Hungry? Why change?

March 31, 2008 - Get free updates of new posts here

I was at a super market last night looking at the candy rack near the checkout stand. I looked at a Snicker’s and started realizing it is always the same bar. Nothing has changed. We always talk about making things better, improving, changing and how things get stale. hasn’t changed their homepage very much and they are doing okay. As well, Snickers bars always cure my hunger.

I guess you can have variations: Snicker’s Almond, Google’s iGoogle homepage and so forth.

link to photo

Then I really wonder. When is something good enough Not to change?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

9 responses to “Hungry? Why change?

  1. Eric Reply

    If we’re talking brand I think when you add confusion to your communication (changing names for example, think new coke) then it’s good enough to not change (like snickers). That’s one example I could think of.

  2. Atish Reply

    I don’t follow the “time saved” thing. Does that mean my time was saved by not changing something when I would have changed it?

    Actually I see that “time saved” only shows up in my RSS reader and not the actual blog post.

  3. kadavy Reply

    When all of the factors relevant to determining its form hasn’t changed. A website may become irrelevant as technology changes, and while technology in food production has certainly changed, food itself, not so much. Don’t forget, though, that Snickers now offers a variety of sizes of candy bar, probably to go along with cultural changes. Bigger is better – time for a jumbo size. Oh, watch yer carbs – let’s make a bite-sized bar.

  4. Kevin Wu Reply

    Sometimes they update the logo of well established products. I think that’s pretty significant. It helps to modernize the image of your product.

  5. Britt Reply

    Some of what you’re talking about depends on how you define change. Does the change improve the original experience or simply provide a different interaction? I suspect the answer to this question can help determine the need for change.

  6. Damon Billian Reply

    Possible reasons Google really hasn’t had to change:

    1. Their competition in the search market hasn’t done anything to force them to change things.
    2. Their revenues, even if they have other products, largely come from one very profitable enterprise. Until someone really threatens those profits in some way, Google has really little reason to change.

    eBay hasn’t changed their site that much over the past decade. As Amazon has really started to pose a real challenge to eBay, eBay has a strong need to start innovating again. Even though I used to work at eBay, I do think that Amazon is really starting to kick eBay’s butt with user experience and feel (Amazon has also started offering a lot of cooler new products).

  7. Jason Cartwright Reply

    Here in the UK a few brands change to harmonise across Europe or even globally.

    So, for instance a cleaning product called Jif changed it’s name to Cif. This was used as a marketing opportunity – with the adverts taking the mickey out of Europeans failing to pronounce ‘Jif’ – justifying the change and making a funny, memorable advert.

    Using your example – ‘Snickers’ used to be called ‘Marathon’ in the UK.

    Perhaps the US is more conservative? Or just a bigger market…

  8. Nicole Price Reply

    Thats something you will never know unless you actually change it. But a thumb rule could be, if there is nothing lacking in terms of functionality, appearance, cost, market reach etc, there may not be a need to change.