20 October 2013 | 14 Comments
In Kickstarter Lesson #64 I referenced a book by Daniel Pink called To Sell Is Human. Pink shares a lot of proven techniques for generating supporting and enthusiasm for a product based on behavioral psychology, so I wanted to write about another concept he talks about.
Let’s start off with an example of a hypothetical board game Kickstarter project. It’s a heavy Euro game with a slight fantasy edge to it. We’ll call it The Lost Book of Sylva.
Not knowing exactly how to share the potential for his game, the project creator pitches it in the following ways throughout the project page. I’ve seen many versions of these examples on Kickstarter projects:
- The Lost Book of Sylva is the best game ever!
- You will have more fun playing The Lost Book of Sylva than any other game.
- The Lost Book of Sylva is the next Terra Mystica.
- The Lost Book of Sylva could sell millions of copies.
According to several pyschological studies, here is how Daniel Pink would do it (this is my prediction, not an actual line authorized by Pink):
- The Lost Book of Sylva could be the next Terra Mystica.
Why is that any different than options 1-4? The answer can be found in a study published in 2012 by Stanford University’s Zakary Tormala and Jayson Jia and the Harvard Business School’s Michael Norton.
Those researchers studied the way that emphasizing a project’s potential can reap the greatest return on investment. In one study, they put people in the position of NBA managers who needed to give contracts to a veteran player and a rookie. The veteran had consistent stats over the last few years and the rookie was projected to have similar stats. However, participants gave the unproven rookie 25% more money at the same point in their career as the veteran.
Their other study tested two slightly different Facebook ads for a comedian. The two versions were as follows:
- Kevin Shea is the next big thing.
- Kevin Shea could be the next big thing.
Guess which one got significantly more click-throughs and likes? Yep–the second one. The one that showed the comedian’s potential.
I think the effect of this is even more drastic on Kickstarter. When you see a project making brash claims with complete certitude, it’s a turnoff. You might even wonder if the project creator is a bit delusional. How does he know that his game is the most fun ever? you wonder. I see that a lot. It’s like informing someone that you’re going to tell them a funny joke. Suddenly they’re going to be cynical about how funny it actually is. Don’t tell them it’s going to be funny–let them be the judge of that without you telling them how to feel.
Also, when you’re comparing your unpublished game or product concept to a masterpiece (“The Lost Book of Sylva is the next Terra Mystica.”), you make your potential backers doubt you. It’s such a brash claim–why should they believe you.
That brings us to the correct way to frame your project: “The Lost Book of Sylva could be the next Terra Mystica.” Just like the comedian example, you’re focusing on the game’s potential instead of what you know for sure. It’s passive instead of active–sure, it could be the next Terra Mystica, but maybe it won’t be. You (the backer) can decide.
But more importantly, by framing it that way, you get backers really excited about the project’s potential, all within a frame of reference of a game they’ve either played or heard great things about. If you back up your claim with a good-looking project with a clear ruleset and third-party reviews on the project page, people are going to get excited about the idea that they might be backing what will someday be considered a great game. Based on those studies I mentioned, the chances they’ll back the project will go up if you frame the project in that way.
Sometimes it’s the little things that can turn a failing project into a successful one, or a small project into a big one. So make sure to add a line on your project page that shows your project’s potential.