In the interest of full disclosure, I must warn you that this tirade is self-serving. To understand what makes it so, you have to know that for the past 15 years or so I've been on the marketing side of IT. (Some, certainly not me, call that the dark side.) With that out of the way, this tirade begins with a question: In all of history, who do you think has done the most harm to the IT industry?

Some people say it's Microsoft because, these people claim, its near-monopoly of the desktop operating system market and its subsequent domination of the office suite market stifle innovation. I don't want to wade into that debate because, to be honest, I just don't know. That and I have an irrational fear of lawsuits. (Or is that a rational fear?) There are times when I feel that Microsoft's indisputable financial success is ample justification for ranking it as one of the world's truly great companies. Needless to say, rebooting Windows for the umpteenth time and waiting for what seems like an eternity for it to load is not one of those times, but even then, I don't think Microsoft is the ultimate IT villain.

Other people name email spammers as the devils who have demeaned what would otherwise be one of IT's great contributions to humanity. If you read my "Demon Email" tirade that kicked off this series and the more recent "More Demon Email" tirade, you know that it would not take much to convince me that these people are right, but, no, spammers do not win my nomination as the most detrimental to the IT industry--and not just because my ISP has now implemented reasonably effective anti-spam measures.

Of course, there are evil hackers (yes, Good Witch Glinda, I do know that there are both good and bad hackers) who terrorize us with their viruses, worms, Trojan horses, spyware, and the like. They are truly diabolical characters, but they do not get my vote.

Some people blame the government for not acting fast enough to update laws to deal with the new electronic threats. Others take the opposite tack and blame government for too many laws that act as impediments to IT innovation. They are both wrong. Government is not the worst fiend here.

I think the person who caused the greatest harm to IT died in 1882, well before the dawn of the IT age--Ralph Waldo Emerson. He is attributed with uttering the words "If a man can write a better book, preach a better sermon, or make a better mousetrap than his neighbor, though he build his house in the woods, the world will make a beaten path to his door." Most people paraphrase that as "Build a better mousetrap and the world will beat a path to your door."

The problem? Too many IT innovators actually believe that crap.

Here's what's wrong with Emerson's prescription. First and foremost, no matter how advanced your mousetrap is, nobody--not a single soul--will beat a path to your door if they haven't the slightest clue that your door exists or that there is a better mousetrap behind it.

Second, you have to target the right people. People who do not have mice or are not aware of the mice they do have will not be interested in mousetraps. If they don't have mice, then you have to find a different audience. (The retorts to the snide remarks that are entering your mind right now are: Popular opinion notwithstanding, no, reputable marketers do not try to convince you that you have mice when you don't. And, yes, most marketers are reputable. Yes, really.) If people are simply not aware of the mice they do have, then you have an education job to do.

Third, buyers define value in their own terms, not yours. People who think that mice are just the cutest little things and love to see them scurrying around are not going to buy your mousetrap, no matter how good it is. Before these people will become customers, you must teach them about the diseases that mice can spread.

Finally, people have to believe that it is worth beating a path to your door. With apologies to Emerson, that will likely not happen if you are in the middle of a dense and pathless forest. On the other hand, if you not only beat the path yourself, but also pave it and provide free transportation, then your mousetrap won't have to be all that much better than the competition's to convince prospective customers to come to your door.

Metaphorically speaking, IT has built a number of really great mousetraps that never succeeded, or at least not to the extent that they deserved, because their inventors believed Emerson's aphorism. Why this tirade? I'm writing this because, over the years, I've heard far too many people tell me, "Don't worry about markets, messages, or channels of communication. Just write up the specs. Our product is so good that we'll have to beat customers off with a stick." Invariably, their stick does not get much use. The companies that take this approach usually fail or just barely survive rather than thrive. As a result, the world has missed out on a number of products that could have bettered their lives--maybe not by as much as their inventors believed, but at least somewhat.

It's time for IT innovators to get wise. I'm an unrepentant city boy. I'm not going to beat a path through any damned, vermin-infested forest just to buy some stupid mousetrap.

Joel Klebanoff is a consultant, a writer, and president of Klebanoff Associates, Inc., a Toronto, Canada-based marketing communications firm. Joel has 25 years experience working in IT, first as a programmer/analyst and then as a marketer. He holds a Bachelor of Science in computer science and an MBA, both from the University of Toronto. Contact Joel at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. He certifies that no mice were harmed in the writing of this tirade.