I was told, 'We don't do this for the money.'

I have met and worked with impactful startups that had a love-hate relationship with the market approach.

Talking about marketing strategy, business plan or user expectations was sometimes only understandable through the prism of impact. We would talk about impact to the customer, he would buy impact, and he would be satisfied with the impact. Impact as a value proposition, marketing message, and KPI.

Except that in reality, impact is good but it is not enough! Besides, we do not "make impact". I prefer to say that we respond to a need in the world, in an impactful way. This formulation more accurately invites us to take into account all the dimensions of the identified need, beyond the impact.

Take for example, the company 1083. They make jeans responsibly. And just because their jeans are 'ethical and clean' doesn't mean 1083 is oblivious to traditional consumer expectations of fashion and aesthetics. In other words, 1083 makes 'beautiful' jeans. And if they made ugly jeans, even if they were high-impact, I bet they wouldn't sell.

It seems simple and obvious, and yet!

Backstage, it's not always easy to place the cursor in the right place . From 2017 to 2020, I supported the start-up Seabin Project for the development and marketing of the very first floating waste collector. A new concept, a market to be (created). At that time, the expectations for pollution control solutions were palpable among ports & marinas. The lack of a solution was glaring.

During the very first prototype test campaigns, the feedback from the beta testers confirmed the start-up in its 'all environmental' focus: " More waste, smaller, better collected!" The team then saw its initial belief reinforced: the only purchasing criterion for its innovation would be its environmental performance - its famous... impact. And on this point, there was nothing to complain about: in just a few hours, a Seabin collector could trap up to 30 liters of floating waste!

Yes, but here it is, after the launch of the first productions, the user community expanded beyond the committed early adopters . The mass market that was emerging did not see it the same way. " Impact is good, but operational efficiency is better! "

The new users were clear: the collector, despite its good collection performance, remained a machine that was too rudimentary, heavy and expensive to maintain!

It had to become more practical, more ergonomic, and quickly. Without it, the mass market would soon abandon it. More traditional expectations therefore, and no less legitimate (!) which had to be heard. This was done.

Conclusion :

We can clearly see that the opposition between the Business-For-Good vs. Business-for-profit value frameworks does not hold. Whether we innovate for profit, or for 'the cause', a pragmatic and rigorous market approach is essential and the key to sustainable success. Whether the objective is financial or altruistic, a well-thought-out and implemented market strategy remains the pillar of successful and sustainable innovation.