Archive

Archive for the ‘consumer research’ Category

The Consumer Need Myth and Why Customers Really Buy

April 23rd, 2009

You’d be hard pressed to find any marketing text book that doesn’t talk at some point about “consumer need”.

It’s a simple enough concept: the products that will do best are those that meet a requirement that someone has.

At the next level you may find there’s a discussion on the types of consumer need.  Broadly these break down into physical and emotional needs. 

So, by way of simplistic example, the former says that, because you’re cold you will buy a hat.  The latter that because you want to feel special you’ll buy an expensive hat. 

This is all fine up to a  point.  But I happen to think that most consumer behaviour is nothing to do with “need”.  This is a problem because the notion of consumer need suggests that, at some level, a consumer is aware of what it is they are getting as a result of acquiring the product, and in my experience that’s often not the case.

Have you ever noticed how much some people’s lives are taken up with shopping; for some people human behaviour is consumer behaviour, almost exclusively.  When they aren’t shopping, they’re thinking about shopping, or watching TV programmes surrounded by ads, or reading magazines that are promoting consumerism directly through their copy or indirectly through their adverts. 

And some people will talk about shopping for hours; granted they’re not talking about the physical act of buying, they’re talking about something they’re thinking about buying, or something they’ve bought, or what happened when they tried to buy something.

All of this is has precious little to do with how cold someone’s head is.

I suspect that we’re collectively so preoccupied with shopping because of how our brains work.  Studies show that the brain works by estimating risk and reward, and then sending out extra dopamine (the feel good factor) when a decision is proved correct.  This increases the strength of the the neural pathway, essentially increasing our perception that what we thought would happen did.

I won’t explore the many fascinating implications of this mechanisms now, but when it comes to shopping I suspect it’s so prevalent because it’s so predictably rewarding.

Most of the time when you go out to buy you successfully do so.  The process is completed and you now own something new.  Owning stuff feels nice.  In fact, studies like the one I talked about recently in my eZine (The Importance of Touch) show that we get very attached to things we hold very quickly.

In evolutionary terms it’s generally been advantageous for us to have stuff: stored provisions, items we can use as tools, things we can defend ourselves with, mechanisms for protecting ourselves from the elements and so on.  So our brains have evolved to reward us for having things.

Rarely is shopping disappointing or dissatisfying.  When it is we learn quickly to change our expectations or to avoid places that fail to satisfy, and we can quickly find substitutes.

In essence shopping is low risk, high reward behaviour, and our brains get a kick out of that.

Philip Graves
P.S. You can sign up for my eZine here.

consumer behaviour, consumer research , , , , ,

Consumers: Reality is Over-rated Part iv

April 21st, 2009

It seems from many of your comments about focus groups that many of you have experienced some of the problems I mentioned in relation to asking consumers about their perceptions.

To be fair to focus groups I should point out that I was talking about research more generally. 

There’s little doubt in my mind that the focus group, per se, is far and away the most useless, unreliable, misleading and distorting ‘tool’ in the marketers armoury. 

Actually, I should qualify that a little.  A focus group in a viewing facility is the pinnacle of disastrous research techniques, but the focus group part of that is no small component.

I would really appreciate hearing more details from those of you who have had bad experiences with focus groups.  Please email me if you have any stories to share (and I’m happy to respect requests for confidentiality).

Back to the subject at hand…

Yes, perception is everything, but asking consumers about their perceptions is fraught with difficulty; on the other hand, understanding them is very important if you want to understand consumer behaviour.

So how do you understand what customers’ perceptions are?

It’s mostly about time.

One of the benefits of unconscious processing is how fast it is.  Whilst you’re wondering what you’re looking at, your unconscious has filtered 10 millions bits of data about your environment and caused you to respond in the way it thinks best – the way that will keep you safest, usually.

So when it comes to establised brand perceptions what you need to look for are quick associations that a customer makes with a brand or product.  For example, when the opportunity occurs naturally (or apparently naturally) for them to talk about a brand, the more fluently they talk and the more they have to say – in a sense, the more they are reeling off something that’s clearly established and familiar to them – the more deep-rooted what they have to say is.

Similarly, when someone engages with a product (for example in a store), you can see how engaged with it they are, and how readily they select it over the alternatives available. 

You might think this is a tricky skill to acquire, but if I asked you to watch some people meeting in a room do you think you would be able to spot who already liked who?  Assuming they weren’t aware you were watching them and had no reason to mask their behaviour, my guess is you would get it right most of the time.  Trained observers can usually tell even when people are trying to conceal their connections.

In talking to people, the biggest clues to brand perceptions come from inconsistencies.  When what someone says doesn’t match all their experiences or what they do it is a significant clue that confirmation bias is turned up high.

When someone is naturally eulogising about a brand (i.e. not in response to a research-style question) the natural thing to do is to empathise with them and mirror their account with those of your own.  Instead, using a suitably gentle tone, explore the contradictions; “You must have had a few problems with them though, everyone does.”

Yes, this is a leading comment / question (the best ones usually are, but I’ll save that point for another time), but it allows you to find out whether this is a genuinely unblemished experience or a biased assessment.

In case you’re wondering, the most likely source of such biases are people’s first experiences with the brand concerned or what they were told by a friend that made them select it in the first place.

Philip Graves

consumer behaviour, consumer research , , , ,

Consumers: Reality is Over-rated Part iii

April 20th, 2009

Having suggested that perception is far more important that the reality of experience in determining consumer behaviour, you might think that finding out how a consumer perceives your brand is a useful exercise.

And, of course, you’d be right.

You might suggest, therefore, that asking a sample of your target consumer audience or existing customers would be a smart think to do.

And you’d be a lot less right.  In fact, if you don’t mind me saying so, you’d be wrong.

There are a number of reasons for this.

Firstly, we aren’t always aware of our perceptions.  A lot of our reactions happen at an unconscious, emotional level.  We like to believe we’re wonderfully good at decoding this responses consciously and post-rationalising them accurately, but we really aren’t.  We just make it up and then convince ourselves that what we’ve just told ourselves is true.

This is what I call “the what we like to tell ourselves” error.

In general, we’ll tell ourselves that we’re smarter, sexier, funnier and all round better than we really are.  We’ll also tell ourselves that we’re not in the snare of any silly old brand, it’s just that we’ve happened to find their products are better suited to our needs.

Secondly is the problem of how we think our answer will be perceived by someone else; we’ve learned through the “mistakes” of childhood not to say what we’re thinking but screen it for social acceptability. 

Kids are wonderfully honest and direct: I remember my two-year-old son staring at a man in the doctor’s waiting room and asking very loudly, “Why has that man drawn all over himself?”  The tattooed man didn’t take exception and it was, I think, a very good question to ask (although not one I would except to get an accurate answer to from the chap himself!).  By the age of six my son has enough of a developed sense of social awareness not to ask that sort of question in public.

This filtering process becomes automatic and gives us the “what might they think if I told them” error.

Most people don’t want to be seen as being influenced by brands and advertising even when they’ve fallen for a brand hook, line and sinker.  Even when they are aware they’re very loyal to a brand they probably wouldn’t want to acknowledge the full extent of it’s impact on what they do (even if they are aware of it).

Last, but not least, the actual process of asking someone a question changes the way they think and, therefore, how they respond.  I won’t go into all the psychological nuances of this now, but suffice it to say there’s a reason that psychotherapy makes such extensive use of balanced questions to bring about change.

So, whilst customers’ perceptions are deeply significant in determining their behaviour, asking them about those perceptions isn’t likely to reveal the nature or extent of them reliably.

Next time, if you haven’t guessed already, I’ll tell you how you can understand this aspect of consumer behaviour better.

Philip Graves

consumer behaviour, consumer research , , , , ,