STRATEGYWeeks to result

Target Customer Scenario Method

Use vivid before-and-after stories to select your beachhead market

Problem it solves

unclear strategic direction

Best for

Cross-functional teams making high-stakes market segmentation decisions with limited quantitative data, especially during the chasm period

Not ideal for

Mature markets where quantitative segmentation data is abundant and reliable

Overview

Why this framework exists

The Target Customer Scenario Method is a structured approach to making high-risk, low-data market segmentation decisions using informed intuition rather than analytical reasoning. Moore argues that in chasm-period markets, there is never enough data for rigorous statistical analysis, yet companies must act quickly. The solution is to tap into the collective anecdotal knowledge of customer-facing employees.

The method produces a library of one-page scenarios, each depicting a specific target customer with a vivid before-and-after narrative. The 'before' scenario captures a moment of frustration with five elements: scene, desired outcome, attempted approach, interfering factors, and economic consequences. The 'after' scenario shows the same situation transformed by the new product with three elements: new approach, enabling factors, and economic rewards.

These scenarios function as memorable archetypes that engage intuitive faculties, making them far more useful for decision-making than abstract market descriptions or SIC codes. They are then systematically scored against a Market Development Strategy Checklist to produce a prioritized list of beachhead candidates.

Core principles

5 total
  1. In high-risk, low-data situations, informed intuition is more trustworthy than analytical reason
  2. Memorable images and characters engage intuitive faculties that abstract market descriptions cannot
  3. Target customer characterization, not target market characterization, is the correct unit of analysis
  4. Scenarios should be limited to one page each to force focus and maintain memorability
  5. The process is about generating good enough material for a decision, not achieving analytical certainty

Steps

4 steps
  1. Gather scenarios from customer-facing employees
    Invite anyone in the company to submit one-page scenarios. Prioritize input from salespeople, customer support, and consultants. Each scenario must include header information (end user role, technical buyer, economic buyer) plus before-and-after narratives. Continue until new submissions are only minor variations of existing ones, typically 20-50 scenarios.
    Pro tipInclude scenarios from every current customer, interesting prospects whether won, lost, or in waiting, and prospects known from prior experience. Cast a wide net for the initial library.
    WarningThese scenarios will incorporate fictions, falsehoods, and prejudices. That is expected and acceptable. They are still far more useful and accurate than formal market data at this stage.
  2. Write compelling before-and-after narratives
    The 'before' scenario must capture five elements: the specific frustrating scene, the desired outcome, the current attempted approach, the interfering factors that cause failure, and the economic consequences of that failure. The 'after' scenario captures three: the new approach with the product, the enabling factors, and the economic rewards.
    Pro tipMake the scenarios vivid and specific. Give the character a name. Describe a concrete moment, not an abstract process. The more memorable the scenario, the better it serves as a decision-making tool.
  3. Screen with show-stopper criteria
    Have each member of a small decision-making subcommittee privately rate each scenario on four factors: identifiable economic buyer, compelling reason to buy, deliverable whole product within three months, and absence of entrenched competition. Roll up into group ratings, discuss major disagreements, and eliminate the bottom two-thirds.
    Pro tipA very low score on any single factor is a show-stopper regardless of total score. Include anyone on the subcommittee who could veto the outcome.
  4. Score survivors on secondary factors and commit
    Rate remaining scenarios on partners and allies, distribution channel, pricing fit, positioning credibility, and bowling-pin potential. Rank order by score. If the team agrees on a winner, go forward. If deadlocked, assign one person to build a bowling pin model incorporating top candidates and select the head pin. If no scenario survived, do not attempt to cross the chasm.
    WarningIf no scenario survives screening, continue taking early-market projects, keep burn rate low, and search for a viable beachhead. Do not force a crossing that the data does not support.

Checklist

Saved in your browser

Examples

1 cases
Electronic book scenario for aerospace maintenance

Moore constructs a detailed scenario around 'Ernie,' an aircraft maintenance technician who cannot find shrevostat repair information because paper manuals are out of date and in the wrong location. The before scenario shows cascading delays as Ernie waits for a colleague to find, copy, and deliver manual pages. The after scenario shows Ernie pulling out an e-book with searchable, hyperlinked, automatically updated documentation and fixing the problem immediately.

OutcomeThe vivid scenario revealed extensive whole product requirements (docking stations, document management integration, wireless connectivity) that abstract market analysis would have missed, and provided a memorable character to anchor the team's decision-making.

Common mistakes

3 traps
Focusing on target markets instead of target customers
Abstract market descriptions like 'the healthcare market' do not engage intuitive faculties or reveal actionable details. Specific customer characterizations like 'the CFO of an integrated delivery network struggling with capitated insurance accounting' generate insights about messaging, channels, and whole product requirements.
Waiting for formal market research before acting
The chasm period demands speed. Commission validation research in parallel with execution but do not wait for results. The enemy in the chasm is always time, and standing still benefits established vendors and the status quo.
Treating scenarios as definitive rather than directional
Scenarios are informed approximations, not facts. They provide the best available basis for a directional decision. Course corrections are expected. The goal is to get moving in approximately the right direction rather than to achieve certainty about the perfect direction.

Origin story

How this framework came to be

Moore developed and refined this scenario methodology over years of consulting at The Chasm Group, where it was used broadly with clients. The approach draws on the insight that business knowledge in practice is carried through anecdotes, not formal research. Moore's background as an English professor informed his belief that memorable characters and narratives are more powerful decision-making tools than abstract data in low-information environments.

Source

Traced to primary
Source · BOOK
Crossing the Chasm, 3rd Edition
Geoffrey A. Moore · 2014
Open source →

Related frameworks

Browse all Strategy →