Brand equity is a headstart, but it won't always win the race!

Shopper insights are creating a lot of buzz at the moment, but not everyone is on the same page. For the purpose of this post, I have defined shopper insights as... "Insights informing strategies/ tactics aimed at increasing conversion of demand to sales during the act of shopping". This is based on the premise that sales are driven by demand (preferences) and shopper activation (how this preference converts to behaviour).


Demand (consumer insights, the study of preference) + shopper activation (shopper insights, the study of how these preference evolve during the act of shopping) = sales*

*this is oversimplified, but illustrates the point I'm trying to make.

It's important to understand both sides, because they don't always match perfectly. In fact, I like to look at strong preferences/ demand (brand equity) as a getting a head start in a race; it gives you a good chance of winning, but doesn't guarantee success. And on the flip side, you might start from behind, but still win the race (e.g. lower preference, but you still get the sale).

The fact of the matter is that most decisions are made while people are shopping.

Another definition - 'act of shopping' - from need recognition through to post purchase

Let's take an example. I recently traveled to the US. I wanted to fly Virgin - I like what the brand stands for and I think they offer a good service. If you were to measure my brand equity, I would be a Virgin 'lover'. However, when looking at hotels in San Francisco I noticed a United Airlines offer for Aus - US return flights. The end result, I purchased a ticket with United Airlines. Why? They did a better job of shopper activation; they reached me with a relevant offer while I was in the act of shopping. Admittedly the service was terrible, you couldn't get more surly flight attendants if you tried, but this is another issue entirely and not something I won't to go into now (experiece>loyalty>brand equity).

You can see how this example fits with the framework presented in the diagram. I entered the shopping process with preference for Virgin, during the act of shopping I ignored preference and acted on an offer, I was disapointed with the consumption experience and therefore I'm now a rejector of United.

An interesting article re P&G focus on shopper marketing

http://adage.com/article?article_id=139127

Research provides the roadmap NOT the directions

This post is in response to the common misconception that research will provide the definitive answer to business  problems. The truth is, research is only a guide and needs to be combined with solid thinking before any decisions are made.

Think of research as a map to aid decision making - a map won't give you the exact direction, but gives information you need in order to navigate to your destination. If we continue with this analogy, two people using the same 'map' could take different routes to the same destination - this is the impact of judgement. The more research you do the more populated with information the 'map' becomes and arguably you are able to make a better decisions on what route to take. But regardless of the quality of this 'map', the decision on what route to take is a decision for the driver (e.g. users of the information), not the research.

Don't get me wrong, researchers are in a position to recommend a route, but we can't become overly reliant on the data we collect to make these recommendations - we need to apply common sense and intellect.