The anecdote told in this article makes no sense. The plain "Swiffer Sweeper" product is not used for wiping up spills, but for collecting dry dirt and dust. It wasn't until later that P&G introduced several wet products, which, again, aren't for cleaning up spills, but for getting stains up off the floor after you've used the dry Swiffer Sweeper. As far as I know, there is no circumstance in which it would be appropriate to pull out a Swiffer after spilling a cup of coffee.
Perhaps the true story is that Continuum noticed that people don't use mops to clean up wet spills, so they made something for cleaning dry floors?
The main point is that a successful product line was created. The product was shaped using a different approach than the in-house R&D team was using, and insights from Continuum's method led to the Swiffer concept. It's usually the case that when you actually watch users pursue their goals you learn things that cause you to pivot. The problem you thought you were trying to solve is fundamentally different than what you thought.
I think the main takeaway here is that rather than creating a product that needed to elbow its way into an already-crowded market, they solved the problem by creating a new market. Seeing how people really cleaned minor spills and dirt was the inspiration for what is essentially a moist paper towel at the end of a stick.
Yes but what I'm saying is that takeaway is probably not true, because the original Swiffer isn't a moist paper towel and is not used for cleaning up minor spills. It just doesn't add up.
You could say it's just an illustrative anecdote, but I think that illustrative anecdotes lose their power when they are fabricated.
Perhaps the true story is that Continuum noticed that people don't use mops to clean up wet spills, so they made something for cleaning dry floors?