A company develops a strong position in one market. Soon, adjacent opportunities appear. A customer asks for a related product. A distributor proposes a neighbouring geography. An industry contact introduces a new application. Each opportunity seems close enough to the existing business to justify exploration.
The danger is not that these opportunities are necessarily poor. It is that their costs are evaluated separately while their demands accumulate inside the same organisation.
Every market entered consumes something that cannot be used elsewhere: capital, management attention, engineering capacity, commercial focus or time.
Adjacency can hide distance
A market may look adjacent because it uses similar technology, shares a customer type or belongs to the same broad industry. But commercial adjacency is more demanding than technical similarity.
The new market may have different buying authorities, qualification requirements, service expectations, regulatory conditions, channel economics, price structures or competitor behaviour. The product may be familiar while the route to revenue is not.
A manufacturer that supplies one industrial segment may assume that a neighbouring segment will value the same component. Yet the second segment may require different certifications, tighter tolerances, local service and a longer approval process. The engineering distance may be modest while the commercial distance is substantial.
Calculate the opportunity cost, not just the opportunity size
A typical opportunity case estimates revenue potential, expected margin and investment. It should also show what the business will have to postpone or weaken to pursue it.
If the same engineering team must support a new market, which product improvements will move more slowly? If leadership attention shifts to a geography, which existing customer relationships receive less attention? If capital funds a new production line, which other investment becomes unavailable?
These are not reasons to reject expansion. They are costs that should be included in the decision.
Compare adjacencies against a common logic
Leaders can assess a new market by examining:
- Customer overlap: Are the buyers, users and decision processes genuinely similar?
- Problem overlap: Does the business solve a related and consequential problem?
- Capability reuse: Can existing assets and expertise be used without extensive redesign?
- Economic attractiveness: Can the business achieve acceptable margins and cash conversion?
- Adoption distance: What new proof, qualification, service or channel access is required?
- Strategic reinforcement: Will the new market strengthen the core position or distract from it?
The assessment should include an explicit statement of what will be deprioritised if the opportunity is selected.
Use a sequence rather than a collection of launches
A business need not make every opportunity a permanent strategic commitment. It can investigate several possibilities lightly, then select one or two for deeper validation. Early evidence may justify a pilot, channel partnership or limited application before a full market entry.
The key is to control the level of commitment at each stage. An attractive conversation should not automatically create a product roadmap, a new team and a capital request.
The strategic implication
The cost of saying yes is often invisible because it appears across multiple functions and over time. The business experiences it as slower execution, diluted attention and too many priorities rather than as one obvious failed investment.
The leadership question is not only, “How attractive is this adjacent market?” It is, “What will pursuing it prevent us from doing, and is that trade-off worth making?”
Related reading
- Where to Play When You Cannot Outspend the Incumbent
- The Strategic Value of Deciding What Not to Build
Continue exploring this collection: Strategy — The Power of a Moat
Browse all articles · Ideas & Insights
Interested in the decisions behind technology-led growth? Explore Work With Me →
Continue reading in this collection
Why Focus Can Produce Disproportionate Returns
Focus can deepen knowledge and capability faster than spreading scarce resources across a much larger market.
Read article →
Find the Asymmetry Hidden in the Customer's Value Chain
A supplier can create disproportionate value by solving an overlooked problem at a critical point in the customer's wider value chain.
Read article →
Turn Constraints Into Strategic Design Choices
Constraints can shape a focused business model when leaders design around limited capital, capacity and market access.
Read article →