Real world examples of marketing efforts disconnected from their market
Many campaigns fail because consumers “see” things dramatically differently than those who are trying to communicate with them. Companies are spending millions of dollars essentially “talking a foreign language” to those receiving the message, then wonder why the message isn’t getting through. The following are some real world examples of disconnects that we have noticed in the market place.
The opinions expressed here are those of TLI. The examples have been gleaned from various public sources of information – books, web sites, TV and print ads, etc. They are intended solely as examples of disconnects between corporate and market perspectives.
Driving Porsche
Problem
In the early 1990’s Porsche was in genuine difficulty. Sales had fallen from 30,000 units per year to a dismal 7,000 in just seven short years. The following images illustrate the dramatic contrast between the perceptions and motivations of Porsche compared to the prospective buyer.
Implications to the strategy
The Authors of Perfect Pitch put it brilliantly in their comments to Porsche:
“Many people who really want to buy a Porsche, who really want to drive a Porsche, are
embarrassed to do so. They do not want to buy one of your cars because they are scared by what
their friends and perfect strangers alike will think of them. And that is the problem they needed to
address.
“Several years later, in a conference room in Germany, I heard a group of senior Porsche executives
still referring to the need to address “The Asshole Factor”.
(The Art of Selling Ideas and Winning New Business. Perfect Pitch. Author Jon Steel.)
TLI’s commentary:
We find it intriguing that years after the presentation, Porsche executives were still referring to the need to fix the “asshole factor”. Considering that Porsche execs were also Porsche drivers, we suggest that their perception of themselves was most likely in direct conflict with the market’s view. This inability of Porsche decision-makers to get beyond their own biases has likely led to the failure of Porsche to resolve the marketing and brand problem – a scenario which has led to the “need to still address the asshole factor”.
“Until businesses understand, anticipate, and respond to the psychological biases that both consumers and executives bring to decision making, new products will continue to fail.”
(Harvard Business Review OnPoint edition 4516, June 2006 > Eager Sellers and Stony Buyers: Understanding the Psychology of New-Product Adoption).
The Pepsi Challenge - The “real thing” drives buyers
Problem:
In a study by neuroscientist Read Montague, 67 people had their brains scanned while being given the classic “Pepsi Challenge”, a blind taste test of Coca-Cola and Pepsi. Half the subjects chose Pepsi, and Pepsi tended to produce a stronger response than Coke in the region of the brain thought to process feelings of reward.
But when the subjects were told they were drinking Coke, 75% said that Coke tasted better. Even more
importantly, their brain activity had changed. Scans taken during the test showed that the area of the brain that governs high-level cognitive powers, and the area related to memory were now being used, indicating that the consumers were thinking about Coke and relating it to memories and other impressions.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuromarketing)
Implications to the strategy
The “blind” taste test results suggest that Pepsi should have half the market share, but in reality consumers are preferring (and thus buying) Coke for reasons related less to their actual taste preferences and more for their “perceived taste” influenced by their fond memories and/or experiences with the Coke Brand.
TLI Commentary
TLI finds it interesting that a person will actually taste something differently when perception, memory and experiences are brought into the equation. We have seen this in other studies where consumers are offered the exact same lemon/lime drink, but in different packages. Overwhelmingly the tasters said the drink with the more “yellow” label tasted much more lemony than the one from a package with less yellow.
Perception, meaning systems and experience has a dramatic impact on how people react to a product. Blind taste tests alone can not accurately project how customers will “taste” the product in market.
“Until businesses understand, anticipate, and respond to the psychological biases that both consumers and executives bring to decision making, new products will continue to fail.”
(Harvard Business Review OnPoint edition 4516, June 2006 > Eager Sellers and Stony Buyers: Understanding the Psychology of New-Product Adoption).
What will others think? Banning use of Clotheslines!
Problem:
Go Green. Save our Planet. The stakes couldn’t be more real. The importance of changing our environment-related behaviours is gaining popular acceptance. Western society is “going green”. Take for example the idea of hanging laundry on a backyard clothesline to dry – great for the environment, great for the pocket book. Then why, with all the focus of society and governments on “going green”, are some homeowners’ associations and cities restricting the use of clotheslines in planned communities?
Research shows that when an individual hangs their laundry on a line to dry they feel great because they feel like they are doing their bit to help save the environment. But when a whole community goes green and uses backyard clotheslines – the reaction is illogically different!
Implications to the strategy
One of the strongest biases that affect motivation is related to one’s desire for a positive self-image and the avoidance of unpleasant “cognitive dissonance” (the conflicted feeling caused by holding two contradictory ideas simultaneously). For example: It’s good for the environment to use a clothesline (positive idea) but if I live in a community where laundry is always drying on the lines, it’s like I’m living in a ghetto (negative idea).
Why it is important:
In this example, the precept of thinking globally but acting locally has little power. The rational reward of acting responsibly has much less strength when compared to the emotional pain of living in a “perceived” poor neighborhood.
What is most important here is that this dynamic or “cognitive dissonance” is largely unconscious to people. Where psychological biases motivate them, people choose actions that avoid discomfort over gaining satisfaction.
“Until businesses understand, anticipate, and respond to the psychological biases that both consumers and executives bring to decision making, new products will continue to fail.”
(Harvard Business Review OnPoint edition 4516, June 2006 > Eager Sellers and Stony Buyers: Understanding the Psychology of New-Product Adoption).
Contact TLI Today.
|
