the consumer with what they are actually trying to do will result in “a one-size-fits-none product.” Lots of features with few adopters.
The true path to scale is for microschools to stay laser-focused on discovering and better-aligning themselves to their families’ jobs to be done.