The In's and Outs of Marketing Research

“Kenna’s Dilemma: The Right- and Wrong- Way to Ask People What They Want” by Malcolm Gladwell is a very interesting piece of writing that talks about the troubling faults, mysteries and difficulties of retrieving consumer research and information about products in the marketplace. Although all of the lessons throughout the article are important for researchers to understand, I think the two most important lessons are learned from the Pepsi versus Coke challenge for market share and from the Christian Brothers Brandy and E & J Brandy example.
The Pepsi Challenge demonstration of marketing research is interesting because it brought consumers to the forefront of making a decision on camera about which cola was better tasting. This was controversial for Coke because not only were they losing market share, consumers actually thought Pepsi’s products tasted better during these quick sipping taste tests. Because Coke’s reputation was heavily based on its “secret recipe,” Coke felt as though they had to react quickly in order to maintain their leadership in the market. New Coke was produced, favored in pre-market taste tests, and was launched with much confidence. And what did Coke achieve? Nothing. Failure. And Why? Listen carefully: I think that for marketers to grasp the understanding of consumers’ beliefs, feelings, and opinions about a product they have to throw all of the rules of marketing research out the window, but in a strategic manner. In any research project a marketer needs to know that numbers are reliable, but they are not and will never mean everything in every scenario, and should not trigger every marketing decision that is made within a company. This example, in the exact opposite way, is extended in the Aeron chair market research. Aeron’s rankings for look and comfort during product research were low and unpromising, which is opposite of what happened for New Coke. They were doubtful that it would be successful but extended it to the market anyway. It became a huge success and now can be found in office buildings across the world. I used one all summer in my internship, (although it may not be the Aeron brand because of the increased competition for the “skeleton chairs” in the market today,) and I found it very neat to read about the chair’s history. My case in point is that Coke and Aeron experienced first hand how market research can be very wrong about the success of a product and marketers need to take this into consideration which may mean to follow their gut instead of their gadgets.
The other important lesson that should be learned by marketers is that a simple change, such as the size, shape, color, font, or label on a bottle or package could be the determinant of which brand succeeds in a competitive landscape. I know that if I am apathetic or not loyal to a brand, I almost always pick the combination of best price for quality and quantity, and then my second variable in choice is the appeal of the packaging for the product. This is especially important in alcohol purchases because most of the lower level liquors taste the same, and so on as you travel up the ladder to “top-shelf” products. The bottle of the product is a sort of staple to a person’s fashion sense and can be a trendy accessory when walking into a party. Christian Brothers conducted market research on their products because there were exact and reliable quantitative ways to understand why they are not performing well against a certain competitor. All marketers should really analyze their own mind processes in making decisions, along with the market research, in order to find the critical downfall of a product in order to make it better in the long run. For example, I am not loyal to any certain bottled water. The other day in the store I chose to buy Glaceau Smart Water because of the packaging. It was interesting and I felt “modern” when holding it. I have no doubt that this company has obtained positive reinforcement about their packaging, and thus will continue to use their sleek bottle.