This is an exert from a recent post on my blog…at the very least it provides a point of view on the difference between consumer and shopper insights. Keep in mind that it is written from a very basic viewpoint and is very much a work in progress – hopefully it provokes thought and opens a discussion.

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

copy link to see diagram http://insightsnthings.blogspot.com/

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

- online sampling is redefined, for the better
- research transformation in client companies begins really to take hold
- we begin to understand listening and incorporate it into all research
- researchers finally start to get that just because something has been done for 60 years does not mean it is sacrosanct!

I was disturbed recently to read that clients are using listening in their projects at a far higher rate than are research companies. Are research agencies hiding their developments under their hats until they have something really useful to say or is there a real discrepancy here?

Will this also be the year in which the distinction between market research and analytics fades into irrelevancy? If so, we are in for interesting times!

–Yay to the ARF for their test of online panel survey outcomes and attempting to address the issue. I’ve always felt that the panels are like sausages; no one really knows or wants to know what’s in there. Recognizing and taking steps to address will be wonderful if research users and practitioners are willing to pay for fixes.

–Nice to see development of shared metrics to keep up with the complex media choices and usage of today. And tomorrow.

–The sheer amount of effort required to insure data integrity, along with suppliers need to differentiate their products (“brand”), results in misplaced emphasis by MR on methods instead of delivering the goods on marketing questions.

Yet, the push to do this comes in part from the very same dissatisfied research teams who insist that vendors “show me something different” to be considered for work.

BTW, there is a lot of MR lip service about “providing insight”, but I find that the amount of time on a project spent developing recommendations based on results is about 5% max, as deadlines are approached.

–Finally, the need to focus on the retail level is definitely as important as brand building. Strategic research has enjoyed more status, closer attention by C-level execs and way cooler analytics for a long time. Maybe now research on retail/tactical issues will gain attention (and cachet and user dollars.)

One thing though. Will someone please explain the actual difference between Shoppers and Consumers, as in shopper research and consumer research. The distinction had always seemed a bit fatuous to me, but maybe it’s not.

Re: marketing research still struggling to be recognized as having significant impact

I’m not surprised by these findings… put simply I think it is a ‘real’ issue as opposed to a perceptual issue… Most researchers focus on the wrong things and fail to make an impact…
• Data not insight
• Process not outcome
• Treat research as a end in itself, not a means to an end
• Use research data in a vacuum – e.g. forget to take into account outside information (e.g. financials, economic data, previous research etc)
• Simply don’t think like a marketer – need to ask themselves the ‘so what’ when looking at data.

The ‘market research’ brand is in dire need of a re-positioning, starting with recognition of the historical flaws.