Comprehensiveness vs. Relevancy


I’ve been thinking a lot lately about the relationship between comprehensiveness and relevancy, especially as it relates to the value customers place in various brands and services. For example, take a real estate Web site like As a home buyer, knowing that your are searching from a database that has every home available for sale in the market is very important. So in the case of home buying, comprehensiveness is perfectly aligned with relevancy and value.

But what about shopping for a TV? Do I need to have access to every television set available? Or just those that meet my criteria? If I’m looking for a 35-inch set, for example, I don’t need to be able to search from a database of every 35-inch set manufactured. But depending on where I’m shopping, there’s an assumption that a level of comprehensiveness has already happened.

If I’m shopping at Best Buy, and looking through their TV options, I assume that their buyers have already done completed a level of comprehensiveness in their own shopping to bring me the best options based on quality and price. And that’s where the relevancy and value comes in.

You could say the same for the value of real estate agents. Because agents have access to the MLS, and therefore every home for sale, an agent can cull that comprehensiveness on your behalf, and deliver to you only the products that meet your criteria. The real estate agent with homes for sale, therefore, is similar to what the Best Buy buyers do for me with television sets.

Think about the products or services you offer to your customers. Is comprehensiveness a premium? Is it directly tied to relevancy and value at the customer level? Or can you deliver more value by delivering a level of comprehensiveness before the customer gets to you?