"Better" is Bad For Business

How marketers have gotten it wrong by proclaiming they are "better."

Marketers have a problem – and it’s a big one that is only exacerbated by the increasing use of AI in copywriting. That bugaboo is the overuse of generic words that are subjective and not based on any fact or evidence. For example, words like “creative,” “responsive,” and “epic” are tossed around by organizations of every size and shape as they try to differentiate themselves from the competition.

Lately, another word has entered, if not dominated, the fray: “better.” Depending on the organization and their respective strengths and weaknesses, they are quick to suggest to their target audience they are “better” than the rest. The issue lies in that “better” is subjective because it’s not compared to anything and begs the question, “better in relation to what?”

The use and suggested meaning of the word “better” have ultimately become reliant upon the marketer’s perspective:

• Smaller is better

• Larger is better

• Local is better

• Regional is better

• National is better

• International is better

• Younger is better

• Experienced is better

• New is better

• Vintage is better

• In-person is better

• Virtual is better

Marketers forget that “better” is conditional and contingent upon a wide variety of factors. When those elements are intentionally omitted from the equation, the word “better” is meaningless.

If you want to be seen as “better,” improve your offerings, leverage different tools than the ones you’ve become comfortable with, take calculated risks, learn something that intimidates you, hire the right people and empower them to act, and so on. Instead of telling people your company is better, do things that go beyond simple marketing tactics to improve it.

Remember, bigger (or smaller, regional, vintage, etc.) isn’t better; better is better.