Views from the Hills by R. E. Stevens, GENESIS II (The Second Beginning) E-Mail views@aol.com

Little Things do Count in the Big Picture

In our day-to-day habits we can, if we look closely, see how little things play an important part in our choice of products and brands.  I was reminded of this just a few minutes ago when showering.  We have three brands of body wash, shower wash or whatever you choose to call the soap in a bottle.  Now I have my favorite among the three but i noticed that the favorite was not the one I was using.  As a matter of fact, I could tell by the amount of product left in the three bottles that my favorite was actually used less frequently than the other two.  Why?  Well, it just happens to be one of those very little things that play a major factor in the use of a brand.  It seems that my favorite body wash has a screw cap while the other two have flip top caps.  It is so much easier and faster to use the flip caps as opposed to the screw cap that it has motivated me to use a brand that was not my brand of choice.  I am reminded of a line in a song that states that "Little things mean a lot."  I guess that holds true for my choice of body wash.

I have also noticed that my wife will go out of her way to shop at a particular store about once a month.  She goes there specifically to purchase the chain's coffee creamer.  It seems that their carton contains a screw cap while the ones at our regular supermarket (and the most convenient) has cartons with a fan-fold opening.  She likes the screw cap so well that for the purchase of coffee creamer she will go out of her way to make the purchase.

How many times throughout a day can you identify where a secondary attribute of a product is the motivating factor for using one brand over another?  How might this observation be put to use in your product or service?

Feedback on recent Views

In response to my Views of December 8, 2000 on In-Home Group Discussions, Mr. Gerald Berstell, an independent consultant in Chicago, disagrees with me that the respondents knowing the sponsor of the research is a downside to the protocol.  As Mr. Berstell stated, he believes it is a real "upside."  The respondents get a lot more involved in the research when they know who's conducting the research and involvement translates into a higher level of participation.

In response to my Views of December 18, 2000 on Continuing Education, Mr. Tommy Galloway an MMR Graduate, year 2000, and now a member of IBM wrote that the Marketing Research Core Body of Knowledge (CBOK) is rapidly becoming a requirement for all of those in Market Intelligence at IBM.  He has be told that over 90% of all of their Marketing Researchers in Europe have taken it and most in the U.S. at the corporate level have taken it.

In response to my Views of December 28, 2000 on Concept Writing, Mr. Dave cooper of McCormick asked about my thoughts on Manufacturer branding in concept evaluation.  I consider the brand name and the name of the manufacturer as an important part of acceptance.  consider a concept addressing a new automobile called the "Cyclone" featuring high performance characteristics and a fancy design.  With this information it would most likely be highly acceptable to a select population group.  But add the name "Ugo" and almost all, if not all acceptability would go out of the window.  Yes, the identity of the manufacturer can be very important.  Having said this, I would want to know the acceptability with and without the name of the product and the name of the manufacturer.  The idea could be more acceptable under another name or another manufacturer.  These are just two components of many making a brand successful.

Feel free to send your comments.  I enjoy hearing different points of view.


[Back][Index][Forward]