Winning by Default: Achieving Market Dominance in a World of Subpar Choices

In an ideal world, consumers and voters alike would have a variety of high-quality options, each one competing to deliver the best possible experience or outcome. But in reality, certain markets—and even political landscapes—offer only a limited number of choices, and sometimes none of them are particularly appealing. When faced with subpar options, people are left to pick the lesser of two evils, the candidate or product that stands out not because it’s exceptional but because it’s simply different. In such situations, dominance doesn’t go to the "best" choice; instead, it goes to the one that’s least frustrating, most memorable, or simply more aligned with people’s dissatisfaction. This is a phenomenon we might call “dominance by default.” It’s not glamorous, and it certainly doesn’t require excellence, but it’s a powerful position when customers—or voters—have nowhere else to turn.

In the 2024 U.S. presidential election, this concept of “dominance by default” seems more relevant than ever, with Kamala Harris and Donald Trump as the two main contenders. For many voters, neither candidate represents an ideal choice. Harris, as the sitting vice president, embodies continuity with the current administration—a familiar but uninspiring figure who, for some, may represent more of the same political status quo. Trump, by contrast, taps into an entirely different environment. His appeal doesn’t come from conventional qualifications or political polish; it comes from his unique brand of disruption. As a known quantity with a history of defying norms and challenging the establishment, Trump represents a break from the status quo that appeals strongly to voters frustrated with “business as usual” in Washington.

In this scenario, Trump has the advantage of being distinct and polarizing in a way that makes him stand out. While both candidates are flawed in their own ways, Trump’s differentiation is sharper and more aligned with the frustrations of a significant portion of the electorate. For voters who feel that traditional politics hasn’t delivered real change, Trump’s outsider status, even after one term in office, still resonates. His candidacy may be far from perfect, but it’s defined by a clear contrast with the establishment. In an election where voters are dissatisfied with both options, Trump’s identity as the anti-establishment choice makes him the default option for those seeking something—anything—different.

The same dynamics of “winning by default” apply in business, where consumers often face limited choices in markets with lackluster options. When all available products are flawed, companies can still gain a competitive edge by focusing on things like reliability, customer service, convenience, familiarity, and small, incremental improvements. Instead of winning by being truly exceptional, a company can establish dominance by addressing the specific frustrations that plague customers when all choices fall short. Through these strategies, even a product that’s subpar in absolute terms can become the default choice, so long as it stands apart in a meaningful way.

Reliability is often the first factor that distinguishes one company from another in a market of limited, subpar choices. When both options are flawed, customers will generally choose the one that delivers a more reliable, predictable experience. It doesn’t matter if neither product is impressive—what matters is which one fails the customer less frequently. In such markets, consistency becomes a form of excellence. Take, for example, cable providers in regions where only two companies serve the area. If both options are known for high prices, service interruptions, and poor customer support, consumers will still have to pick one if they want cable TV. The provider that offers slightly more consistent uptime or has fewer billing errors might become the “go-to” option, not because it’s excellent, but because it’s less problematic and, perhaps, distinctly more predictable. Over time, customers begin to view this provider as the “better” choice simply because they know what to expect. In a market with low expectations, reliability—even if it’s just “good enough”—can be a decisive factor.

When the core products are uninspiring, customer service can also become a critical differentiator. In a market where consumers have no ideal options, the company that offers a more humane, responsive customer service experience can stand out as the preferred choice. Airlines often provide a good example of this dynamic. On certain routes, passengers may have only two airlines to choose from, both of which are notorious for cramped seating, frequent delays, and a barrage of fees. In these cases, the airline that manages to deliver friendlier customer service, quicker resolutions to complaints, or a more empathetic staff can become the “better” option. For frustrated travelers, even a small improvement in customer service—such as a helpful gate agent or a willingness to waive a minor fee—can make one airline seem far preferable to the other. When product quality is low across the board, customers learn to appreciate the company that makes them feel heard and valued. A genuinely good customer service experience doesn’t fix a subpar product, but it can soften its impact, making customers more inclined to stick around.

Another way to win by default is through convenience. If both choices are equally flawed, consumers will often choose the one that’s easier to access or use. When quality is not a distinguishing factor, convenience can become a powerful advantage. This could mean a simpler sign-up process, a more intuitive interface, more flexible payment options, or better integration with existing products and services. Internet providers in rural areas are a good example of how convenience can tip the balance in a market of limited options. In many rural regions, consumers are forced to choose between two slow, unreliable internet providers. If one of these providers offers an easier installation process, a streamlined billing system, or better technical support through a user-friendly app, customers are likely to pick that option, even if the service quality is just as poor as the competitor’s. In this case, dominance isn’t about who has the fastest internet speed; it’s about who makes the experience of getting connected slightly less of a headache, standing out in small ways that make life a bit easier.

Familiarity can also foster loyalty in markets with few choices. When neither option is great, consumers are often more comfortable sticking with the brand they recognize. Familiarity creates a kind of trust, even if it’s based on low expectations. Consider local banks in a small town, where residents might have only two banking options, both of which are known for high fees and limited online functionality. If one of these banks has been around longer, or if more residents already have accounts there, it may dominate simply because it’s the one people are used to. For many consumers, switching to an unknown alternative—especially if it’s equally flawed—feels like an unnecessary risk. In this case, dominance is achieved not through excellence but through brand recognition and a sense of safety in sticking with the familiar. When neither option is inspiring, customers often prefer to stay with the “devil they know,” and a company with an established local presence can leverage this to become the default choice.

Finally, small, incremental improvements can make a big difference when neither option is particularly appealing. Customers in subpar markets may not expect perfection, but they will notice if one company begins to address certain pain points, even if progress is slow. In a low-expectation market, the company that’s making visible, incremental improvements can gradually build goodwill and establish itself as the “better” choice over time. Consider public utilities in cities where only two providers exist, both known for slow response times and poor communication. If one utility begins investing in faster outage response or introduces a more user-friendly online billing system, customers may start to see it as the preferred option, simply because it’s trying to improve. In markets with low standards, even small improvements stand out, creating a sense of progress that customers appreciate.

In a market of limited, subpar choices, winning isn’t about being the best—it’s about being the least frustrating, the most reliable, or the most distinct option available. When customers are forced to decide between two flawed products or services, they’re likely to gravitate toward the one that offers a slight edge in reliability, customer service, convenience, familiarity, or small improvements. This phenomenon—dominance by default—explains much of Trump’s appeal in 2024. His differentiation from the establishment, his blunt style, and his willingness to disrupt the system still resonate with a segment of voters who feel disillusioned by traditional politics. In a landscape where both choices have significant flaws, Trump’s distinctiveness may very well make him the default winner.

In a world where the bar is low, dominance by default doesn’t require perfection. It requires an understanding of what customers or voters find most frustrating and a commitment to alleviating those pain points, even in small ways. When excellence isn’t on the table, sometimes being “good enough” in the right areas, or simply distinct enough, is all it takes to capture loyalty—and victory.