Statistics are not consumer insights - bc people are like donkeys with too many carrots

The reason I´m cautious when clients or business partners say they "know a lot" about the target audience and have strong "insights" is that it is too often based on Roy Morgan searches and quantitative data, discovering what people SAY about a brand...

Problem is that people are funny - we say one thing and do another. We can tell a researcher that we have seen a brand and that we like it and even support it. But we will still buy something else. Why? One explanation is that there are too many other options around, and even if I like something, I might like other brands too - and they may be better, cheaper or more in my face. Another explanation is that we want to sound positive in the eyes of another person. We don´t want to hurt their feelings, so we say something we think they want to hear, and that will make us look like nicer people (nobody likes a grump). A third reason is that we might think we like something, even if we don´t. As a coach I constantly deal with that people say they want success, love or to win a race, but that their subconscious is sabotaging for them - they might think they don´t deserve it; their dream might be set by their parents and not themselves; they might think reaching a goal will leave them feeling empty.

People are funny, and true consumer insights goes beyond the numbers. I use quant data, but an insight is, as a friend planner at Akestam Holst in Sweden said "a fact based revelation". I like that expression. A fact based revelation. Or a "qualified guessing" as we said at my old agency in Stockholm (Prime PR). A consumer insight is always a "hunch", based on instincts. You can´t skip the research state, but the research is a base for the revelation, not the revelation in itself. 

I came to think of this, when reading an article in the Nielsen Wire this morning, revealing that while the majority of consumers around the world (83%) say that it is important that companies implement programs to improve the environment, only 22 percent say they will pay more for an eco-friendly product. Interesting read:



Many consumers reported a personal preference for eco-friendly goods, but large percentages of respondents report setting aside this preference and buying whichever product is cheapest, including 48 percent in North America, 36 percent in Middle East/Africa, 35 percent in Europe, 33 percent in Asia Pacific, and 27 percent in Latin America.

Global consumers have mixed feelings about the environmental impact and benefits of particular sustainable practices. While 64 percent of consumers, globally, indicated they believe organic products are good for environment, there is wide regional disparity of opinion. Eighty percent of Latin Americans and 72 percent of Asia Pacific respondents think organic products are environmentally-friendly, but fewer people are convinced in Europe (58%), Middle East/Africa (57%), and North America (49%).

Among other environmental and sustainability efforts manufacturers have taken, recycled packaging and energy efficient products are seen as the most broadly helpful. Fully 83 percent believe that manufacturers using recycled packaging and producing energy efficient products and appliances have a positive impact on the environment. Fewer consumers are convinced of the environmental impact of local products (59%), fair trade products (51%) and products not tested on animals (44%).

Belief in the impact of “local” products is highest in North America, where 65 percent of consumers believe these products have a positive impact on the environment.

For more detail and regional insights, download: 2011 Sustainable Efforts & Environmental Concerns.

Article: http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/global/the-green-gap-between-environmental-concerns-and-the-cash-register/

Why the Aussie economy is different from the European

The Western world is in financial trouble – well, that´s no big news, right...  – but the funny thing is that Australia seems unaffected. Some say it´s because of the mining boom, but I prefer to explain it with the Aussie “no worries” spirit. Since few in this part of the world are following the news or bothering about those dramatic events overseas, the psychological amplification of the drama won´t appear. We just potter on as normal, so the stock market and house market won´t be as nervous as in Europe or the Us.

Back in Sweden I watched the news with a frown on my face, because all the people there were just so worried and stressed and concerned. Everyone saw disasters in each direction, watching out for trouble, searching for risks. A totally different vibe than what you get from the Aussie news where the hosts are joking and presenting news about fashion and sharks.

You can laugh at the Australian care free attitude and even call it stupid... but... When you dwell on things, you tend to feed them and they grow. But we put the tragedies on a diet by going surfing and throwing another shrimp on the barbie... Light always beat darkness.

The Australian Bureau of Statistics just released a report on household spending, showing household income has climbed 50 per cent since 2003-04, way ahead of prices which have climbed 19 per cent. And we have not spent all the extra income, we have tucked some away; spending grew 38 per cent.

This is good news, considering the earning to spending ratio has not been looking good in the West the last decade. In 1994, the savings rate was nearly 5 % in Us, but by 2006 it had fallen below zero – to negative 1 %. Americans were not only not saving; they were spending more than they earned. At the same time Europeans save an average of 20%. (compared with Japan 25% and China 50%)

I believe the economy is a result of our mindset. We get what we expect, and the placebo effect is just as relevant here as in medical research (showing for example that when researchers tested the effect of 6 leading antidepressants, they noted that 75% of the effect was duplicated in placebo controls.)

We keep on spending, we keep on living and breathing, and so is the economy, which means adworld does not need to worry just yet; the target audience won´t have saving on their mind – at least not in a frustrated way. (banks should worry though...)

The Keller model - does anyone use models anymore...?

Keller´s pyramid is a classic in marketing, and a simple way to present your ideas to the client. It answers four questions:

Who are you? First level is brand salience. In building a highly salient brand it is important that awareness campaigns not only build depth (ensuring that a brand will be remembered and the ease with which it is) but also breadth (the range of situations in which the brand comes to mind as something that should be purchased or used).

What are you? The second layer of the pyramid deals with giving meaning to the brand trough two building blocks: brand performance and brand imagery. Brand performance is the way the product or service attempts to meet the consumer’s functional needs. Brand imagery deals with the way in which the brand attempts to meet customers’ psychological and social needs.

What about you (responses)? In the third tier of the pyramid you develop a consumer response to the brand. Keller proposes two building blocks for this tier, namely brand judgments and brand feelings.

What about you and me? The final tier of is called brand resonance. Resonance is characterized by the intensity of the psychological bond that customers have with the brand and their level of engagement with the brand.

I believe this is an interesting model, however I believe that today´s way of branding is much more focused on the consumer. The target comes first, and even if it´s important to have a core and identity, most time should be spent on finding a "click" between brand and consumer, where they are truly useful and meaningful to each other.

What model do you like?

Stare Challenge captures the eye of gen y guys

From Campaign Brief: http://www.campaignbrief.com/2011/09/snack-brands-australia-launche.html

 

Sydney digital creative agency, Pusher, has created a digital and social media campaign for client Snack Brands Australia and their product, CC's Corn Chips.

As a follow-up to the television spots produced by Workshop Australia that launched at the end of July, Pusher's campaign, running until the end of September, is designed to generate conversation on social channels and into the online space to engage with the young male skewed target demographic.
Pusher has developed an interactive game that has been built into the CC's brand destination website and featured on the CC's Facebook page.  The game, "CC's Stare Challenge" features a girl sitting on a train staring at you.

Contestants on Facebook or the website are asked to activate their webcam and 'line up their eyes' with the eye-detection and motion sensing webcam that then tracks each and every subtle eye movement throughout the game.
Once the stare video challenge begins, characters from the CC's TV commercials come into frame with CC's Corn Chips and try and distract players to get them to look away.

To make it harder to keep staring, Pusher has incorporated a host of 'diverts' in the form of video challenges.  One includes a 'CC's Fan' scenario that blows the girl's hair all over, like a shampoo commercial.

"The CC's Stare Challenge tells us when players of the game break their stare and look away.  When they do it's because they have looked away at the product while already engaging and playing the CC's game," said Mike Crebar, digital strategy director at Pusher.

"The technology behind the game emerged just a short time ago in the consumer electronics markets through cameras and security systems, so the CC's Stare Challenge game that includes eye-tracking and motion sensing technologies being controlled through a webcam, is a great eye opener - pun intended."

 

This is another way of grabbing the attention of the restless, joy searching Gen Y. Staring has very little to do with corn chips (I think) but is a way for the brand to attach its brand with a positive emotion. The brand will give the boys something fun to think about, and subconsciously this will make them link CC with the feeling of fun. Does it work? I´m curious to see the results.

Flying elephants attracting the frequent flyers - or their finance department?

We were watching TV last night and came across the new TVC from Optus and Quantas. I am a little puzzled about it - what the message really is - but I understand the point of aligning one high end brand with the other, attracting the "frequent flyer gamers" (collecting points is angry birds for business men, right...?). The strategists and business developers must have seen that the target are heavy users of both air travel and mobile telephoning, so CLICK, perfect match, a beautiful love affair...

Whether the same business men watch TV on Sunday nights and get intrigued by flying elephants is another thing, but the ad is interesting. Different. A little science fiction. A little odd. Pretty. I´m positive - even if I don´t really know why... lol.

I guess the real target is the finance department, who picks up the bill. It´s unlikely these business travellers are the ones actually purchasing the service, which makes it all a bit more complicated.


http://www.bestadsontv.com/ad/39102/Optus-Elephant-Flight

Winners of creative awards are effective too

Sometimes people (me too) talk about how adland inhabitants have big egos and wish to win awards rather than focus on business objectives and long term results.

This turns out to be wrong.

According to The Gunn Report there is a very strong link between creativity and effectiveness. When comparing campaigns that have won creative awards with winners of the IPA Effectiveness Awards, the report comes to these conclusions:

-         Creatively-awarded IPA campaigns are more effective than non-awarded ones despite lower levels of Excess Share of Voice or ESOV (share of voice minus share of market).

-         There is a very strong link between creativity and effectiveness when ESOV levels are taken into account.

-         Creatively-awarded campaigns are 11 times more efficient than non-awarded ones in terms of the level of market share growth they drive per point of ESOV.

-         If the creatively-awarded campaigns in the IPA Databank had enjoyed the same level of ESOV as the non-awarded campaigns, they would have resulted in two times more market share growth than the non-awarded campaigns achieved. The difference in terms of return on investment is likely to be much greater than this.

-         Creatively-awarded campaigns appear to achieve their greater effectiveness levels with much greater certainty than the non-awarded campaigns: they are more reliable investments.

-         For equivalent levels of investment, creatively-awarded campaigns achieve broader levels of success across greater numbers of business metrics beyond share growth.

-         The greater the level of creativity (i.e. the more major creative awards a campaign wins) the greater the level of effectiveness

-         The link between creativity and effectiveness appears to be driven to a significant degree by two important factors:

o   The preponderance of emotional communications models amongst creatively awarded campaigns (emotional campaigns have been shown elsewhere to be strongly linked to effectiveness).

o   The much greater ‘buzz’ effects of creatively-awarded campaigns (buzz has also been shown elsewhere to be strongly linked with effectiveness). It is an innate quality of highly creative advertising and cannot be bought through media expenditure.

So good work is simply good work. Like J

Why giving free samples can give you slut status - and what happened to the Westfield shopper blogger?

Do you know who won the Westfield shopper blogger job? Yeah, I say "won" and not "got"... It wasn´t really a job search but rather a massive competition - and it got lots of media exposure, making the 100 000 dollar investment worth it before the blogger had even written a word.

But I just checked the website and there is no blogger to be found... Did they even appoint anyone or was it a scam?

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/be-paid-just-to-go-shopping-westfield-puts-up-100000-shopper-blogger-job/story-e6freuy9-1225929649890

There are sooooo many promotional, experiential, advertising and social media campaigns running at the same time. Millions are pumped out, we are all sprinkled in competitions, giveaways and happenings. But how many do we really notice? Win this and win that - I haven´t entered a contest like that since I was a teenager and wanted a bicycle. Have you?

Is it really effective? I get wowed by the cleverness of campaigns when reading about them in the industry publications, but I´ve never been exposed to one in real life. You can get free samples of all sorts of stuff when wandering Bondi Beach on a Summer Saturday - but I´m not sure I remember which brands I got. Freebies simply pass by un noticed - because they do not involve me. They touch my surface but never grabs my heart.

If you really wish to cut through the clutter that our life is I guess you need to have a smart strategy. Understand your consumers and their emotional needs. Know their footsteps through shopper marketing research. Get them engaged by asking them to participate, play, perform or work for the freebies.

By simply giving away stuff to anyone you act much like the lady in the short skirt, who is stumbeling around on the dance floor at 2.55 am...