Destroy to Rebuild: The Counterintuitive Path to a Winning Go-To-Market Strategy

So let's talk about go-to-market strategy. I like to apply mental models to everything we do, and go-to-market is no exception. One of my favorite mental models is by Charlie Munger, which is invert the question. Basically, if someone asks you to do something, try asking yourself, what would you do opposite?

Imagine you're steering a ship, but instead of charting a course forward, you're asked to plot its destruction. Sounds crazy, right?

I've seen firsthand at Copy.ai how companies can get bogged down by incremental tweaks and familiarity blindness—just tinkering with processes that are fundamentally flawed but too familiar to really question.

But what if we flipped the script?

By deliberately thinking about how to dismantle your go-to-market strategy, you can unearth inefficiencies lurking beneath the surface. This paves the way for a more robust, future-proof approach.

Let's dive into why sometimes, to build something great, you must first consider how you'd destroy it. This approach isn't just about thinking differently; it's about thinking effectively.

The Dangers of Incrementalism and Familiarity Blindness

Companies often fall into the trap of incrementalism, just making small tweaks to existing processes rather than rethinking them from the ground up. This is where "familiarity blindness" comes into play—a concept explored in Lindblom's research, which shows how being too close to something can prevent decision-makers from seeing its flaws.

Incrementalism just perpetuates this blindness, leading to inefficiencies that compound over time.

It's like a company that keeps adjusting its marketing strategy without questioning its core assumptions. Over time, these minor adjustments can lead to a bloated, inefficient process that no longer serves its purpose. It's like trying to fix a leaky boat by patching holes without ever considering why the boat is leaking in the first place.

Inverting Your Thinking to Surface Hidden Flaws

So one of my favorite mental models is the "invert the question" principle from Charlie Munger. The idea is simple—if someone asks you to do something, try to flip the question and ask yourself, "What would I do if the goal was to destroy this instead of build it up?" By reversing the objective, you start to see all the things you should avoid in order to be effective.

Let's apply that to a go-to-market organization. How would I make that organization as inefficient as possible?

I'd start by making sure the marketing materials are super vague and untargeted.

I'd blast generic messages to everyone in the industry rather than tailoring content for our ideal customer profiles.

I'd also layer in as many bottlenecks, review steps, and handoffs as possible to slow down execution.

And I definitely wouldn't provide any training for the sales reps—just let them flounder.

Basically, I'd do everything in my power to make the entire process as cumbersome and wasteful as I could.

Now, if I reverse engineer that approach, the path to an effective go-to-market strategy becomes clear.

First, we need to deeply understand our ideal customer profiles and create laser-focused marketing content for each one.

Then we want to eliminate as many execution bottlenecks as we can, streamlining the workflow to move faster.

And of course, comprehensive enablement for the sales team is a must.

It's all about taking the opposite approach of what I just described for destroying a go-to-market org.

Takeaway

Inverting your thinking may seem unnatural, but it's crucial for overcoming familiarity blindness and uncovering hidden inefficiencies. By deliberately considering how to destroy your go-to-market strategy, you can rebuild it stronger and more adaptable than ever before. I challenge you to apply this approach and witness its transformative impact on your business. Sometimes, the path to greatness begins with a willingness to destroy what you know.