Category Archives: Consumer Behaviour

Social Consumerism or Sociomerism

Posted on by
Reply

What do you after you buy that uber cool laptop that you had been eyeing for sometime? Open the pack, admire the computer, switch it on, log in and explore?

 

Not really, you actually take a snap of the packaging,  upload it on the social networking sites and enjoy the admiration! The admiration will peak, your social chatter will make you feel good about your buy, and only then will you sit back and enjoy the laptop you bought.

 

In today’s expectation economy where the consumers want to buy the best, they want to boast about it first. This is what I call Sociomerism.

 

Sociomerism is bold new powerful driver of consumer choice. Infact what your social network will say about what you buy almost predisposes the consumers’ choice. In today’s hyper-connected world where social networks define rules of engagement in personal life, they are doing so in brand choices also.

 

While this is a relatively new phenomenon, some maven brands are catching upon this new trend.

 

The Coke honesty commercial is clearly an example of leveraging Sociomerism. As a consumer you are least likely to talk about Coke the brand and the liquid in glowing terms. Who will ever want to upload a picture consuming Coke? Who will ever hear good comments about your love for Coke? But when the same Coke honestly opens up and speak about sugar, obesity and possible ills of the brand, the world doesn’t snigger at them. The world stands up and applauds.

What coke has done is that It had made people talk about Coke the brand, the liquid and people’s love for the brand! This otherwise would not have happened.

 

So why would Sociomerism big and powerful as we move forward? Here are four possible reasons

 

  1. We live in a world of choice saturation. Buying new thing no longer gives the same joy and hearing applause on the choice
  2. Status is the differentiator humans seek. Brands are the equalizer, celebration of choosing the brand is the differentiator
  3. Consumerism is not a good word consumerism cannot be celebrated. Consumer movement is a different ball game. Sociomers will actively seek newer consumer movements to enhance their social status. They will force more and more brands to come out of closet and be Honest.
  4. Sociomers will seek more and more customizing options to drive online chatter. Till now buying was not really a two way street. Buying things did not generate conversations. Today Sociomers want buying to generate chatter. This makes them feel powerful.

 

The younger consumers who are wired differently drive the new experience economy. Merging experiences with ownership is something that comes naturally to them.

 

Brands now have to be ready to face them

 

Original article is published here:http://blog.creamglobal.com/right_brain_left_brain/2013/02/social-consumerism-or-sociomerism.html

Intimate Wash, Insensitive Insights

Posted on by
2

Once upon a time there was a couple who was going through serious marital discord. Then they discovered a ‘Midas’ cream which made intimate parts of woman’s body fairer. After they used the cream they rediscovered their mojo and lived a blissful life. This is roughly what the new “Intimate Wash” promises. Now this brand is available in market, and if you haven’t you can watch the ad here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8phEyKrxBZM.

India has been obsessed with fair skin, since the time the British ruled us. There is a very large category in India that owes its roots to desire of Indians to have lighter skin. For many years, it was women who wanted to be fair, today in this age of metro sexuality; even men have jumped on to the bandwagon. There is nothing wrong if the consumer desires a fairer skin, after all Afghan Snow promised luminous skin much before Fair and Lovely came on stage. The issue is that brands linked fairness to girls getting good grooms, getting success in life or even getting accepted by their fathers as worthy of affection. In a society which is so polarized against girl child, by doing so the brands have only helped the desire for fair skin become mainstream. In the process the brands have heightened the colour divide. Here was an opportunity where the brands could have fulfilled their greater role towards society by being responsive and sensitive. Instead we have brands that promise fairness of all kinds making us cringe with disgust

ImageImage

Then there is this global car brand that promoted its iconic car in India as the most ‘expensive wedding gift’ for your daughter.  The finest silk, the most beautiful jewelry and the most spectacular wedding wouldn’t have made the wedding memorable, if the father didn’t gift his daughter the curvy ‘yellow one’. The print ad promises that it is best gifted as it is ‘fittingly expensive’. In case you haven’t guessed it, here’s where to find them http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8NM3VEMp48

Weddings and dowry are very much a part of popular culture. It is that part of culture that we all can do without. Incidentally dowry is outlawed in India and therefore promoting ‘expensive gift’ for wedding does fall in the grey zone of being illegal. The issue is not of legality, the issue is of sensitivity. By being insensitive to sacred institution of wedding, the brand almost certainly misses being liked or loved. Mercifully, while the whole category of fairness cream sold fair is better, the automobile category did not follow gift an expensive car for dowry as an insight

There also this telecom brand that uses a dog first as cupid, then as voyeur and finally as the guard, to let a young couple meet, serenade and fall in love. The only hitch in the tale is the fact that the young couple is just two preteen children, who may not know the meaning of all the dog does, and definitely leaves the moms queasy. What has a telecom brand got to do with them is another matter of debate altogether.

The usual defense of this too has been that this is happening in the society around us. This is exactly the reason why the brand should have stayed away from giving a romantic angle. The fact is that children make friends easily; they are without prejudices and find joys in new connections. How much warmer the brand would have been if the two preteen children would have been used with sensitivity and care in brand communication

These are not three isolated examples of brands that have bordered on being insensitive. There are a lot of ads today on media which often cross the line of being responsible in order to push a commercial message. The usual defense that these are insights of today may be right, but should the insights be used without being evaluated with sincerity, empathy and responsibility?

Communication has the power to shape society, and we must remember that. Otherwise in these days of connected consumers, the backlash would be hard and fast. These three brands are surely a testimony to that.

Marketing to kids in 21st century

Posted on by
1

There is an advertising stereotype that exists for kids in advertising.

The kids are supposed to be cute, wear a spectacle to add to cute value, they sit and watch TV, and run to parents demanding whatever latest they saw on TV. To appeal to the kids the commercial used to be fast paced, had bright colours and had the right drool value and the kids will respond. This may have been correct years ago, but is it true today?

Today’s kids are very different from kids of just a generation ago. For one they have access to a variety of media, which they access from a variety of sources. This means that the content available to them is more eclectic, more varied. To top it there is far more commercialization around them, with even schools not being immune to it.

Two they consume far more advertising then the kids of past. The greater consumption of advertising messages is making kids more evaluative and aware. They are clever, imaginative and inventive; they know what the brand is up to and what it wants them to do.  This generation of kids is wary of advertising, and that is a true challenge for marketers.

New generation of kids needs new rules of engagements

Here are three pointers that can help us target the young consumers and come out winners

#1. Pester power is transforming

We are living in an age where ‘kids have grown up fast’ syndrome is real. They have more autonomy and greater say in brand decisions. It’s not that kids do not want to show their attitude, or come across as ‘cool’, they do, but they do it with thought and precision. They are clear with what they want and pestering is normally left to products that are low value and are impulse driven. This generation of kids gets bored with ‘brands’ fast and moves on to the next target. So if nagging is all the brand banked on, then it would lose the battle very quickly.

#2. Parents are reliving their childhood

The new trend in market is about parents reliving their childhood through their children. This is creating a new kind of ‘pester importance’ where the parents want their kid’s critical opinion before they indulge the child. New hobbies, new toys, newer thrills are all driven by parents wanting to explore things they didn’t do as a child, but never at the cost kids disapproval. This importance of kid’s opinion is something that brands have started to discover. Automobile and fashion brands are creating specific engagement strategies towards this end

#3. Kids are the new pressure groups

Questioning every set convention is inherent in any child’s psyche. They will always question rules and this questioning can open up completely new avenues for brand marketers. The issue here is to be truthful, honest and completely above board. Because the kids are ‘tribal’ by behavior, they tend to adopt the rules of tribes very quickly. The sheer multiplication effect of this behavior is enormous. The anti-cracker and anti-plastics campaign took off because the kids adopted them out of their own volition, and forced the elders to change. Imagine what they can do if you involve them in a variety of larger causes.

Going forward

Increased message clutter is a reality of our times, and Internet is only adding to the clutter. The only way then for the brands to engage their customers will be through open and honest communication. less trickery and an interactive brand environment may be the only way forward.

Published in Impact, Feb 2012 issue. http://pitchonnet.com/blog/2012/02/20/marketing-to-kids-in-the-21st-century/

Why trust matters more than ever for brands?

Posted on by
1

We live in strange times. There are more sovereign nations that are likely to default on loans then corporations. This means today citizens can’t trust their own governmental institutions, how will they ever trust their brands? Today the consumer confidence has been eroded significantly. Brands have not remained insulated from this.

Let’s evaluate the question of trust in two different contexts. One is when the slowdown had not happened and the world of brand was driven by trustful spending. The second is post the slowdown when spending became restrained; anxiety became a bigger driver of choice and thus thoughtful spending.

The trustful spending drove greater consumption where trust was the shortcut to choice. Post crisis, thoughtful spending drove better choices, and trust took a back seat.

The pre-crisis consumerism was driven by a plethora of choices was the source of identity.  Trust was the weapon that helped people cut through a maze of choices and plethora of brand messages. Brands became large when they became iconic. Trust was an integral part of brands march towards becoming icons. Together we all celebrated the consumerism.

Post-crisis everything changed. It’s not that all of us stopped buying what we needed, but the buying became a little more considerate. The need to reflect achievement and identity took other forms. The internet and online shopping made more value driven. Social media made people question even the most trusted brand. Yesterday brands made me celebrate my identity, today we are seeking different experiences, different identities.

Trust is a remnant of past when brands held a much larger place in our lives. We are living in changing times where the society is transforming. We are connecting with each other differently, technology is changing how we shop, media is fragmenting even more and status is not a driver any more.

Trust has expired and is beyond its use by date.

 

Published by http://www.bestmediainfo.com on 20/12/2011

7 things research will never tell a marketer

Posted on by
2

No self respecting marketing executive can live without market research. Market Research offers purposeful information to make plans, policies, programmes and procedures of any marketing activity. Market Research industry is as old as communication industry and many would argue more important than the mainstream communication industry. Yet there are pitfalls, and things that MR can never tell. Here are seven things MR can rarely tell

1. Reflect reality

Market research is a post facto measurement of what had happened. The common belief is that research data reflects the current reality and hence can be used as a basis for predicting future. If that was the case then well researched brands would have never failed

2. Predict future

Research means placing human beings together in one place ask them their opinions and form that as a basis of predicting future. This is like saying that if you watch a lion in zoo, you will learn all about lions. Human zoo is no different from animal zoo, and is rarely the right basis of prediction.

3. Is never free of bias

Any form of research suffers from investigator bias and statistical errors. Research too is a classical case of stimulous response. The answers depend on what you ask, and that define the findings. Can research ever be free of bias?

4.Right answers depend on right questions

The new Coke is the stuff that is now a case study. While the new formulation tested well, scored on blind taste and passed every test the research industry threw at it, it failed when launched. The consumer was not asked the most obvious question; will the formulation change the brand they love? Do they want the brand to change? The result was a massacre in market

5. No guaranty of success

Testing a new commercial for predicting its success in market is a common practice. It is easy to score a commercial on emotional appeal, on message comprehension, on ability to create perception. Yet more commercials fail then succeed. We all know that, yet are slaves to practice

6. Does not replace experience and gut

We need to remember that research is a tool, and not the decision. A marketers gut, experience, market reality are far more important than any amount of research data. Yet the tendency is to live more by research data and less by collective experience.

7. Quality matters

We all know this.

Right?

Yet an average marketer rarely spends time on figuring out who will administer the stimulus for research. Will an average field executive be up to scratch? Will the average investigator strike the right balance of objectivity and expertise? Most researches are spoilt by simple overlooking of this crucial aspect. Next time pay attention to field investigators.

As a simple test try this, ban MR for a while, live by what you know as a marketer, trust your experience, trust your market feel, trust the hours you have spent in field. Take the decisions that need to be taken, and use research almost as the last step to check gross negative. You might speed up the process, learn a great deal more from mistakes, and possibly be more successful.

Experience always triumphs over data

Erosion of trust and new emerging paradigm

Posted on by
1

Trust is a very important parameter in every brand’s arsenal.

Trust is a basic human emotion. Trust is the foundation of sociability, and in any culture it’s the level of trust that defines the level of bonding. The brands operate in similar ways; they build on propositions that the consumers trust. The consumers treat trust as buying shorthand and often shorten their evaluation. Trust allows a brand to become the preferred brand as the consumers believe they will experience the same emotional benefits that the brands’ promise.

However the crisis in economy fundamentally alters this trust equation. For instance today more governments are likely to default on loans then large corporate. Traditionally the governments were the safest to lend a loan to, now that seems to be under a cloud. Today trust in government, institutions and people is being eroded. I am not putting politicians here, as they were never trusted. The erosion of trust then leads to an erosion of optimism and the feeling of brighter future.

Take for instance Nokia, which is India’s most ‘trusted’ brand for last 4 years in the Brand Equity Survey. This is a remarkable feat in itself, as the brands that lag Nokia are really a generation old brands, where as Nokia is new age. This stamp of trust should result in a disproportionately larger consumer bonding and therefore a larger market share. But what is happening with Nokia’s market share is not hidden from anyone, but significantly it is losing to brands that are less trusted than Nokia!

Brands build on trust by building on social acceptability, sense of achievement or as a symbol of success. In an upwardly mobile world that is what the consumer is constantly seeking. Recognition, my impact on the world, my influence on the world around me, are symbols of optimism and success.

Erosion of trust alters human behavior. People reduce their social circle, they become more inward looking, they seek greater assurance, they move from being future oriented to present state. The context of living changes significantly, trust replaces anxiety; approval from others replaces approval from me, and need for status replaces need for acceptance.

This impacts the behavior of the consumers and possibly alters their behavior. It’s not that the need for trust disappears, it stays and is very important, but possibly the need for relevance becomes dominant. In the new paradigm the performance and the price paid takes a dominant position and the need for getting the right value for what they pay becomes more important. For example Honda is the most trusted car brand, but that does not mean ever car that Honda places in market will not be critically evaluated with the filter of relevance, value and price.

This means brands in post crisis world will have to work harder. They will need to get a newer understanding of behavior. The propositions will have to move beyond status, standard, success and power to being right, consistent, honest and transparent.

We haven’t done this in a long while, the time is now.

BOP and Corruption

Posted on by
3

Bottom of pyramid approach to marketing is fairly well established now. It’s a simple premise really. If you break the economic and physical bottlenecks of distribution you can reach a huge previously neglected market. Millions of small sales can add up to big profits. This means that corporate should focus on ways to lower the cost of providing goods and services so that you can offer them at lower price and still maintain margins. The bottom of pyramid thus is made up of mass market made even more mass comprising of underserved consumers.

Now this is a completely contrarian thinking economically. The focus is not on those who have the resources, the focus is not on the high value customers, and the focus is not on the possible most potential customers. This contrarian thinking is powering the consumers across the world

Focus on BOP has strong economic potential and the power to alter markets; can the same theory have similar impact on economics of corruption?

More importantly how do you define the BOP of corruption?

This is where it gets very interesting. All the figures available on the web with so called watchdogs (and most of it being unverified) are about large grafts. And as a country we are pretty low down. In 2010 we were ranked 87th out of 178 countries globally. And even more astounding is a 2005 stat that says 45% Indians have had a firsthand experience of paying bribes, by the same organization. The amount may well be just unestimateable.

Now this is a good indicator of what BOP of corruption may be. Clearly the apex of this pyramid are the politicians and large corporate. At least that is how it looks logically as they control the portals of economy. The bottom end of this pyramid is made up of the ordinary middle class Indians. If45% have paid a bribe then it has to be the great Indian middle class.

Like the conventional BOP theory, even this is made up of mass market made even more mass which collectively is a huge market. If we have to make a positive impact on corruption then this mass of masses need to be impacted.

It’s a tragedy of our times where we don’t think twice before bribing our way through a traffic offence or pay a small tip to the cop who comes for passport verification. It is considered a way of life and the right thing to do. I know I will hear that if we don’t than work will never happen.

Now consider this. What will happen if this mass of audience stops paying to get work done? After all corruption like any financial deed is a transaction. It happens when one party pays and other accepts. Remove the payee, and the tree will collapse.

Suppose this we decide  to never skip a red light, to never pay for passport and driving license, always wear seat belt, never talk on phone while driving, never drink and drive, never jump lanes, the truckers don’t overload trucks, the scooterists wear helmets, even the pillion riders do so. Simply put we follow rules.

This will mean that the whole BOP of corruption comes crashing down. And this will also mean that we will not need discovered again social workers who espouse the great Mahatma again. This will force the government and the business to live by law. This will impact the apex of pyramid.

I know this sounds very simplistic, but then if 45% of Indians decide, we wont, then it will not happen. The true tragedy is that this 45% of India also does not believe in power of franchise and never votes

The bottom line still is that BOP impacts business and can impact corruption. Think about it

Only the connected thrive

Posted on by
Reply

Need to be socially connected is an age old emotional need.  History of human communication is almost 50,000 year old. It has helped mankind spread from Africa to all over the globe. Possibly the drums were the first machines that humans used for communication. Now from pigeons to horseback carriers to electrically modulated sound waves has transformed into mobile phones.

Today the mobile phone as a category is the fastest growing category in the world. Mobile phones are changing the contours of human communication. Already mobile phones have transcended the barriers of personal space and are creating a new form of global brotherhood. May be it’s the mobile phones that is making the world flat and not the computers.

Clearly the mobile culture is moving from margins to mainstream. The adoption of sms, chats and social networking sites are applications that are finding resonance with consumers. Possibly for the first time in human evolution, adoption of technology is outpacing the evolution of technology

The biggest example of this is the incident where a techie live tweeted the attack on Osama hideout, and then in US the news broke first on Twitter than on either network TV or on news websites. This is giving rise to what can be called as ‘Connection Economy’

The Connection Economy is a powerful new force that will redefine the way brands approach consumers and the way consumers engage with brands. There are two powerful trends that define this new Connection Economy. These are “connected life”, “connected identities” . These two are giving rise to what can only be called as “connected markets”

Connected Life is a function of a unique social space that mobile devices create. The fact is that the old cliché of life in your hands is actually true. Peers, family, friends all live together in a virtual space, where the user defines the rules of engagement. This availability of connections on demand creates a sense of joy and gives a sense of huge excitement. It makes every person in the connected space feel far more potent and powerful.

Connected Identities This trend carries contra behavior trend. It has two opposing patterns that define the connected identities. One is the process of individualizing the connection. This includes what can be called the status messages and even customizing phones. The other pattern is evolving common identities. Through common identity the gangs and groups acquire a powerful meaning. This is where the deepest emotions and drivers come alive

Connected Markets is a powerful new driver of business and brands. The connection impacts how the brands connect with consumers and also how consumers connect with brands. Consider this; the group buying deals that are now popular in the virtual space are connected consumers redefining pricing equations.

Again as it has happened with technology where adoption has beaten technology, the connected economy evolution has outpaced the adoption from brands. Our recent research clearly points the gap that exist between what the connected consumers desires from the disconnected brands.

The funny thing is, by the time the brands learn the tricks, consumers would have moved on to a new space. Today its clear, if the brands have to thrive, they have to connect. That is a true challenge

Published in Pitch Magazine, June 2011

IPL 4 and why it failed

Posted on by
1

IPL 4 started sometimes in March, CSK have won, Dhoni’s luck held and the carnival came to an end sometimes in May.  Over 120 brands were involved in this year’s IPL, chasing a dwindling audience. For the first time stadiums had unsold seats in T20 matches.  For the first time when the TV ratings started to slip, they kept on slipping. Something went seriously wrong with this years’ IPL.

True the quality of cricket was not up to scratch, true that the matches lacked fizzle, but the formula was the same. The same carnivals feel, the same cheer leading squads, the same loud IPL bugle, and yet the fizz went out.

This time though there was one additional factor that was missing in last three IPLs. This year there was Twitter, and the IPL was promoting twitter in a big way. The commentators were tweeting, the players were tweeting, and mercifully the viewers’ too were tweeting. Twitter possibly is the best way to know, what may have gone wrong. I pulled out the following as what was trending on Twitter through out the IPL 4

Trend 1: The biggest trend was on team branding and team fandom. The most obvious players moved out their respective teams and donned new colours were a big challenge for the viewers. People actively commented on the difficulty they faced in following their favourite players. Even the new captains were a big issue. The team owners too did not do much to increase their fan base. This year the engagement of the city with their teams was at a low. This is a prime reason why many seats were empty in stadium

Trend 2: Lalit Modi was certainly missed by the twitterati. There were questions on scheduling the matches, there were questions on ability to create and sustain hype, and certainly the pizzazz was missing from this years’ IPL. Schedule of This years’ IPL came under very harsh scrutiny by the twitterati. Lalit Modi was generally hailed as the true hero of IPL!

Trend 3: The second most comments were on the fairness of matches. This trend though is a little complex to analyze, as losing teams fans could always question the results. Yet there was a pattern to a large number of matches. The supposedly weaker team won from the supposedly larger team. The fact the RCB and CSK will make to finals and CSK will win was doing rounds on Twitter for a long time

Trend 4: The quality of cricket that was dished out was an issue. Though some of the new players had sporadic following, driven by how they played. Paul Valthaty, Rahul Sharma, Bharat Chipli, Badrinath were some players who gained sustainable fan following. And despite the rise of a few new stars, the quality of game was always criticized. If the league has to have a future, it needs to work hard on improving the quality of the game

Trend 5: If there was one player who dominated the Tweet world, that it was Chris Gayle. RCB post tells that he hit an astonishing 100 fours and sixes in the tournament. Since the time he came, his murderous assault on bowlers, and his miserly spell in bowling was always the toast of twitter world. Clearly the WI loss was IPL gain

Trend 6: Individual teams had very poor fan following, and that is a clear indicator of low engagement of teams with twitter population. Mumbai Indians has just 185 followers, Delhi has 4000, and the new comer Pune has 3000. KKR wins this hands down with over 44000 followers. CSK has 13000, and RCB 18000 followers. Looks like the average twitterati is not keen to connect with the official team pages

The Twitter analysis has clear pointers. If the brand has to thrive, it has to organize the event better, has to improve the quality of game, and above all be transparent.

The novelty is now over, and the thrill has been missing. IPL5 has survival issues at stake