 |
|
|
|||||
When it comes to inquiring aboutahemcertain products, shoppers prefer the inhuman touch. That is what we found in a study of consumer habits when it comes to products that traditionally have come with a degree of embarrassmentthink acne cream, diarrhea medication, adult sex toys, or personal lubricant. While brands may assume consumers hate chatbots, our series of studies involving more than 6,000 participants found a clear pattern: When it comes to purchases that make people feel embarrassed, consumers prefer chatbots over human service reps. In one experiment, we asked participants to imagine shopping for medications for diarrhea and hay fever. They were offered two online pharmacies, one with a human pharmacist and the other with a chatbot pharmacist. The medications were packaged identically, with the only difference being their labels for diarrhea or hay fever. More than 80% of consumers looking for diarrhea treatment preferred a store with a clearly nonhuman chatbot. In comparison, just 9% of those shopping for hay fever medication preferred nonhuman chatbots. This is because, participants told us, they did not think chatbots have mindsthat is, the ability to judge or feel. In fact, when it comes to selling embarrassing products, making chatbots look or sound human can actually backfire. In another study, we asked 1,500 people to imagine buying diarrhea pills online. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three conditions: an online drugstore with a human service rep, the same store with a humanlike chatbot with a profile photo and name, or the same store with a chatbot that was clearly botlike in both its name and icon. We then asked participants how likely they would be to seek help from the service agent. The results were clear: Willingness to interact dropped as the agent seemed more human. Interest peaked with the clearly machine-like chatbot and hit its lowest point with the human service rep. Why it matters As a scholar of marketing and consumer behavior, I know chatbots play an increasingly large part in e-retail. In fact, one report found 80% of retail and e-commerce business use AI chatbots or plan to use them in the near future. Companies need to answer two questions: When should they deploy chatbots? And how should the chatbots be designed? Many companies may assume the best strategy is to make bots look and sound more human, intuiting that consumers dont want to talk to machines. But our findings show the opposite can be true. In moments when embarrassment looms large, humanlike chatbots can backfire. The practical takeaway is that brands should not default to humanizing their chatbots. Sometimes the most effective bot is the one that looks and sounds like a machine. What still isnt known So far, weve looked at everyday purchases where embarrassment is easy to imagine, such as hemorrhoid cream, anti-wrinkle cream, personal lubricant, and adult toys. However, we believe the insights extend more broadly. For example, women getting a quote for car repair may be more self-conscious, as this is a purchase context where women have been traditionally more stigmatized. Similarly, men shopping for cosmetic products may feel judged in a category that has traditionally been marketed to women. In contexts like these, companies could deploy chatbotsespecially ones that clearly sound machine-liketo reduce discomfort and provide a better service. But more work is needed to test that hypothesis. The Research Brief is a short take on interesting academic work. Jianna Jin is an assistant professor of marketing at the University of Notre Dames Mendoza College of Business. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Category:
E-Commerce
There are a lot of words marketers cant seem to quit. Unique. Authentic. Real. But these are threadbare clichés, which have all but become nullified due to the erosion of their meaning, a dilution fueled by the desire for brands to be generally, yet specifically, for everyone. But everyone is not a target audience. Its a comfortable void. What brands really need right now isnt another lap around the buzzword block. Its courage. Courage to lean into the one trait that could cut through in a world of algorithms, sameness, and mediocrity. Marketers need to be weirder. If you want a sociological anecdote of how weird wins, look no further than online dating. Dating apps have shown us that people dont actually want the most normal partner. They want quirks that stand out. Hinge data shows that profiles mentioning a niche interestlike a specific video game or obscure hobbyare more likely to get matches than generic I like to travel statements. Marketing works the same way. Generic quality service or trusted partner claims are the equivalent of I love long walks on the beach. Tepid is a turnoff. While being good-looking can get you plenty far, to really connect, you need quirks. Mass marketing, like mass dating, creates fatigue. Precision, passion, and personalizationthe pillars of weirdcreate chemistry. When a brand flies its freak flag high, it shows the right customers: Yes, were your people. The Crocs case Take Crocs. Once the fashion worlds punchline, they leaned into their weirdness with bold collabsfrom KFC bucket Crocs to Balenciaga platform Crocs. Instead of pretending to be a lifestyle brand, they became a cameo brand: something you add to your life in a flash of bold comfort. Their revenue hit $3.96 billion in 2023, up nearly 12% from the year before. Thats what I call laughing all the way to the bank. Weird is always the evolutionary advantage, the bright feather on a dull bird. Yes, it may feel like a risk to shake off the camouflage, but if your biggest problem becomes being too visible, wouldnt that be a happy day. Weve all heard the phrase unprecedented times so much its basically become elevator music, but unprecedented times are exactly when evolution has the most fun. Charles Darwin called it adaptive radiationspecies diversifying into weird little niches that thrive when old systems collapse. Marketing is in its own adaptive radiation moment. Large language models (LLMs) and Generative AI are both collapsing the funnel and flooding the market with mediocrity and brand doppelgängers. Now more than ever, the average of averages is going to fail to thrive. Grow a horn So, whats a brand to do in this mush of mid? Grow a horn. Sprout a freaky little tail. If everyone else is cranking out the same optimized content marketing thought leadership, weird is the mutation that keeps you from extinction. Just ask Duolingo. Their TikTok presenceanchored by a giant green owl who is somehow equal parts threatening and adorablehas over 10 million followers. Its unhinged, its absurd, and its working. Weird didnt just help them survive. It helped them dominate the landscape and now anyone who tries to emulate that success is just doing a bad Duolingo impression. Now, absurdism isnt newits just having another renaissance. Whenever people face the unknown or the unbearable, weirdness bubbles up as both coping mechanism and cultural shorthand. Marketers should look to what is breaking though the anxieties of the moment and connecting and why. A giant owl twerking on TikTok, a water brand calling itself Liquid Death, a fast-food chain tweeting in all caps about sauce shortages. These are signals that brands are fluent in the absurdist yet timely language their audiences are already speaking. In an era where sameness is free, weird is priceless. Weird is precision. Weird is passion. Weird is personal. Some call it cringe. I call it survival. And if you want your brand to not just survive but thrive in 2025 and beyond, its time to get a little freaky.
Category:
E-Commerce
In September, my mom died after a short battle with colon cancer. She was 83 and lived a full life in which she had a fulfilling career in education, traveled the world visiting 100-plus countries, and was married to my father for more than 60 years. Its hard to lose a parent, and my workplace (like many) allowed me time off to be with family for the days before and after the funeral. But no matter how generous the policy at your workplace is, youre going to have to come back to work before youre done grieving. Grief happens following any significant event that creates a tear in the fabric of your life story. The death of a loved one is an obvious source of grief, but many kinds of events can trigger the grief process, including a fire at your home, or the loss of a job. Indeed, you may have heard of the five stages of grief. Those were originally described by Elisabeth Kübler-Ross, who studied patients who had received a terminal diagnosis. The problem with Kubler-Rosss stages of grief (denial, bargaining, anger, depression, and acceptance) is that theyre purely descriptive. You need not go through these stages when grieving. They also dont form a linear path. You may bounce around among these emotions or actionsor experience only a few of them. You may be fine for long periods of time and then find yourself sobbing uncontrollably at a comment someone makes or a scene in a movie. Its a messy process thats different for every person (and different within a person for each thing you grieve). So, how do you deal with that messiness at work? Cut yourself some slack First things first, dont try to be a superhero. You dont have to have it all together immediately upon returning to work. If youre still feeling fuzzy and foggy a month or two after a significant loss, dont beat yourself up. Dont assume you should be over it already. By allowing yourself to feel what youre feeling, you can avoid the common trap of amplifying the difficulties of grief by feeling guilt over your grieving process. Instead, accept the process. You may not yet be at the point where you can accept your loss, but you can accept that grief itself is complex. In addition, you need to recognize that for some period after a loss, your work products may not be as sharp as they were before. That doesnt mean youll never recover. It just means that it takes time. Grieving can be a lot of mental work, and you need to let the process unfold. Let others know When you experience a loss, your work colleagues may or may not be aware. Even when you have a death in the family, there are likely to be some people around you who have not heard. Its okay to let your colleagues, clients, and other people in your work community know whats going on. There are several ways that letting other people know can benefit you. For one thing, people are often willing to give you some grace when you make mistakes when they know youre going through a difficult time. In addition, people may be willing to take on a little extra work on your behalf as you recover from a loss. It is not a sign of weakness to rely on others during a difficult period. Measure twice, cut once No matter how careful you are when youre working at your peak, you need to be extra careful in the stressful times that accompany grief. Slow down a lot of your work to minimize the number of mistakes you make. Reread emails and reports before sending them off. Take extra time when making important decisions to ensure that you havent missed anything important. Ask other people to look over key documents before sending them off. In addition, there are many decisions you make at work that have an emotional component. You may use the way you feel about an option to elect to go forward with it. The more anxiety youre experiencing, the harder it can be to separate that from the way you feel about a particular option. As a result, you may feel paralyzed when trying to make a difficult work decision. At times like that, bring in a decision partner to help you. That will help you to avoid significant delays in key projects. Dont go it alone Even people who have been psychologically healthy for most of their lives may struggle when grieving a significant loss. If you have never engaged with a mental health professional before, you may feel that theres a stigma associated with needing therapy. Theres no reason to avoid working with someone if you find the emotions and thoughts youre having in grief to be overwhelming. You would not stay away from a doctor if your foot was hurting significantly enough that you couldnt walk. Dont use fear of engaging with a therapist as an excuse to suffer without help. Instead, reach out to your community to get recommendations for a therapist who has experience working with grief. The resilience skills you learn are likely to benefit you beyond the situation youre dealing with now. In addition, there are many great resources out there that can give you suggestions for how to move forward. I was fortunate enough to interview Lisa Keefauver recently, and her book on grieving (while irreverent) is an excellent guide to dealing with loss. In addition, there are many great blogs that people have written with helpful tips that may get you through your worst days. Remember that when you walk down the street and see people walking with friends laughing and talking, that many of those people have suffered significant losses in their lives and have eventually emerged from grief. It may take time, but youll learn to integrate significant losses into your life.
Category:
E-Commerce
Twenty years ago, getting promoted to manager was a major milestone. Today its a punishment. Thats according to recent research from LinkedIn. In a survey of more than 10,000 LinkedIn users, nearly 7 in 10 said they would leave their job if they had a bad manager. But only 30% said they want to become a people manager within the next few years. So, why the change? Why doesnt anyone want to be the boss anymore? We could sum up the answer in seven words: Nobody showed them how to lead effectively. The data backs this up. Global consulting firm West Monroe surveyed 500 managers and found that 66% of those received eight hours or less of manager training. Of those who had been managers for less than a year, a stunning 43% had received no training at all. Why is this lack of training so problematic? And, more importantly, how can you inspire and prepare the next generation of leaders at your organization? Sign up here for my free email course on emotionally intelligent leadership. The leadership training gap The problem is the skills that get people promoted arent the ones that help them excel at the next level. Management experts Ram Charan, Stephen Drotter, and James Noel explore this concept in their book The Leadership Pipeline. They describe five different leadership roles: Leading self Leading others Leading leaders Functional leaders Business leaders The passage from one role to another requires new learning and new behavior, assert the authors. Whats more, they say, the leader who transitions from one role to the next has to acquire a new way of leading and leave the old ways behind. This calls for a fundamental adjustment in skills and in the way you use your time. The challenge here is that many of the things leaders need to stop doing are things they enjoy doing and which have brought them success. For example, a sales manager may be great at closing deals. But once he or she is promoted, closing deals on their own should no longer be the most important thing. Rather, they should be concerned with helping their reports to excelfor example, clarifying target setting, giving emotionally intelligent feedback, and coaching and development. This change in perspective will affect everything from what they believe is important to how they define success and how they allocate their time. It will also impact the effect they have on their people and the organization as a whole. The change in perspective should continue as a leader continues to transition across roles. A leader of leaders must recruit the right leaders and hold them accountable for their role in developing their people. A functional leader has to not only lead but also build competitive advantages and agendas that enable the company to do things better than competitors. A business leaders focus is long term, but he or she must also stay in touch with the short-term picture. Business leaders must develop strategy and build teams down the chain that assist in executing that strategy. One thing that all of these roles hold in common? They each demand emotional intelligence, skills and abilities like listening, empathy, effective processing, and delivering of feedback. How to fix your leadership problem How do you make sure your organization is preparing your leaders and managers for success? Here are some tips. Map leadership passages: Define the transitions in your organization (individual contributor, manager one, manager two, etc.). Specify what emotional skills are needed at each stage. Develop training: Whether designed in-house, with help from a leadership consultancy, or both, tailor management and leadership training to your organization. Schedule time: Each time a person is promoted, schedule the training and make sure you provide the time and resources they need to complete it. Provide a mentor: A mentor can guide the persons development, answer questions, and support them emotionally. Where possible, allow the person to choose their own mentor. Support mentors, too: Outline guidelines for how mentors can help, and a program for them to meet regularly (in addition to impromptu meetings when needed). Measure outcomes: Track metrics and results, but also look beneath the surface. Pay special attention to retention/turnover, team engagement, conflict rates. Remember, metrics are important but interviews with direct reports and team members can reveal much. Lead by example: Senior leaders must practice developing their emotional intelligence, share their mistakes and learnings, and ask for help. In doing so, they set the founation for the culture. Dont just dump a person into a new role and expect them to figure it out. Some will. Many wont. In contrast, if you prioritize leadership development, youll strengthen your teams and the organization as a wholenot just today but into the future. By Justin Bariso This article originally appeared in Fast Companys sister publication, Inc. Inc. is the voice of the American entrepreneur. We inspire, inform, and document the most fascinating people in business: the risk-takers, the innovators, and the ultra-driven go-getters that represent the most dynamic force in the American economy.
Category:
E-Commerce
My wife and I visited Singapore last week for the first time in a couple of years, and I was reminded how impressed I am with the country. It illustrates a great strategy point, the subject of this Playing to Win/Practitioner Insights (PTW/PI) piece, which borrows from Billy Preston, whose Billboard No. 1 hit song in October 1974, Nothing From Nothing, contained the immortal line: Nothing from nothing leaves nothing. This piece is a play on the line entitled Something From Nothing Leaves Something: How Strategy Choice Can Make Something out of Very Little. And as always, you can find all the previous PTW/PI here. Impressive Singapore The minute you land at Changione of the worlds truly great airportseverything about the country works. Singapore is efficient, clean, and safe. It is always ranked at or near the top of the ratings for low crime rate. It has truly awesome food and great architecture. {"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/09\/martin.jpg","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/09\/Untitled-design-1.png","eyebrow":"","headline":"Subscribe to Roger Martin\u0027s newsletter","dek":"Want to read more from Roger Martin? See his Substack at rogerlmartin.substack.com.","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"Sign Up","ctaUrl":"https:\/\/rogerlmartin.substack.com","theme":{"bg":"#00b3f0","text":"#000000","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#000000","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91412496,"imageMobileId":91412493,"shareable":false,"slug":""}} And it is incredibly prosperous. The International Monetary Fund ranks it as the country with the second-highest gross domestic product per capita in the world. I rank it first because the only one ahead of it, Liechtenstein, is a medium-size town of 40,000, not a real country (similarly for sub-1-million population jurisdictions like Luxembourg, Macao, or Brunei). Singapore may be small (population 6.1 million), but it is bigger than Ireland or Norway, other famously high-GDP countries. Its 2025 GDP per capita is estimated at $157,000, which is 74% higher than the U.S.’s. (Though the U.S. shouldnt feel too bad. It is clearly harder to have a very high GDP per capita if you are a large country with more than 25 million people. The U.S. GDP per capita is 22% higher than the next biggest consequential country, Germany.) Some may argue that you shouldn’t compare a city-state like Singapore to entire countries because there are lots of very rich cities. But even by that standard, Singapore is impressive. The highest GDP per capita of any other large city is San Francisco, at $145,0008% lower than Singaporeand after San Francisco, there is a steep drop-off. The only sizable place richer is Silicon Valley, with a GDP per capita of $210,000, which is super impressive but not entirely comparable. It is a region anchored by one small city, San Jose. The truly impressive thing about Singapore is not its current prosperity, but where it came from. Singapore truly created something from nothingor at least from precious little. Singapore became an independent country in 1965 after a fractious two years as a state of the newly formed Malaysia. Its GDP per capita at the time was estimated to be US$516, or just under $4,000 in 2025 dollars, which is around the same as the current levels of Uganda, Sierra Leone, and Papua New Guinea. So, it was a very poor country. It had close to nothing with which to start. Its population was mainly ethnic Chinese, and there was no love lost between the Malays who surrounded it and the Singaporean Chinese. Singapore had zero natural resources. And in the 1960s global economy, it was in the middle of nowhere geographicallynot known for a single thing other than the Singapore Sling cocktail. But it then proceeded to increase its GDP per capita at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 6.3% for 60 yearsunprecedented in the modern global economy. No jurisdiction has kept up that rate of growth for that long. Something from Something Strategy If you have a rich endowment of valuable resourceswhether you are a country or a companythe strategy imperative is to exploit those resources to overwhelm any competitor (i.e., to play chicken). For example, if you are the U.S., you start with the richest endowment of natural resources in the world, the largest endowment of arable land, a favorable geography (mainly protected by oceans), and a large flow of motivated immigrants, and you invest heavily to exploit the natural resources. Then you use the wealth generated to invest more than any other country in becoming the worlds manufacturing superpower, including building a vast and efficient rail systemand later an interstate highway systemto move goods. Then you use that wealth to invest more in education and scientific research than any other country to become the worlds technology superpower. During your ascendancy, you simply out-invest every other jurisdiction in extremely expensive sources of advantageand there is nothing they can do to stop you. The same dynamic applies to companies. If you are relatively better endowed, your imperative is to invest in expensive advantages that your competitors cant match. For example, when upstart Reebok challenged Nike in athletic shoe sales, Nike invented a new scale-sensitive cost categoryathlete endorsement (e.g., Air Jordan, Dream Team, etc.)and cranked up the investments in this category to heights never even contemplated before until Reebok said “no mas.” The rest is history: Reebok flatlined and Nike solidified its dominance. The general rule, then, is that when you have a resource advantage over competition, look to invest in the most expensive sources of competitive advantage. Something from Nothing But if you are at a major resource disadvantage, like Singapore was in 1965, the imperative is to seek sources of advantage that are cheap and doable for you, but tricky for the competition to follownot an easy strategy choice task. That was the brilliance of Lee Kuan Yew, Singapores prime minister from before its independence through 1990. His fundamental strategy choice was to make Singapore the most efficient and secure place to do business in South Asia. He would ensure that it would be easy to do business in Singapore for foreign companies, and they could be confident that they could transact business without fear of the corruption endemic to that part of the world. Strategically, I love this because it didnt require a huge expenditure of capital (which they didnt have). It required clever choicesfor example, to have the best-paid bureaucrats in the world, so that they dont feel compelled to make extra money on the side. Is that free? No, but the cost pales in comparison to, say, a single giant infrastructure project. And it required building and nurturing a judicial system that was willing to fight corruptionand punish it severely. Again, his is not an expensive investment. Rather, it requires extreme commitment and careful ongoing attention. The other strategy tool that Singapore deployed was flexibility. The island nation famously transitioned through multiple economic phasesfrom labor-intensive to skill-intensive to capital-intensive to tech-intensive to innovation-intensiveacross its relatively short history, pivoting more quickly and proactively than competitive jurisdictions. These are the kind of things that many well-endowed competitors are just not willing to doi.e., they pass the “wont” part of the “cant/wont test.” They would rather spend big on something easier for them to carry out. Prime Minister Lee was absolutely resolute in ensuring adherence to his key strategy choices for the many decades during which he was in charge. Of course, as Singapore became rich, it was able to spend heavily on more expensive things like its massive investment in education and logistics infrastructures, like the aforementioned Changi airport in the late 1970sand then the airports recent enhancement, the award-winning $1 billion Jewel shopping mall featuring the worlds tallest indoor waterfall. Personal Cases of Something from Nothing The something-from-nothing strategy approach is near and dear to my heart because I have needed to employ it in multiple personal leadership rolesfor example, with the Rotman School at the University of Toronto and with Tennis Canada. Rotman SchoolWhen I became dean of the Rotman School in 1998, we had very little going for us. We were poor, with a budget one-quarter the size of our leading competitor, and we were running a deficit on that tiny budget. The business school was hemorrhaging professors to U.S. universities because the Canadian dollar had plummeted from 87 to 67 over the previous several years, leaving Rotman salaries uncompetitive relative to U.S. professorial salaries. The schools alumni were disengaged, and we werent connected at all to the Toronto business community. Overall momentum was significantly negative. We had to figure out how to build advantages cheaplyand I mean really cheaply. One way was to take our very expensive academic researchthat only other academics normally readand make it readable and interesting for a broader business audience, which we did inexpensively through Rotman Magazine, transforming it from a mediocre alumni magazine to an internationally valued source of business thinking. It helped put the school on the map for its business ideas at a tiny cost. Other schools didnt follow because they were run by academics who placed a low value on engaging businesspeople with their research findings. We developed a narrative that Rotman stood for fundamentally transforming business educationA New Way to Think. Our boldness earned us a massive amount of earned mediamore than all the other Canadian business schools combinedat a time when we had zero resources to invest in paid media. I learned that I had a cheap but valuable currency when it came to motivating professorsmy love and affection. The ones that taught well and contributed to translating research into actionable business ideas received disproportionate public accolades from me, and that moved the needle on their efforts more dramatically than I might have imagined. They would bring back stories from colleagues at other competing schools who wished their deans cared as much as I did for the work of my professors. Those cheap but effective strategy choices enabled us to build resources to subsequently invest in expensive thingslike professors, student services, and a new building. Tennis CanadaWhen I joined the board of Tennis Canada in 2005, we were deeply in debt from having built a new tennis stadium in Toronto, we had little history of success internationallyand the modest successes were in the relatively distant pastand, as a cold country that had never prioritized tennis, we had very few year-round tennis courts. (They had to be indoor courts or outdoor courts that were bubbled during the winter months.) We were an also-ran competing against established tennis nations that had historical advantages and orders of magnitude more resources. Nonetheless, we sought to become counted among the leading tennis nationslike the U.S., Spain, France, Germany, Australia, and Russia. A key potential resource that wasnt being exploited was Tennis Canadas ownership of both a mens (ATP) and womens (WTA) top level (1000 series) tournament (of which there are only nine and 10, respectively), the biggest and most important annual tournaments after the four Grand Slams (U.S. Open, Australian Open, Wimbledon, and Roland Garros). We ran it as a competitive sports event, not a valuable economic property. We hired an experienced sports entertainment executive, Michael Downey, as our new CEO, and he turned them into the second-highest revenue pair of 1000-series tournaments, trailing only Indian Wells, the plaything of Larry Ellison, the centibillionaire with unlimited investment resources. We were able to invest the massively increased cash flow provided by the tournaments in an innovative approach to player development. The resulting success of our Canadian tennis stars generated plenty of earned media and sponsorship dollars. We leveraged Canada into a leading tennis nation by inexpensively transforming a wasted asset into a powerful strategic tool. Practitioner Insights If you lag your competitors dramatically in resources, dont cry yourself to sleep at night and give up. You have a tough and tricky strategy taskbut not an impossible one. Your central task is to think through how you can gain an advantage on the cheap. Start by refusing to focus on and obsess about how and on what your competitors are spending their massive resources. Instead ask, despite all that spending, what are customers missing? By the way, that means customers of all sorts because many modern markets are two-sided (including Rotmans and Tennis Canadas). Then spend all your strategic thinking energy on finding inexpensive ways to achieve uniqueness in meeting those unmet customer needs. Search along two vectors. The first is to recognize the assets right under your nose that you arent utilizing for strategy purposeslike the two 1000-level tournaments, academic research that had zero impact on businesspeople, and the deans love and affection. The second is to identify cheap but valuable assets that you can createlike a low-corruption environment, or a more exciting and appealing approach to business education. As Lee Kuan Yew amply demonstrated: Where there is a will, there is a way to create something from nothing. {"blockType":"mv-promo-block","data":{"imageDesktopUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/09\/martin.jpg","imageMobileUrl":"https:\/\/images.fastcompany.com\/image\/upload\/f_webp,q_auto,c_fit\/wp-cms-2\/2025\/09\/Untitled-design-1.png","eyebrow":"","headline":"Subscribe to Roger Martin\u0027s newsletter","dek":"Want to read more fro Roger Martin? See his Substack at rogerlmartin.substack.com.","subhed":"","description":"","ctaText":"Sign Up","ctaUrl":"https:\/\/rogerlmartin.substack.com","theme":{"bg":"#00b3f0","text":"#000000","eyebrow":"#9aa2aa","subhed":"#ffffff","buttonBg":"#000000","buttonHoverBg":"#3b3f46","buttonText":"#ffffff"},"imageDesktopId":91412496,"imageMobileId":91412493,"shareable":false,"slug":""}}
Category:
E-Commerce
Sites : [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] next »