Doing Things Right vs. Doing the Right Thing: The NABC Approach
Tactical thinkers tend to focus on “doing things right”, while strategic thinkers want to “do the right things”. Doing something “right” but not tackling the “right task” is a waste of effort. Doing the right thing also means not making decisions based on personal needs, popularity or personal beliefs, but doing what’s necessary to achieve a specific goal. But what are the right things to do?
NABC: An effective method from the design thinking process
The NABC model helps solution developers to tackle the right things thoroughly. This “strategic thoroughness” approach is proven as useful. But what is meant with NABC?
Explaining the NABC in a nutshell
Developing better solutions with the NABC model
Solving a problem through an exceptional approach with a clear value proposition that differentiates it from similar solutions.
NABC: Step-by-Step Explanation
Below, we embark on a journey, breaking down the development and individual elements of the NABC method step by step, as it has proven itself in our business. We also explore the questions to be answered using this method, making it understandable through simple examples. Additionally, we address common mistakes that can occur in solution development using NABC.
1. Need — The N in NABC
What are the visible or latent needs, problems, or challenges of a specific audience?
The audience (or target group, such as customers, guests, visitors, etc.) must be researched and their profile defined (Persona). If this definition is not precise enough, the subsequent solution may miss its mark. “Need” is a variable with different meanings depending on the context. It can be referred to as a “need,” “problem,” “challenge,” “task,” “desire,” “opportunity,” and more. For our journey, let’s assume we’ve discovered that our target audience is athletes who are “thirsty.”
2. Approach — The A in NABC
How can you respond to the needs, address them (without proposing a specific solution)?
The approach suggests a way or a path to address the need without specifying the solution itself. This is a potential pitfall where you might rush to a (presumed) solution prematurely in the often complex process of finding solutions. Applied to our example of “thirst,” the overly simplistic approach might be “drink water!” This mistake, jumping to a (supposed) solution without fully exploring the dimensions of the insight, is known in the Design Thinking context as the Research/Design Gap: gaining insight and immediately implementing a solution without fully understanding the details of the insight, which is often counterproductive.
In our “thirst” example, the approach could be “quenching thirst” or more precisely “quenching thirst with a beverage.” This approach still leaves open the specific way to quench the thirst, potentially with different beverage options (mineral water, tea, wine, etc.), how it’s consumed (from a bottle, cup, glass, etc.), or the experience (sensations, taste, etc.). If we go even further and consider “rehydrating the body,” we expand the range of possible solutions, which could be interesting depending on the context and support more innovative solutions.
3. Benefit — The B in NABC
Besides satisfying the need, what additional value does the offer provide to the audience(s)?
Defining the benefit can also be a bit tricky. People often come back to addressing the need. For example, if the need is “thirst”, the approach is “quench thirst” and the benefit becomes “no longer thirsty”. But that is not what the benefit is. It goes beyond that. This is where the origin of NABC as part of a value proposition becomes clear: The benefit is about the value that a solution aims to deliver. This quantitative or qualitative value makes the solution unique, which is a key objective of a value proposition. It needs to stand out in a typically competitive market and consistently generate revenue.
In our simple ‘thirst’ example, the benefit is not simply ‘quenching thirst’, but could be something like ‘quenching thirst quickly, pleasantly and sustainably for better health’. Spoiler alert: a potential solution for this could be an isotonic, vitamin-enriched drink in different flavours.
4. Competition — The C in NABC
What are the potential risks to the solution or the solution-finding process?
While the original C stands for competition and focuses on potential market-related risks (cost-benefit ratio, competitors, etc.), in solution-finding processes it’s more appropriate to replace the C with an R. This part essentially deals with a general risk assessment and corresponding mitigation strategies (risk management):
- What could go wrong in the process of finding a solution? In our example, the formulation might be too complex or take too long to develop?
- What could jeopardise the implementation of the solution (feasibility, practicality, production constraints, etc.)?
- What other approaches might provide greater customer value?
- Adaptation or acceptance risks?
The final NABC
In our example, we would end with a so-called “hook”. This introduces the NABC and captures interest and focus, similar to an elevator pitch, but without giving away the solution.
The finished NABC might look like this:
H: We want to rethink hydration!
N: Athletes have an increased need for fluids and therefore get thirsty.
A: We want to develop a new type of drink.
B: It will rehydrate athletes quickly, pleasantly and sustainably.
C: Acceptance: Our solution may be too innovative, but this can be overcome with appropriate marketing.
Reflections on practical application
NABC is a concept that is easy to understand, but requires some experience to apply successfully in a professional context. An iterative trial-and-error approach helps to develop a suitable NABC as part of a specific task, refining it through several iterations to make it more precise. This process is often perceived as tedious because it relies on text and requires concentration and time. This is crucial because the method is often not explicitly applied in everyday projects, mainly due to resource constraints (the usual suspects: personnel, time, budget, etc.).
In professional practice, the NABC method serves as a background thinking model to solve problems systematically with the aim of doing the right thing.
