The difference between a well-written concept (for testing) and a poorly written one often comes down to a few appropriately chosen words. A good concept is concise, usually comprised of 2-3 statements that are crisp, to the point, and easy for the reader to understand. Some poorly written concepts I’ve seen tend to be wordy and often miss the mark, communicating with the reader as if he/she was a co-worker and familiar with internal product jargon.

In choosing the right words to include in the copy, I put a concept through the “SWIM” test by frequently asking, “So What It Means is…” and filling in the blanks with all the consumer benefit(s) I can think of. Focusing on the benefits fleshes out the concept and forces me to work backwards to come up with a compelling way to describe the features – which ideally should be easily associated to the intended product benefit. Remember, the benefit is not what YOU think Joe Consumer will gain from it, but rather, what he internalizes it to be for himself.

Also, you should give reasons why the product features enable the benefit. In advertising speak – the “reason to believe.” The tighter your features description, the higher likelihood the consumer will associate it with the intended benefit. If this copy flows rationally, that’s half the mental battle. Remember, each word is instrumental in establishing “relevance” (the more emotional the better), which could be vastly different for each person depending on how the concept is interpreted. Take the following example of excerpts from a pain reliever concept I tested several years ago:

Concept 1: “Brand XX analgesic…fast acting”
Concept 2: “Brand XX analgesic targets the site of pain with penetrating heat”
Concept 3: “Brand XX analgesic… long lasting”

Consumer reaction: but has the pain gone away?

Had the concepts' writer performed the SWIM test, he/she would have easily learned that regardless of how “fast acting,” “targeted to the site of pain,” or “long lasting” the anagesic, the consumer wanted the pain gone NOW. Immediate pain relief was the benefit consumers were most interested in and focusing on this would have made the concepts that much more compelling.

For a critique of your concept, or more information on concept testing, send us an email.

(back to top)

In recent years, we have noticed a trend among clients to ask the question “how likely are you to recommend (company) to a family member, friend or colleague?” For many, this has become the primary measurement of brand health. It has proven to be a much better measure of brand growth than traditional satisfaction, loyalty, and repeat purchase questions.

With this question almost becoming a norm, we decided it had to be more than coincidence. So we did some investigating. There is an excellent article about this topic in the December 2003 issue of the Harvard Business Review (www.hbr.org, document # R0312C). It explains the problems with other traditional customer satisfaction measures due to inertia, indifference, or exit barriers. It goes on to explain the research behind the “likelihood to recommend” question and the direct correlation behind this measure and brand health.

The most common scale for this measure (and endorsed in the article) is 11 points, ranging from ten meaning “extremely likely to recommend”, five as neutral, and zero meaning “not at all likely.” For analysis, responses are divided into promoters (score of 9-10), passively satisfied (scores of 7-8) and detractors (scores of 0-6). To simplify the findings, calculate a net promoter score: promoters minus detractors. While it may seem extreme to limit promoters to the top 2 box score on an 11 point scale, a truly successful brand needs these evangelists.

Typical rules of survey research still apply. Be sure you have a statistically valid sample and limit the survey length to maintain higher response rates. Questions to help you understand customers’ ratings should be custom to each of the three segments. Also interview your competitors’ customers so you can compare your net promoter score to theirs. Once you establish a benchmark, you can take steps to grow your net promoter score. This may be less of a marketing effort and more of an operations or R&D effort – but growing your net promoter score will likely grow your business.

Finally, it should be noted that while this question works in most industries, there are some instances where it does not work.

If you want to learn more about whether likelihood to recommend may be appropriate for your industry, send us an email.

(back to top)

MRA is A-OK! The Marketing Research Association (www.mra-net.org) is probably getting tired of seeing us; last month we sent our people to Las Vegas for a regional conference, and we'll also be at the national conference in San Francisco on June 6-8. If they keep picking places like these, we're likely to never actually be in the office. And Happy 50th Birthday, MRA!

Fun with Advertising Technology. In April we attended the Ad:Tech conference in San Francisco to be sure we were up-to-date on the technology being used in research and advertising. We walked away with some good knowledge and a nifty red bag.

Excellence in Toasting. As always, Cooper Roberts Research was the sponsor of the "Toast to Excellence" at the sfAMA's (www.sfama.org) annual Excellence in Marketing Awards Dinner earlier this month. Join us next year for another round!

Hello:Goodbye. Last week we said goodbye to a friend and colleague as Rich Woodbridge headed south to San Diego to take advantage of a full scholarship in a master's program at UCSD's School of Business (go Rich!). To replace Rich, we welcomed Rick Mason (yes, we like guys named Richard) a few weeks earlier. Goodbye, Rich, welcome, Rick! Feel free to send flowers.

(back to top)

(back to top)