Most people think they need to be "innovative." They obsess over being the first person to have an idea. They want to be the next Steve Jobs or the next Mark Zuckerberg, creating something out of thin air that nobody has ever seen before. But honestly? That’s usually a recipe for going broke. If you look at the actual history of how businesses survive, it’s rarely about who got there first. It's about who watched what worked and then did it slightly better. The mimicking of known successes isn't just a copycat strategy—it’s the most statistically sound way to build a company that lasts.
Look at Google. They weren’t the first search engine. Not even close. AltaVista and Yahoo! were already massive when Larry Page and Sergey Brin started playing with backlink algorithms. They looked at what was working—search—and realized the "known success" of the time was actually flawed. They didn't reinvent the wheel; they just made it rounder.
The Strategy Behind Mimicking of Known Successes
We have this weird cultural obsession with the "pioneer." We love the story of the lone genius in a garage. But in the world of venture capital and market share, pioneers often end up with "arrows in their backs." That’s a common phrase for a reason.
Being first is expensive. You have to educate the customer. You have to prove the market even exists. You have to build the infrastructure from scratch. When you focus on the mimicking of known successes, you let someone else pay the "pioneer tax." They spend the millions of dollars on R&D and market education, and you show up once the path is cleared.
Harvard Business School professor Theodore Levitt wrote about this decades ago in his classic paper "Innovative Imitation." He argued that most of the growth in our economy comes from people following the leader. It’s a bit of a secret in the C-suite. While the marketing department talks about "disruption," the finance team is usually looking for ways to replicate a competitor’s high-margin product.
The Fast Follower Advantage
Think about Facebook. It wasn't the first social network. Friendster and MySpace had already proven that people wanted to hang out online. Mark Zuckerberg basically took a known success (social networking) and applied it to a closed, high-status environment (Harvard). Then he expanded. He didn't have to explain what a "profile" was. People already knew.
This "fast follower" approach works because you have more data than the leader. You can see their mistakes. You can see what their customers are complaining about on Reddit or Twitter. You're basically getting a free map of the minefield.
Why It’s Not Just "Copying"
There is a massive difference between lazy plagiarism and strategic mimicry. Lazy plagiarism is when you just make a cheaper, worse version of a product. Strategic mimicking of known successes is about identifying a proven demand and filling the gaps the original creator missed.
Take the coffee industry. Starbucks proved that people would pay $5 for a latte. They created the "third place" concept. Once that success was known, thousands of boutique coffee shops popped up. They didn't try to be "not coffee." They looked at Starbucks and said, "Okay, the demand is there, but people want better beans or a more local vibe." They mimicked the business model but tweaked the execution.
Real World Examples of Copying Your Way to the Top
If you’ve ever used a tablet, you probably think of the iPad. But Microsoft had a "Tablet PC" back in 2002. It was a clunky, stylus-driven mess. Apple didn't invent the tablet; they waited until the technology (capacitive touch) and the market (app ecosystems) were ready. They mimicked the idea of a portable slate computer but refined the experience.
- Southwest Airlines: They didn't invent flying. They mimicked the efficiency of bus travel and applied it to the air.
- Instagram Stories: This is probably the most famous modern example. Snapchat invented the "ephemeral story" format. It was a huge success. Instagram saw that, mimicked it almost exactly, and because they already had a larger user base, they effectively "won" that feature set.
- Microsoft Excel: Lotus 1-2-3 was the king of spreadsheets. Microsoft just did it better.
The Danger of the "New"
Doing something truly new is terrifyingly risky. Most startups fail because there is no market for what they are building. They solve a problem that nobody actually has. When you engage in the mimicking of known successes, you eliminate "market risk." You already know people want this. Your only risk is "execution risk." Can you do it as well as, or better than, the other guy?
Honestly, execution is usually easier to control than human behavior. You can hire better designers. You can optimize your supply chain. You can spend more on ads. But you can't easily force people to want a product they have no interest in.
How to Identify a Success Worth Mimicking
You can't just copy anything. You have to look for "velocity." If a competitor is growing 20% month-over-month, that’s a signal. If they have a high "churn" rate (meaning people sign up but leave quickly), that’s an even better signal. It means people want the solution, but the current version sucks.
That is your opening.
Look for industries where the leader has become "fat and happy." When a company gets too big, they stop listening to customers. They get bureaucratic. This happened with Blockbuster. They had a known success: movie rentals. Netflix mimicked the success of providing movies but fixed the "late fee" pain point.
Cultural Mimicry
This happens in entertainment too. Why do you think there are 15 different "Real Housewives" shows? Why does every movie seem like a sequel or a reboot? It's because the mimicking of known successes is the safest bet for a studio executive's job. If you spend $200 million on a new idea and it fails, you're fired. If you spend $200 million on Fast & Furious 12 and it fails, you can say, "Well, the previous 11 worked!"
It's a defensive play. But it’s also how genres are formed. Every "Souls-like" game is a mimic of Dark Souls. Every "Battle Royale" is a mimic of PUBG or H1Z1. These aren't insults; they are descriptions of a proven market.
The Ethics of the Echo
People get touchy about this. They use words like "derivative" or "unoriginal." But look, business isn't art. It's about solving problems for money. If someone else solved a problem, but they did it in a way that’s too expensive or too complicated, you're doing the world a favor by offering a better version.
The legal system even accounts for this. You can't patent an "idea" like "selling shoes online." You can only patent specific, non-obvious technical inventions. This keeps the market competitive. If mimicking weren't allowed, we’d have a world of permanent monopolies.
✨ Don't miss: Stock Price for Coca Cola Today: Why Most People Get the Stability Wrong
Avoiding the "Me-Too" Trap
The biggest mistake you can make when mimicking of known successes is being "just as good." If you are exactly the same as the leader, people will just stay with the leader. They have the brand recognition. You need a "wedge."
A wedge is that one thing you do differently. Maybe you're the "privacy-focused" version of a known success (like DuckDuckGo). Maybe you're the "luxury" version. Or the "budget" version. You need a reason for someone to switch their loyalty.
Actionable Steps for Strategic Mimicry
If you’re looking to start a project or grow a business, stop staring at a blank whiteboard. It’s a waste of time. Instead, start looking at what’s already making money.
- Audit your "Spent" history: Look at what you've bought in the last six months. What did you find frustrating about those products? That’s your market research.
- Reverse engineer the "Why": Don't just look at what a successful company is doing. Figure out why it works. Is it the convenience? The status? The price?
- Identify the "Left Behind" segment: Every big success leaves someone behind. Who does the market leader ignore? If they are chasing enterprise clients, can you mimic their product for small businesses?
- Wait for the "Second Wave": Don't jump in the second a new trend starts. Wait until the hype dies down and you can see who is actually making profit.
- Focus on "Micro-Improvements": You don't need a revolution. A 10% improvement in user interface or a 5% faster delivery time is often enough to steal significant market share.
Innovation is overrated. Persistence and observation are where the actual money is. By the time you're done reading this, another "original" idea will have failed, while ten "copycats" will have found their first thousand customers. That's just the way the world works.
The goal isn't to be the first. The goal is to be the last one standing. You do that by learning from the people who went before you, avoiding their craters, and building your foundation on the ground they already proved was solid. It’s not "cheating"—it’s being smart.