Why Tinder works? Solving for X in Tinder for X (Part 2/2)

In Part 1, we delved into the user psychology of what makes Tinder such an addictive product and what are its takeaways for your business idea in general. We’ve all heard a lot about the Uber for X model now, where X has been abused and overused a lot (2016 is an especially interesting time for these startups). Let’s talk about the other cool thing - Tinder for X. So we ventured out to find what makes or break a Tinder for X model where X could be different industries like recruitment, shopping etc.

Let's begin with all the major criteria for any business problem to be suited for Tinder for X model 

• Should connect 2 communities who need each other
• Availability of almost infinite options to swipe for both communities
• Any wrong decisions should have little downside
• Snap judgement to proceed to the next meaningful step should be possible
• Very little but highly significant information must be presented
• Choices should be ideally binary & execution virtually zero effort (Tinder-swipe)
• Should offer variability in rewards
• Should trigger the emotion of ego boost from a "match"

Now, let’s look at some of the Tinder for X model, solving for X we get

X = Employer / Job-seeker | Major Apps : Super(India), Jobr

Looking for jobs had been made easier over the years but a Tinder-like model beats everyone in engagement. There are endless startup jobs & an equal number of young grads on the app validate the effectiveness and need of the idea. Obviously, there’s also an ‘ego boost’ for an employee, as well as for the employer to some extent, whenever there’s a ‘match’.

However, it’s not a snap judgement for neither the employer nor the employee - it definitely takes second thoughts unless of course you’re in your notice period or the appraisal you’ve been waiting desperately for 2 years just went to someone else in the organisation. Moreover, the lack of Job Description only adds to the trouble. Also, for an employee, there’s definitely a lot of financial downside to a left swipe - that could mean a family holiday at Mauritius being just (s)wiped away!

X = Entrepreneur / Investor | Major Apps : Tendr , PIF

For investors sifting through a heap of startups daily, these apps are definitely a need of the hour for the investor community. Also, these apps levels field for ‘techie’ founders with limited networks. Obviously, the ‘ego boost’ exists predominantly for an entrepreneur whenever he gets a ‘right’ swipe from an investor.

Again, it would never be a snap judgement. Judging business potential isn’t as cognitive as judging people for hook-up, even for a seasoned investor. Forget business potential, even a beauty pageant where the sole job was to judge beauty by gazing- they ended up asking GK questions.

Also, an endless supply of investors would be tough. However, can’t comment same about no. of entrepreneurs in India these days. It’s only time till the Vijay Mallya raises investment for bail as well. Moreover, a high probability of financial downside for missing out a potential business idea for an investor makes snap judgement even harder.

X = Online shopper / online store | Major Apps: Mallzee. Hit or Miss

Definitely a must-have app for an ever deal-hungry consumer - what better than looking through an endless stack and dismissing based on % of discount. Given these days of deep-discounted customer acquisition strategy, judging based on discount is more cognitive than judging strangers.

However, this idea fails miserably on the ‘ego boost’ front. A store would never swipe left a customer, so basically it’s never a ‘match’ in the truest sense. Given a customer knows that he would always be swiped right, there’s no thrill or as such ‘variable reward’ (check the Part 1 for details)

X = News/ Home-hunt/ Food | Major Apps : InShorts, HomeSwipe, Nibbly

Let’s be clear at the outset, an app that gives you summarised news or affordable homes or delicious food doesn’t qualify, as we are talking about Tinder for X model. Sadly only if a news or a house or a biriyani could swipe you right and give you that ego boost then we were done here.

The lack of ‘variable rewards’ & ‘ego boost’ makes this model not so attractive. It’s clearly a case of wrong nomenclature when someone calls something like ‘News In Shorts’ a Tinder for X model.

To conclude, all these are frankly our opinions & judgements, backed by data. Any reference to any startups living or shut down are completely intentional but not ill-intended at all.

We feel that any product could be tweaked to be awesome, not necessarily in Tinder model.  Please feel free to contact us - me & my co-author Nivedan in case you’re facing any challenge with your cool product and we can help you with designing a product strategy to make it even more awesome.

We would love to know more from you about what you think are the reasons for the success of Tinder and similar products. Also, any other A for B models would be a great topic to discuss.