Learning from Bus Buddhists
In psychological terms, context is almost everything. Much as we like to think that we know how we will act and react in a given situation, without the richness of...
Stradivarius’s Consumer Behavior Insights
Most of us would like a brand as powerful as Stradivarius, the man who made violins three hundred years ago – although we’d probably want that recognition a little sooner.
Fortunately we can learn a lot about how consumers relate to products and brands from examining these musical instruments more closely. With any luck we can save ourselves a bit of time and effort in the process.
To understand what makes a Stradivarius special we need to get our laboratory coats out and start analysing a few things. It turns out the wood he used was mostly from trees that grew during the “little ice age” when winters were longer and summers shorter (from the mid 1400s to the mid 1800s).
So from this you could draw the conclusion that the Strad man just got lucky.
After all, he used the wood that was available at the time.
And finding your woodworm treatment enhances your product is a little like learning your disinfectant smell attracts customers (which in some cases it might very well, incidentally).
And you’re in the lap of the gods when it comes to how subsequent repairmen tinker with your product.
The violin world often stages blind tests comparing Stradivarius and modern instruments. As often as not the audience prefers the sound of the modern instrument.
Does this mean a Stradivarius isn’t worth the vastly greater price?
Of course not. Anyone interested in buying the best violin available knows about these tests and yet the price commanded by Stradivarius’ instruments continues to rise.
People love the feeling that they have the very best and the association of Stradivarius with a stratospherically high price just adds to the allure.
It helps too that the product is scarce. Only 1100 were built and around 650 remain (and he won’t be knocking any more out now!).
Does this mean blind tests like those used in consumer (marketing) research are a waste of time and money? Yes .
Products are perceived in the context of the associations our unconscious minds map onto them.
The price makes an item more precious to us.
The brand name is a whole bag of associations: some created by the brand’s marketing, some from our own encounters and experiences with that brand.
Naturally, it’s important to make your product good. But that is only part of what’s needed if you want to be perceived as precious.
[This is a lesson Coke famously learned when they introduced a new recipe in the 1980s to fight Pepsi. Everyone got sidetracked by the Pepsi taste test – a blind taste test that said people preferred Pepsi. ]When consumers encounter a product they don’t analyse it scientifically. Asking them to do so triggers a different way of looking at the world and different mental processes.
Guess what?
When that happens they arrive at a totally different conclusion.
The best way to find out what people think of your product is to watch them when they’re shopping around it.
With practice you can see what they think by looking at how they interact with it and the other products around it.
Violinists will say they interact differently with a Stradivarius (even if a listening audience can’t tell the difference). In the player’s mind this isn’t an illusion – it’s a by-product of all the powerful associations they have with that name.
But you could waste a lot of money trying to mimic the instrument’s properties. What you make won’t be a Stradivarius and so it will never feel like one to someone who knows and values the (brand) name.
Sources:
Penn State University (2008, November 22). Is A Stradivarius Violin Better Than Other Violins?. ScienceDaily. Retrieved November 23, 2008, from http://www.sciencedaily.com¬ /releases/2008/11/081108164152.htm
Swedish Research Council (2005, July 13). Scientists Dispel The Mystery Surrounding Stradivarius Violins. ScienceDaily. Retrieved November 23, 2008, from http://www.sciencedaily.com¬ /releases/2005/07/050712233805.htm
Image courtesy: Jose Manuel Mazintosh