_edited.png){kind=logo}
4P：Product (產品) 、Price (價格) 、Place (地點) 、Promotion（促銷）
STP：Segmenting（市場細分）、Targeting（目標市場）、Positioning（市場定位）
這幾年遇到的行銷負責人談論的常是CAC、RoAS、LTV、CDP之類的數位行銷指標或專業術語，以上傳統的4P與STP似乎變成大家用不太著的東西了…
過去1-2年遇到了不少成長型的新創公司，其中也不乏具相當規模的公司，我發現他們多數已有一項產品得到市場認可，但再往下成長過程中，人力與費用卻持續增加，且增速多半大於營收增長的速度。也就是收入與資源投入的“增量”並不匹配，邊際效益明顯下降，這常常是營運績效不彰，惡性循環的開始。
當然多數公司會義正嚴詞的提出，要培育新產品/營收第二隻腳，投資腳步當然不能停止，放大虧損很合理！這說詞聽起來好熟悉，別忘了我也曾負責上市公司IR，是善於提出類似說法應對投資人的佼佼者之一！不過這些並不重要，重要的是公司是否陷入低效率循環而不自知？不自知當然就無法對症下藥，持續下去，因此錯失時機商機，造成的才是公司真正巨大的損失！
這時公司掌舵的CEO，如果理解傳統行銷學 STP 與 4P，便可以有效地派上用場，發揮關鍵的效益！要理解對於知識新創公司來說來說最貴的：不是錢，而是人跟時間！說白了就是工程師、產品、客服、業務行銷等全體人員的努力加總 = 「員工人數 x 時間」。
因此產品開發方向偏差、模糊不清的市場定位、過高過低的訂價，或是低效的銷售渠道或促銷方式，都可能消耗大量的「員工人數 x 時間」，導致公司低效運營的致命後果！偏偏這些議題過去多半交給行銷人員處理，殊不知從公司經營者的高度格局來看，這些其實都是 CEO 能否有效配置公司資源的關鍵課題。
常見的狀況如下：
1）「產品」不等於「商品」：能發揮夠大價值讓客戶願意付費的產品，才叫商品。許多產品及工程單位，根據自身經驗及對技術的理解，開發出心中覺得很牛逼的系統，拼命地跟客戶說明產品功能有多強大，但客戶常冷冷地反饋“那這如何幫我多賺錢？” 或是 “這東西幫助有限，免費的話我就試試，要另外付費那就算了。”很可惜，很多辛苦熬夜開發出來的「產品」沒機會成為「商品」，對公司與客戶從未真正發揮「價值」，但大量的「員工人數 x 時間」卻已浪費掉了。
但現實中，如何做出對的商品而非產品，如何創造出Must-have的「價值」而非只是Nice-to-have的「功能」，這些對於多數的產品負責人來說，可能還是太困難的課題。 有些公司甚至等產品已經開發完成，才要行銷單位想辦法包裝，硬叫業務去推銷，成果當然多半不如預期。 這個重大題目，優秀的CEO還是必須自己扛起來，整合公司各部門，才能發揮真正的價值與力量！
2）「市場定位」極為關鍵，應該擺第一位。很多公司沒清楚自身市場定位，產品的開發有的跟隨模仿競業，有的是PM自己想像揣摩，都不大可能成為熱賣「商品」。有的公司喜歡拿自己跟歐美大廠比，但功能落後追趕不及，只能一味地靠壓低價格期望贏得客戶認同，但有時候客戶要的可能只是在地化的彈性及服務，唯有深度理解客戶與自身優勢的CEO，精準市場定位後，產品及團隊的運營才可能事半功倍。
3）「訂價」 是一個看似微小，但卻超級重要的議題，很多公司是丟給行銷或產品的負責人處理。 現實的案例中，我們看過不少類似的產品功能，透過不一樣的市場定位、不同價值溝通、產品方案包裝、新的商業模式下， 卻產生10倍以上的收入差異！也看過客戶原預算是公司訂價 3-5倍的案例。由此可知，訂價其實是一個公司策略高度層級的事情，CEO能不懂不管嗎？
4）「渠道」與「促銷」雖然明顯偏行銷與業務負責的領域，但其實與前面談過的3個P都有密切關係：產品2B或2C？市場定位高、中、低？訂價邏輯與策略？這些都會影響到「渠道與促銷」方式的選擇，CEO是不是也可從全局的角度，對負責同仁給出適當引導與建議？
這裡篇幅有限，我們並不深究行銷學的 STP 與 4P 理論（Google上都查得到）。主要想提醒的是在現今數位世代，從產品設計到客戶銷售一條龍整合的軟體公司，其實可以交叉利用 STP 與 4P 技巧，由精準需求回頭定義目標市場、產品定位、商模與訂價，快速收集市場反饋調整，大幅縮短「產品」轉為「商品」週期。尤其是目前已有主力產品的公司，在發展“營收第二隻腳”時，不需要再走過去耗時耗力的成功老路（運氣與摸索），其實可以有更智慧的方法。
時代雖然不同了，但經營的邏輯與心法通常不變。老東西新用法，說不定效果奇佳也不一定？建議有興趣的CEO們不妨試試吧。
4P: Product, Price, Place, Promotion
STP: Segmentation, Targeting, Positioning
In recent years, discussions among marketing executives have largely shifted towards digital marketing metrics such as CAC, RoAS, LTV, and CDP. The traditional 4Ps and STP seem to have become obsolete concepts for many.
While encountering with many growth-stage startups over the past 1-2 years, including companies with considerable scale business, we found even these companies have a product that has gained market acceptance, their following growth journey is accompanied by increasing manpower and costs, often outpacing revenue growth. This discrepancy between revenue and resource input results in diminishing marginal returns, leading to operational inefficiencies and the onset of a vicious cycle.
Many companies may debate this by emphasizing the need to nurture new products or revenue streams, rationalizing the amplification of losses. However, it's crucial to recognize whether the company is caught in an inefficient cycle unknowingly. Without this awareness, effective action cannot be taken, leading to missed opportunities and significant losses.
At this juncture, CEOs who understand traditional marketing concepts like STP and 4Ps can effectively leverage them to drive critical benefits. Understanding that for knowledge-based startups, the most valuable resource is not money but rather people and time is essential. Essentially, the collective effort of all employees equals "number of employees x time."
Deviation in product development direction, unclear market positioning, incorrect pricing, or inefficient sales channels and promotional strategies can consume significant "number of employees x time," resulting in fatal consequences for the company's efficiency. These issues are often delegated to marketing personnel, but from the perspective of company management, they are critical issues that CEOs must address in resource allocation.
Common scenarios include:
"Product" does not equal "Commodity": Many products fail to become commodities that customers are willing to pay for because they lack significant value. The effort invested in developing these products often goes to waste. The challenge of creating a must-have "value" rather than just a nice-to-have "feature" remains daunting for many product managers. Exceptional CEOs must integrate departments to create real value and power!
"Market Positioning" is crucial and should take precedence. Companies often lack clarity in their market positioning, leading to product development based on imitation or the PM's imagination, making it unlikely to become hot-selling "commodities." CEOs who deeply understand their customers and their own strengths can achieve significant operational efficiency by precisely positioning their products and teams.
"Pricing" is seemingly minor but extremely important. Many companies leave pricing decisions to marketing or product managers. Real-life cases have shown revenue differences of over 10 times due to different pricing strategies and business models. Pricing is a high-level strategic matter that CEOs cannot afford to ignore.
"Distribution Channels" and "Promotions," although seemingly within the realm of marketing and sales, are closely related to the previous three Ps. CEOs can provide appropriate guidance and recommendations to their teams from a holistic perspective.
In conclusion, while the landscape has shifted to the digital age, the logic and principles of management remain largely unchanged. The crossover utilization of STP and 4P techniques in software companies that integrate product design and customer sales can significantly shorten the cycle from "product" to "commodity." Especially for companies with existing flagship products, there are smarter ways to develop a "second revenue stream" without retracing the time-consuming and laborious paths of the past.
Though times have changed, the fundamentals of management and their application in new contexts often yield surprisingly effective results. CEOs interested in exploring this approach are encouraged to give it a try.