Market Research Strategies

By Scott Young

Use These Five Principles for Effective Package Design Research To Determine What Really Triggers the Buying Impulse

Marketers are increasingly recognizing the importance of packaging in influencing the many purchase decisions that are made at the point-of-sale. Consequently, many are now attempting to numerically assess new packaging systems and ultimately to gauge the return on investment from packaging initiatives.

Companies approach this challenge by applying or adopting the research disciplines and metrics that they are already using to assess advertising executions. However, this presents several challenges, because many factors make packaging—and point-of-sale marketing—quite different from advertising. With this thought in mind, here are five useful principles to help ensure that quantitative research studies accurately gauge the impact of new packaging systems—and properly guide business decisions.

Principle #1: Avoid side-by-side "beauty contests"

Packaging is about communication and persuasion, but poorly designed packaging research studies can quickly descend into "art directing" rather than communication assessment. For this reason, the single most important principle of effective packaging research is monadic study design, in which each person sees and reacts to only one system—and findings are compared across "cells" (those who saw current packaging vs. those who saw proposed packaging). This approach best simulates the introduction of a new packaging system and it most accurately measures how a packaging change will impact shoppers' attitudes and behavior.

When shoppers directly compare different packaging options (for the same brand) on a side-by-side basis, it creates an unrealistic viewing scenario—one that shoppers would rarely encounter in a store. As such, these side-by-side comparisons often turn test subjects into "art directors" or "brand managers" rather than shoppers deciding whether or not to buy a product. Therefore, finding out that "80% prefer the new packaging over the old" has little connection to whether or not a packaging change will have any impact on sales. Ultimately, the evaluation of packaging systems is not about design preferences—it is about influencing behavior.

Principle #2: Start on the shelf by gauging visibility

Packaging is unique because it "lives" on cluttered shelves, and has to work within the very limited time—often only 10-20 seconds—that shoppers typically spend making their purchase decisions. Given this reality, the first challenge is clearly to be seen and considered—and to consistently create an opportunity to sell. In fact, years of PRS Eye-Tracking studies have shown that shoppers never see at least one-third of the brands displayed. Research also shows that being seen quickly—visually "pre-empting" the competition—correlates quite highly with purchase.

The other side of the equation is shop-ability. For a smaller brand, this is a question of simply being found if a shopper approaches the category looking for it. For larger brands, this is the challenge of facilitating shopping by quickly leading shoppers to their desired product form or variety—and/or possibly driving an incremental purchase by highlighting a new or "trade-up" product. In either case, if shoppers do not find what they are looking for within 10-15 seconds, there is a good chance that they will grab another brand.

Unfortunately, there are few "short-cuts" to gauging shelf presence—and "quick and dirty" communication checks can be very misleading. Specifically, research has found that when packaging is shown in isolation (on a board or web screen), shoppers cannot accurately gauge its shelf visibility or shop-ability. In addition, recall is a poor and misleading indicator of shelf impact, because shoppers will often guess that they have seen a leading or established brand ("Since it was a soda shelf, I must have seen Pepsi.") The bottom line is that there is no substitute for actually documenting what happens as shoppers encounter packaging within a shelf context—that is, what do they see, actively consider, pick up, and buy. It is important that major package design decisions are guided by this knowledge, rather than by what shoppers claim or what they recall.

Principle #3: Remember: the norm is competition

Packaging also differs from advertising in that it is typically positioned directly next to its primary competitors. In other words, packages are rarely viewed or considered in isolation—and all communication is inherently on a relative or comparative basis. For package design, the most relevant norm is nearly always competition—and it is critical that a study gather directly comparable data regarding competitive packaging, including that of leading store brands.

Moreover, because shoppers typically spend only a few seconds actively comparing different products, it is important to measure a packaging system's ability to communicate on an immediate and "visceral" level. Effective package designs typically create a competitive advantage by "owning a key dimension" through a unique physical appearance (a color, a shape, an icon) or by clearly highlighting a differentiating message. In terms of messaging, PRS Eye-Tracking of label viewing patterns clearly suggests that "less is more," because including too many messages detracts from readership. The most effective strategy is to identify one or two truly differentiating claims, or "key dimensions," and ensure that they come across quickly and consistently.

Principle #4: Present "complete" packages, not individual elements

To guide later refinements and optimization, there is a natural desire to want to quantify the impact of specific packaging elements. However, asking shoppers to react to or rate individual design elements (such as logo treatments, visuals, colors, etc.) immediately places them in "art director" mode rather than a shopping mindset. This approach leads to the implicit assumption that all design elements are equally important in shaping reactions to the packaging. More importantly, isolating design elements leads almost inevitably to a "design by numbers" mentality, which rests on the misguided assumption that packaging can be optimized by simply combining the "winning" approaches from each element (the "best" cap, the best color, the best visual, etc.).

To guide refinements, studies should gather reactions to packages or packaging systems in their totality—and then include probes to uncover which specific design elements are driving these reactions. Alternatively, marketers can test different versions or variations of a package design in order to isolate the impact of single element on shelf presence and communication. Overall, the primary objective should be to document the strengths and limitations of a packaging system and to identify important issues and concerns, such as which messages are not coming across clearly. This information can help marketing and design professionals develop several potential solutions to address any shortcomings.

Principle #5: Don't rely on a single number

As marketers seek to project the return on investment from package design changes, there is increasing pressure to provide a "single number" to assess each proposed packaging system and guide final decisions. Understandably, the main question is: "Did a new system drive more purchases?"

However, research shows that a one-time "simulated shopping" exercise captures only part of the story—and that few packaging changes meet the standard of immediately driving sales gains. The reality is that a packaging change will rarely override years of buying patterns and lead many competitive users to immediately switch brands. Instead, a new look can and should lead non-buyers to "look twice" at your brand—and perhaps to give it a try if it is on special or perhaps their brand is out-of-stock. In other words, a more realistic goal is to "enter the consideration set" as a viable alternative for non-users.

To provide a more comprehensive projection of return on investment (ROI), packaging research should combine simulated shopping with a series of exercises that document performance in areas that link directly to longer term "business building potential." These dimensions include shelf visibility, aesthetic appeal, competitive differentiation and personal relevance. As importantly, using multiple measures will help to ensure that packaging research serves as more than a "score sheet" (for identifying "winners" and "losers")—and also will help to provide the diagnostic guidance needed to create even more effective packaging.

Moving toward improved accountability and insight

Across each of these principles, several unifying themes emerge. First and foremost, the key to effective packaging research is to keep the shopper in a shopping context. When a shopper is at the shelf, considering different brands for purchase, he or she is in this context—and is likely to provide accurate feedback. Conversely, when a shopper is removed from this context, the shopper becomes an "art director" and the research can frequently become misleading.

Secondly, it is necessary to recognize and account for the uniqueness of packaging, both in research methodology and analysis. Specifically, the clutter of the shelf environment, the presence of direct competitors and the immediacy of the purchase decision make packaging quite different from advertising. This suggests that advertising research principles and metrics should not be "transplanted" directly to packaging studies.

Finally, despite the effort for accountability and the allure of a "single number," it is still critical to conduct and analyze packaging research in a diagnostic manner, which provides the designers with the insight to solve problems and to further fuel creativity, rather than destroy it. Ultimately, the companies that invest in a more comprehensive approach to packaging research will be rewarded with more accurate business projections—and with the insight to create more effective packaging systems that consistently "win at retail."

Scott Young is the President of Perception Research Services (www.prsresearch.com), a company that conducts over 500 custom studies annually to guide packaging decisions. Scott can be reached at (201) 346-1600 or syoung@prsresearch.com.