To do our jobs properly, marketers need to predict future consumer behavior. But how?

The problem is this… as an industry, we’ve got a lousy track record of accurately predicting consumer behavior.

Even though we have all these research tools and methodologies (focus groups, mall intercepts, attitudinal questionnaires, Likert scales, multivariate cluster analyses, perceptual maps, conjoint analyses, demographic and psychographic profiles, semantic differentials, etc.—all of which we stole from behavioral scientists many years ago) we still seem to get it all wrong. We have the capacity to know a lot, but we don’t seem to learn what really predicts behavior. Are we guilty of bad science the same way surgeons were guilty of bad medicine by blood-letting bad humours out of the human body just a handful of generations ago?

I heard one researcher state the other day that marketers are good at measuring consumer opinions and attitudes but, unfortunately, consumer opinions and attitudes do not necessarily correlate with future behavior. Consumers are great at telling us what they think and feel about something. The problem is they can’t articulate what truly drives their behavior. Many times they simply don’t know—at least not know in the conscious, cognitive sense. What we are now realizing is that we cannot use attitudinal research to predict consumer behavior. It’s like using a microphone to record the color blue.

This phenomenon probably explains why over 80% of all new product/service launches fail—even when they’ve been thoroughly researched with target groups. It also may explain why customer satisfaction has only an 8% predictive value in determining future customer purchases. Our research findings are misleading us.

To get better at predicting consumer behavior, we’re going to have to change the way we do research. There’s been a flash of interest in a new science called “neuromarketing” that’s done a great job proving how bad our current research methodologies truly are. They’ve found conclusive evidence the gap between what customers say they’ll do and what customers will actually do. Books like Neuromarketing, Buy-ology and Habit give us evidence of this. Neuromarketing research methodologies are powerful: fMRI and electroencephalography (EEG) technologies. But they are unwieldy, expensive and totally impractical for daily marketing use. But, the good news about them, they may bridge us to new ways of doing research in the future.

The best way to predict consumer behavior right now is by simple observation—what I call the “Jane Goodall” method of consumer research. Paco Underhill in his book Why We Buy demonstrates that technique. Consumer observation is good at revealing current behavior in already defined consumer experiences, but cannot offer us understanding when it comes to predicting behavior in new environments and with new products.

Consumer research is at the beginning of a new chapter of development. And it will be interesting to watch it write itself. Hopefully, there are a few brave souls out there who are interested in taking research to the next level.

Is Madison Avenue Guilty of the Same Hubris as Wall Street?

The Fall of 2008. Generations from now will remember it as the fall of the financial markets and a crucial turning point in global economics. So many slick, opportunistic decisions made by very clever financiers over the past decade are coming back to bite us… decisions laced with so much greed… stimulated by so little control and oversight. Unbridled opportunism has caught up with Wall Street—and us.

Are we on the brink of the same type of meltdown in branding?

Just as in the financial markets, branding has become slick and sophisticated over the past decade. A casual walk down the business book aisle at Barnes & Noble will attest to that. Dozens upon dozens of branding books are packed tightly together competing for attention. Marketers rush to them looking for the next big idea in manipulating their brands to create ever-higher levels of customer addiction.

Have emotion-based brand connections become marketing’s subprime mortgages? Have customer relationship marketing (CRM) and “cult branding” schemes become a marketer’s equivalent of credit default swaps? Have we resorted to cheap brand value builders while ignoring the true value the customer receives from using our products?

I’ve criss-crossed the United States, Canada, Eastern Europe and the Middle East over the past few years talking to hundreds of business owners and marketing professionals. And I hear a consistent strain of thought: “How can I improve how I talk about my brand?” But, what I’m hearing very little of is, “How can I improve the core product and service my brand represents?”

What I mean by this… our profession seems more concerned with how well we’re communicating our brands than making our brands stand for better products/services that meet the needs/desires of consumers better. It’s an artificial inflation of brand value at the expense of product value.

Should we spend more energy coming up with better products than better tag lines? Should we be focusing more of our attention on true consumer problems than on clever online interactive tools? Should we invest more in product research and development than in researching brand equity scores?

Do I have an answer? Unfortunately, not entirely yet. But I’m working on it. Diligently. Even so, the question still begs to be asked. And a peer dialogue needs to result. So, thoughtful marketer, what are you seeing out there?

Seems like everyone’s feverishly yapping these days about the need to ”cut through the clutter” while spazzing out on their fourth Red Bull of the morning. But just what happens when everyone starts cutting through the clutter at the same time–and in the same way? Take a look around. Welcome to 2008, The Birth of “The New Clutter.”

To say you’re wanting to “cut through the clutter” and then actually doing it are two separate issues. Unfortunately, they are rarely connected. That’s good news for the serious idea person (which I’m assuming you are–or at least want to be.) Cutting through the clutter is still a simple proposition, but a simplicity most are not willing to embrace. Why? Because it’s hard. Simple, but hard. But it’s doable with a certain discipline to your idea making. And that’s what I’d like to discuss with you… about going to the 15th.

I’m firmly convinced that all of us are capable of producing good ideas given the chance, motivation and method. If you find yourself in a brainstorming session with colleagues and the group starts hammering at a problem and pelting it with a spray of random ideas, you’ll probably find that you’ll discover a couple good ideas among the lot. For most, that’s enough. They’ve got a good idea or two to champion and they’re off to implement them.

But the difference between a good idea and a great idea is huge. Not only in the quality of the idea, but also in its effect. A great idea can work 100x harder than a good idea.

“The New Clutter” is a gathering of good ideas (thinking they’re great ideas) trying to get noticed in an over-crowded, increasingly jaded marketplace. Did you know that the average American consumer gets exposed to 3,000 to 5,000 ad messages a day? And each of these messages are good. Their creators all think their ideas “cut through the clutter” when, in fact, they’re just adding to the noise.

But then there are others. These are the ads we remember. The ads that change our behavior. These are the ads we tell our friends over drinks or at the coffee maker at work. They’ve caused us to rethink our thinking. They’ve ignited a connection to the brand and product. They’ve given us an extra something that completely causes us to forget the 4,999 other ads we saw that day. These ads have cut us to the quick.

So, what’s the difference? The creators of the one great ad do what rest are unwilling to do. They’ve gone to the 15th.

After graduation from my M.B.A. program in 19… (well, let’s just say Ronald Reagan was still in the White House), my uncle gave me this small little book on advertising by a guy named John Caples, legendary ad guy from the ’60’s. I awkwardly thanked my uncle for the book, though inwardly I was thinking, “what does some old ad guy from the ’60’s have to teach me? Doesn’t my uncle know the advertising business has changed and the ideas from decades long gone have no relevance today?” Well, I thought that and didn’t express my disappointment outwardly.

But one day, in a fit of boredom and lack of inspiration, I pulled out the Caples book. And I read it. You need to know I had been a successful creative director at an agency for some time. And, as I read, many  of my original misgivings remained. But there was one thing he said in that book that made a ton of sense. A simple thing. But a hard thing. He talked about going to the 15th. And it was the idea that transformed my idea creation from being nominally “good” to “great.”

Here’s Caples’ idea: when he was tasked to write a new ad, he had a method. Once presented with a client problem that needed an advertising solution, Caples would spend a day or two digesting the client situation thoroughly. He’d talk to experts and read as much as he possibly could about the client, its products and the market. Then Caples would go home, eat a nice dinner and go to sleep. He wouldn’t even try to solve the client problem yet.

The next morning Caples would then come into the office and pull out 15 clean sheets of paper and sit down at his desk and force himself to come up with 15 different ways to solve the client problem. He’d jot down his first idea in loose form, then place it on the credenza behind him. He’d then take sheet #2 and force himself to come up with another idea. Then he’d think of a third, a fourth, a fifth… then a fourteenth, then a fifteenth.

I decided to give Caples’ idea a try. Fortunately, a client came to me with a problem the very next day. And I went to the 15th on that problem–just the way Caples would have if he were in my position. And I was able to come up with a stunning, “clutter exploding” solution. I had produced really good work for that client in the past. But this idea… this idea that came from a collection of 15 separate ideas… that’s the one that levitated into the rare air of “great.”

Had I become a genius overnight? No. I just had a plan. A simple, albeit hard, plan. Most are either too lazy or too much in a hurry to go to the 15th. And they stop at their first good idea or two, just like I used to do. And its their ideas that are creating the “New Clutter.” Caples taught me to get past my good ideas by generating a lot of ideas… 15 ideas to be exact. And that’s where the magic begins!

So “cut through the clutter” till your heart’s content. Just make sure you go the the 15th to get there.

Happy ideating!
Steve Whigham