There has been significant press coverage recently on the topic of private label supermarket products, ranging from Woolworth’s announcement that they intend to double the share of private label products in their supermarkets over the next 5 years; to brands such as Heinz stating that the supermarkets’ growth in private label is damaging the brands that have helped them to grow in the first place.

There is almost a blind assumption that the profileration of private label products is being driven by consumer demand, in times where the pressure on the consumer wallet remains. It is assumed that consumers welcome private label, as they are helping people to control their spending. But is this really the case?

Over the past 3 years, TNS Australia has been tracking consumer attitudes to Private Label products, originally just within the supermarket, but more recently in the bottle-shop too. What is interesting is that we have observed a number of shifts in attitude towards private label products during this time.

Private Label purchasing is not always driven by budgetary issues

For every person buying a private label product for budgetary reasons, there is a person buying private label products because they want to. But additionally, the increase in share of private label products on shelf (which is being noticed by consumers), suggests growth is coming as much from supply side dynamics as demand side.

The growth of Private Label brands is not welcomed by all

Whilst most consumers now buy private label products (to varying degrees), we are beginning to see an attitudinal shift towards private label brands. A desire to buy Australian made supermarket products is increasing, but also a dislike of the fact private label brands are increasing their share in the supermarket (at the detriment to other brands) is becoming more prevalent. People increasingly believing that private label brands are simply copying the original and that the products are of inferior quality. Of course this varies a lot by category – or more to the point consumer’s desire to buy the original product varies by category – but these shifts in perception indicate that there is a growing sense of discontent with the influence of private label brands.

People protesting with their purchases

When we explore in more detail consumer attitudes to private label and the impact on purchasing behaviour, we discover some interesting points. The growth in dislike of ‘these (private label) brands dominating the supermarket’ over the past 3 years is a key shift in sentiment.  But interestingly, they still buy Private Label brands – it is simply that they buy less than everyone else. With the size of this group growing from 24% of main grocery buyers to 34% in the last 3 years, it certainly appears a conflict is growing between consumer needs and supermarket strategies.

The prevalence of Private Label is driven by category dynamics

There are some categories such as bread, margarine or milk which are more susceptible to private label products carving out significant share – hence why the supermarkets have embarked on a price war within certain categories. Other categories – such as vegetable extract spread (e.g. Vegemite) are largely immune. Fundamentally the ability of private label brands to capture share comes down to 3 things: 1, the ability of the private label brand to replicate the performance (taste, integrity, packaging) of the branded product, 2, the brand equity the original product has generated previously and 3, the price differential between the branded product and private label equivalent.

But of course things do not stand still. Chocolate was traditionally a category somewhat immune to private label, driven by heavy marketing investments behind several iconic brands, but consumer attitudes towards chocolate is beginning to shift. In 2009, 39% of main grocery buyers would have considered buying private label chocolate, but in 2011, this proportion has grown to 47%.

 Read the full report here:Private Label – TNS Positioning 201211

It is really great to see our Digital Life study released for a second year. This is a global TNS study based upon work we did here in Australia several years ago, so it particularly pleasing to see it back – bigger and better than ever. It is now conducted in 60 markets around the world amongst 72,000 people making it (we believe) the largest and most comprehensive study on digital habits in the world.

We highlighted some of the key outcomes from the 2011 Digital Life (Australia edition) in our recent DNA conference, but it is worth recapping some of the key 2011 trends:

• Unsurprisingly, people are spending more time online than last year. Growth is coming from mobile and tablets, which are essentially creating new online occasions.
• Growth is also being driven by a big jump in social networking. This is driven by both a broadening (more networks being used per person) and deepening (more diverse reasons such as news, business and gaming) of social networks per se – it is clearly no longer just about status updates and photos
• Of particular interest is a growing divide in usage between our lead user group (influencers) and base level user group (functionals). This is being driven in part by the uptake of mobile and tablets by influencers, but fundamentally there is a growing fragmentation of usage online
•  User generated content is being used increasingly across the purchase funnel. This is consistent across most categories
• Online Retail has grown dramatically in Australia in 2011, with Australians now amongst the most frequent online shoppers. This is fuelled by a number of factors including of course the strength of the Australian dollar, but it is really the daily deal sites, group buying sites and eBay who are taking advantage of this boom
• We’re also seeing a two-fold increase in people interacting with offline content & media using their mobile. People are becoming accustomed to investigating via their mobile and brands can easily leverage this to their advantage
• The final trend we’ve seen is a rise in gaming – not console or traditional gaming as such, but more social network and mobile gaming. This presents new and often unique opportunities for organisations to get involved, as games can be both engaging and sticky.

Fundamentally there are shifts in consumer behaviour happening in Australia; driven by both technology adoption and a change in the content people seek out. This creates real opportunities for innovation for brands in Australia in 2012.

We are running another DNA conference in Brisbane on the 23^rd November and then Perth in the new year. But if you want to find out more about the Digital Life study check our www.tnsdigitallife.com or contact us at jonathan.sinton@tnsglobal.com

TNS’ Green Index, conducted in September 2011,  and released publicly for the first time since its inception in June 2010, reveals a stable outlook towards environmental issues amongst Australians over the past fifteen months. On a hundred-point scale, Australia’s current level of green sentiment sits at 60 in Sep-11, one point above its first recorded level at 59 in Jun-10.

However, a deeper look into the measures behind the Index – a range of questions falling under the broad themes of personal concern for the environment, seriousness of green issues and intention to act – reveals a number of changes in the way green is perceived between 2010 and 2011.

Chief among these are a drop in the perceived seriousness of green issues – from 61 in Jun-10 to 58 in Sep-11 – and an increase of intent to act – from 49 in Jun-10 to 55 in Sep-11.

What we believe is behind the increase in green behaviour, in spite of a decrease in perceived seriousness, is an indoctrination of environmentally friendly action into society. Many green behaviours, particularly less involved behaviours, are becoming ingrained in the way we behave.

This notion is supported by profiling of the types of green consumers.  The Green Index segments Australians into five types of green consumer.  The type that has grown the most in 2011 is the Non-Believers – those who display levels of green behaviour that outstrip their level of belief.

Other key findings:

• Relative to other issues, green ranks third in terms of perceived seriousness – with 75% describing it as ‘very serious’ – behind cost of living (88%) and the health system (82%), but in front of a global recession (72%) and Australia’s economy (72%).
• One in two (50%) think the condition of their local environment is   good.
• Two in three (68%) agree that climate change is real, while only 16% disagree.
• Simple green behaviours and those that introduce efficiencies into the home dominate, but 17% claim to be purchasing green energy and 13% claim to have purchased a hybrid or more fuel efficient car.

For more information please contact vanessa.hamilton@tnsglobal.com

This insight about shifting attitudes toward sex came back to me when I was thinking about the many ways in which emerging markets differ from one another. Generally, the perception is that emerging markets are quite conservative when it comes to sexual imagery.

But the old advertising adage of “sex sells” remains true pretty much anywhere in the world. You just have to get the message right – for both your audience and your brand.

Overtly sexual

In some emerging markets, you can be a lot more direct in your appeal to sex than in many industrialised countries. I remember the market research manager of a Central American airline telling me that the way he got good response rates for his inflight surveys was to have pretty girls in short skirts hand them out.

Depending on whether your internet filters let you, check out Russian airline Avia Nova’s recent commercial. As a female business traveller, I hate the ad. But it knows its target audience (most business travellers in Russia are likely to be men and, shall we say, not necessarily worried about political correctness) and it certainly has a clear message that differentiates the airline from its competitors (albeit one that the crew may not wish to live up to).

There is no more vivid example of the overt approach than using Paris Hilton to sell beer to Brazilians. In this television commercial for Devassa, Hilton cools herself with an ice cold can in full view of a crowded street, and appears to enjoy the experience almost as much as her horde of onlookers.

Marketers in Africa can get away with a surprisingly overt approach to sex as well, providing certain sensitivities towards STIs and the more repressed role of women are observed. This little gem for condom manufacturer Trust went viral a couple of years ago now, with a cheeky but highly sexual approach.

Subtly sexual

In contrast, China is a more traditional culture where talking about sex overtly is usually considered to be in poor taste. But using innuendo and relying on the audience to connect the dots can be a very engaging strategy. McDonald’s, for example, pushed the boundaries with their Feel the Beef campaign, created to introduce their Quarter Pounders to the Chinese palate. And they got away with it.

Knowing how far a brand can go comes down to understanding the unique histories and nuances of a place. At first glance, India might seem like a highly socially conservative market. But India’s tradition of sensuality (think Tantra) means that it is possible to make sexy ads that are culturally referenced and don’t upset the censors.

Many brands in India are testing the waters, including Wild Stone deodorant with its ad featuring a married woman fantasizing about a handsome stranger. While a direct approach to sex may be taboo in India, fantasy and innuendo fit within cultural norms and beliefs.

Another idiosyncrasy to note is that the same rules don’t always apply to ads from other places as they do to ads from the homeland. For instance, an Indian businessman might want to fly with Avia Nova after seeing the Russian airline’s ad, but doesn’t necessarily want an ad for an Indian airline to look like that.

Similarly, tourism ads can’t look like they promote the country as a sex tourism destination. The perception has to be that it’s all about fantasy (even if it isn’t).

So what’s the takeaway? While sex may sell everywhere, it sells differently depending on where you are in the world. But the real story is still “same, same but different,” because the motivation underneath it all remains universal.

In fact, when we talk to people about their travel experiences, they tend to forget about smaller trips, such as family visits or weekends away, and focus instead on their bigger, more braggable journeys.  The grey area that smaller trips fall into means they are less likely to be seen as holidays by Australians.

But for the industry, they certainly are.  Travel to visit friends and relatives (VFR), attend events, get away for a weekend or in conjunction with business trips is an injection into the tourism industry, regardless of whether it’s perceived as a holiday or not. It is a source of visitors and a source of dollars.

In previous posts, we have spoken about the latent potential of VFR travel and travel to events as a stimulant to increase domestic travel. The common feature of both these forms of ‘hidden travel’ was that a holiday was not the primary motivator for the trip. For VFR travel the trip is usually conducted out of a necessity to see a loved one and not perceived as a holiday (particularly if a mother-in-law is involved!). In the case of events, the event is the hero, or catalyst for the trip, rather than the desire to take a holiday.

However, both have the power to help people reconnect, whether it be with family or friends, childhood memories or an iconic/ favourite destination. This sense of reconnection is one of the most powerful drivers behind Australians travelling at home. At TNS, we believe there is significant opportunity for the tourism industry in stimulating these types of travel. For example, providing ideas of potential activities to enjoy with relatives will help to change the dreaded sense of ‘what am I going to do with them’ to an opportunity to show off your hometown and see it through new eyes. Building happy memories of such occasions clearly means that there will be a greater willingness and engagement in repeating them more often.

Events have the power to prompt us to re-evaluate how we feel about a home town or destination. They can invoke fond memories and change the mood of a city or landmark.  One recent event that helped residents and visitors reconnect with their city is Vivid – Sydney’s festival of light, music and ideas which has become Sydney’s major festival in winter and is an annual fixture on the NSW Events Calendar.

Initial estimates indicated that over 400,000 people attended Vivid Sydney this year, compared with about 320,000 last year and 200,000 in its first run.  The music component of the festival, Vivid LIVE, sold more than 35,000 tickets, generating $2.3 million at the Opera House box office, and the ideas component of the event – creative industry events and conferences – lured people from overseas to Sydney.

Research we conducted in the first year of the event showed that the theme of reconnection was strong. The Sydneysiders we spoke to expressed pleasure at having rediscovered their city as well as a sense of pride. A number commented that the walk had brought them to parts of the city they had never visited or not visited for many years, reminding them just how fantastic they were. Instead of being the exclusive domain of tourists, these areas were very much part of Sydney again. In addition to a desire to come back to these areas, festival-goers expressed a desire to share them. Sydneysiders commented that the reaction of an outsider visiting the city would be “this must be the best city in the world”. The sense of reconnection even extended to those who visit the Rocks and Circular Quay every day – a typical comment was that they were seeing their workplace or ferry stop with fresh eyes.

Other events in the past have displayed a similar transformative power for the love of a city. The Sydney 2000 Olympics, Sydney New Year’s Eve, and the nation-wide support enjoyed by Australia Day are examples.

But just as they have the power to reinvigorate the way we feel about a destination, our Domesticate^TM research showed that events have the ability to damage it as well. Getting the basics wrong can breed disaffection. Toilets, food and transport are the areas where travellers see events falling down most commonly.  These basic factors are crucial to the enjoyment of the event and are least likely to be forgiven if things go wrong.

The pride that people can feel when their home town puts on a show represents an opportunity to tap into residents as advocates of local events amongst their interstate friends and families. Events provide a job for people to enjoy time with friends and relatives, and give them a reason to want to come back. Sydney, for example, is somewhere many Australians have been. When weighing up potential destinations, many would choose somewhere new over a return visit. What Vivid Sydney has done for people in this mindset, is given them a reason to come back – a chance to see Sydney in a different light.

Events can make or break a destination. Leveraging their power to stimulate more domestic travel is about positioning Australian destinations in the new light events can shed on them. Reconnection must be kept at the heart when communicating offers linked with events – it is a tool we can use to fight the emotive appeal of overseas destinations to keep more Australians at home.

From their roots as messaging services, social-networks have rapidly expanded to encompass all kinds of functionalities: chat, gaming, events, blogging and more. Facebook has for years been the world’s largest photo-sharing site, while social video is the fastest-growing corner of the web.

In fact, photo and video are Facebook’s “killer apps”, whose success has come at the expense of standalone photo-sharing sites, which have seen their usage plateau or decline in Facebook’s wake.

I am reminded of Microsoft back in the days when it bundled IE with Windows and quickly killed off Netscape. Microsoft and Facebook have both built their success on building platforms that aggregate functionality and create a network-effect which attracts more users and raises barriers to competition. Nowadays Facebook’s proposition rather resembles that of Windows; offering a full array of information, communication and entertainment services. It’s no surprise that while Google still has more unique users, Facebook has surpassed its rival in terms of total time spent.

Just as Microsoft attracted criticism for allegedly monopolistic practices, Facebook has been subject to high-profile scrutiny around how it handles its users’ data. People are inevitably sceptical of the motives of companies that are so ruthlessly successful, yet the technology industry has always been about finding the core idea that generates a virtuous circle.

The core idea underpinning social-networks – that your contact-list is the ideal foundation for a consumer cloud – is redefining traditional categories and boundaries. Is it an application, a site, a network, or an operating-system? How about “ecosystem”? One thing is clear: Facebook, LinkedIn and their ilk are becoming increasingly horizontal, and increasingly are capturing a lion’s share of consumer attention and consumer equity.

The ability of the discounted daily deal to tap into both the power of the ‘crowd’ and today’s pervasive mindset of thrift has set the sector up to continue its meteoric rise, in spite of flagging consumer confidence. 

It seems getting consumers to open their wallets is as simple as offering a hefty discount and making them feel clever for saving 80% on 100% of the money they wouldn’t have spent to begin with. Unfortunately for Australian retailers, this is far from simple to put into practice.

But while group buying is nothing less than a juggernaut – according to Telsyte, Groupon Australia grew 1,356% in the past quarter – it is not yet living up to its promise. It’s the talented youngster, still to knuckle down and realise its potential.

Only one-quarter of the Australian population is signed up to a group buying site. Despite its high profile amongst savvy consumers and the low cost of entry for startups, few (apart from Nine Entertainment’s/ Microsoft’s Cudo) have invested in above the line advertising.  Forty per cent of Australians still haven’t heard of group buying sites and a further 33% are aware but yet to sign up.

The profile of those who have been hooked is dominated by 35-49 year-old females.  Males, Gen Y and Baby Boomers have not joined the stampede to the same extent.

Engagement amongst men who have signed up is significantly lower than females – more have unsubscribed from the daily emails and more claim to be bored with the type of deals on offer.  This stands to reason, with the deals dominated by health, beauty and travel, which fall into the traditional female domain of leisure shopping.

And the daily emails these businesses send to their subscribers polarise their audience – half (49 per cent) find the deals to lack personal relevance, while the rest (43 per cent) look forward to receiving them.

So while the sector has been phenomenally successful so far – 2.6 million deals were sold in quarter 2 of 2011 alone – it is yet to put into practice basic elements of segmentation and direct mail targeting.

Aside from niche operators, group buying sites make little effort to send relevant deals to their customers.  The market operates in a deal rather than data-driven manner, bombarding its subscriber base with offers of variable relevance.

Few of the 100 plus operators collect data on their subscriber base, let alone use it.  They send the same email to everyone, flinging bikini wax deals at men and family holiday offers to singles.

Imagine how successful group buying businesses could be if, instead of indiscriminately emailing subscribers, they tailored offers to their audience. All of a sudden half their subscribers would no longer be ignoring their emails. Each communication would not reach as many subscribers, but the conversion amongst those it did reach would skyrocket.

With analysts tipping that many in the crowded market will fold, ultimate success in group buying will come to those who knuckle down and deliver deals that their subscribers want, each and every time.

Some departments are already using digital with success –Brisbane City Council used Facebook to reach flood-affected residents with immediate updates and the Defence Force runs live ‘chat to an Air Force Pilot’ discussions on Facebook to assist with recruiting.

These type of information- and service-based interactions dovetail with a digital approach and show high demand from the public.  Around one in two Australians prefer to access government information and services via digital avenues.  And there is strong interest in access via mobile avenues also, with 74% interested in interactive government information on the go.  Public transport apps, payment services and claim forms are examples of how digital is making interacting with the government easier for Australians.

But for behaviour change campaigns, the tools of education and persuasion are less straightforward to deploy via digital means.  When it comes to online behaviour, Australians vary greatly. With the diversity of people who now partake in online activity, there are a range of drivers and motivations as users seek to fulfill their needs and interests via the internet.

Before embarking on a digital social marketing campaign, you need to understand how and why Australians are using the internet and social media.  Our recent Digital Life study found that in Australia, with our high internet penetration, the online population is one of the most diverse in the world – it is older, and consequently less sophisticated in how it uses online media.  When looking at online behaviour, attitudes and, importantly, the drivers behind online behaviour, we discovered six different types of internet users in Australia. Out of these, the four key segments to note are:

1. Functionals: users who access the internet to perform tasks such as emailing, reading news, checking weather and personal administration. They are less interested in social networking, and are not driven by the need to express themselves.

2. Networkers: users who access the internet to build and maintain relationships, mostly via social networking sites, predominantly as a way to keep in touch rather than a means of self expression.

3. Knowledge Seekers: users who access the internet to gain knowledge, information and educate themselves about the world.

4. Influencers: users who access the internet for almost all parts of their lives, they are heavily involved in social networking, blogging, mobile internet and online shopping. They like to share opinions and will contribute to blogs and other user-generated content.

There is a natural hierarchy to these segments, as we’d expect, with digital proficiency increasing from Functional to Influencer. The more savvy segments are generally younger. In fact, only 16% of Functionals are under 35, compared to 79% of Influencers. This is important to remember, as many digital initiatives and campaigns are skewing towards the Influencer segment.

The implication of this array of distinct, different patterns of behaviour is that if you are targeting a mass audience, you need diversity your strategy. Or it may mean that you don’t even use digital strategies at all. If your target audience is made up of Functionals, there may be no gain in allocating budget to digital campaigns beyond ensuring you have a friendly, easy-to-use website. They’re simply not active enough online to warrant it. This is the case for many departments, especially for those communicating to an older, less digitally savvy group.

With all the focus on social media and apps, it is easy to lose sight on your website.  One of the key findings from Digital Life was the importance of the organisation’s own website as a source of information and influence.  After looking at the usage of different information sources during the interaction cycle, the official website emerged as the most important source of information in the decision contemplation process. Unfortunately for us in the public sector, Australian government websites are not always winning approval from the public.

With one in two of the opinion that government websites in general are confusing and difficult to navigate, there is some work to do for some departments to capitalise on the power of a website for delivering information.  It is important to ensure that websites get the attention they deserve and are updated in line with campaign roll outs.  It is a key tool for communicating with all digital user types, and the only tool that is effective for the less savvy digital users.

If the segment of the public you are seeking to influence sits within the Networker digital segment, then a social media campaign would be a useful way to connect with them.  A social media presence aimed at achieving behaviour change may focus on engaging Networkers in a support group environment, creating discussion to educate the public about a topic or using video to convey information.

If the target audience of a campaign sits in the Influencer category, an app would be a good tactic.  But make sure whatever you do in mobile is linked to the journey of behaviour change contemplation and trial.  The current Federal Government Swap It campaign aimed at promoting healthy lifestyles is an example of an approach that successfully integrates both above and below the line approaches.  The Swap It Don’t Stop It app enables users to select ideas for swapping unhealthy behaviours with healthy behaviours, set reminders and monitor progress.

When the early adopters of the behaviour change (first to contemplate, first to take action) are at the same time in the Influencer segment, then using social media and online communities can be a powerful and persuasive tool to include in the social marketing strategy.

The key to integrating digital into social marketing campaigns is to only do so if there is a clear reason for doing it.  Don’t just have a Facebook page for the sake of it – the group you are targeting may not be active online or it may not be a relevant space to address the behaviour in question (for example, the national sexual health campaign targets a group active in social media but is not a suitable topic for Facebook engagement).  To execute digital strategies effectively, the behaviour change journey and online behaviour of the target group across digital mediums needs to match. To leverage the advantages of digital, we need to look at the public through a digital lens in order to deliver campaigns to help effect behaviour change.

This and other examples, such as Old Spice, display how today’s fragmented model of influence can have a real impact on brands – positive or negative.  Social media has made word of mouth about brands stronger and faster, throwing an extra element into the mix for tracking brand performance.  Traditional brand tracking programs measuring awareness, consideration and other aspects of brand equity in the offline world no longer tell the full story – they fail to capture what is being said about a brand online.

Contemporary model of influence: brands now engaged in a dialogue with consumers

A myriad of monitoring services have emerged that measure social media performance, ranging from free tools to full service analysis and reporting.  The higher-end tools are designed to provide insight into how a brand is tracking online, by combining automation with human analysis of the data to provide greater interpretation.

The cost and time benefits associated with social media monitoring have led brand managers to ask if they can replace traditional techniques with the approach.  There are a number of reasons why the answer is no.  Social media monitoring is a great complement to brand tracking programs, but it is not, and will never be, a replacement.

Limitations of social media monitoring

The strengths of social media monitoring are well documented, but there are a number of limitations that need to be considered before incorporating it into a brand tracking program.

1. Only a sub-set of the population are active online

Social media monitoring tools measure the online population only, which in Australia is dominated by a vocal minority.  Our annual Digital Life study estimates that only 22% of our online population creates content on a weekly basis, which makes us quite voyeuristic compared to the global proportion of content creators of 37%.

There is also the fact that consumers are more likely to express their opinions when those opinions are strongly held.  In some categories, such as tourism for example, the ranters and ravers can have a big impact on overall sentiment in social networks.  What is being said, and who is saying it, as a general rule are not reflective of the general population.

Relationship with user-generated content

2. Social media metrics are not predictive of market performance

During last year’s federal election, we tracked share of voice and sentiment associated with the parties, leaders and key issues across social media and online news media.  Our analysis revealed that Labor and Julia Gillard held a significant lead over the Liberals and Tony Abbot in terms of positive sentiment in the week leading up to the election.  Yet when the votes were tallied, the lead Gillard and Labor had enjoyed in social media did not translate into votes.

Social media sentiment from the week before the election compared to the final Federal Election result

Once again this points to the representativeness of the sample – those who were expressing their opinions online were only a sub-set of the population.  But it also points to the fact that social media can be used to predict some things but not others.  In this case, sentiment was not a predictor of voting behaviour.

In other research we’ve conducted, we’ve noted that the quantity of online chatter does not appear to impact on sales figures.  However, the saying that it takes years to build a brand and a moment to destroy it rings true, with negative sentiment more strongly correlated with (negative) purchase behaviour.

The snowball effect of social media also has an interesting impact in that while purchase intent (survey measure) does not predict sales, when people discuss their intention to purchase online it is a strong indicator of sales. This implies that the effect of ‘buzz’ or a belief that ‘everyone else is doing it’ affects behaviour.

3. Automated measures and human interpretation aren’t perfect

At the moment, social media metrics are not very sophisticated and, while they are usually filtered by human analysis, they generally rely on automation.  The power of the linguistic engines that conduct the analysis remains somewhat limited.

Across the jobs we’ve conducted, typically only 35% of cases are definitively classified by sentiment, while the rest are classified as uncertain or neutral comments.

Even when the human eye passes across the data, the analysis process is far from infallible. Nuances in communication, such as sarcasm, are common in social media and easily lost in translation. Measures such as sentiment – or even identifying a conversation as relevant or not -  are therefore not as reliable as validated survey measures.

Social media monitoring analysis process

4. Different horses for different courses – talking points and buzz volume varies by category

In some categories people are more active than others.  For example, chatter around toilet rolls is virtually non-existent, while buzz around tablet computers is through the roof.  For categories that don’t rate a mention in the social space, social media monitoring is not going to work unless they have an Old Spice moment.

Similarly, the discussion in some categories is dominated by issues, not brands.  The confectionary segment is one such area, issues of health and obesity dominating the discussion, rather than mentions of the brands themselves.

Incorporating social media monitoring into brand tracking programs

The function of brand tracking is to answer two fundamental questions:

1.       How am I doing? (Evaluation)

2.       What should I do about it? (Prediction and explanation)

Given that social media monitoring is observational in nature and the metrics gathered are typically one-dimensional, it is currently most useful as an explanation tool and is limited in its ability to evaluate and predict.

However, it can be a valuable supplement to the brand tracking mix, by providing additional diagnostics to the program.  It can add depth in the following ways:

• In an era where social media makes crises and hoaxes stronger and faster, it is great as an early detection system.
• It can be used as a listening diagnostic to provide greater depth and context around key metrics.  For example, if there is a decline in trust, social media can be analysed to identify why.  It can provide qualitative insights into what’s happening in the market.
• It can be used to monitor leading consumers – early adopters or opinion leaders – to ascertain which direction the market will head next.
• Opinions and other findings from traditional brand tracking can be matched to social media sentiment scores to understand the relationship content creators have with a brand.  Using our Digital Lifestyle segmentation, this link can be made, to help brands understand how they can influence their online influencers.
• Social media is predictive of some measures.  Sentiment is the main measure it can be used to understand, and while positive sentiment does not always correlated to behaviour, negative sentiment usually does.  It can also be used to tease out themes about a brand and analyse how it is performing against these themes.  Quality, design, efficacy and service are common themes evaluated by social media monitoring.

As brands increasingly become part of social networks, the need to add a social element to the tracking mix will grow. While not every brand will replicate an Old Spice moment, most will be the subject of conversations online in some form.  So while it would be foolhardy to entirely supplant a brand tracking program with social media monitoring, it is incumbent upon contemporary brand managers to keep at least one finger – and maybe more – on the social pulse of their brand.

With tens of thousands of records in our innovation database we have a clear understanding of what is required. Let’s think though about what an innovative product is trying to achieve. It needs to offer something different, and it needs to make your customers want to buy it. The innovation needs to offer a unique benefit that will entice consumers to switch and then stay with that product rather than switching back.

If it’s genuinely different but nobody wants it, you have an obvious problem. If people want it but it’s not offering anything new, you also have a problem: your innovation will either fade from view quickly or start cannibalising what you’re already offering. We call these crucial factors trial and uniqueness. When an opportunity is discovered, we investigate dimensions of the new idea which stimulate both trial and uniqueness. The x factor we are looking must tick both boxes.

Based on findings from tens of thousands of innovation projects, there is only one such super-dimension: excitement. Other dimensions usually only stimulate one of the two responses, such as likeability which tends to push up trial, but has no real bearing on perceptions of uniqueness. Excitement though can motivate trial and create the impression that the product is unlike any other. It’s the factor that gets people lining up around the block and turns consumers into fans.

But how does this work for categories that don’t traditionally lend themselves to excitement? The rule still applies, as to generate excitement the product only has to offer a unique and meaningful benefit over its competitors.The product itself doesn’t have to be inherently exciting in order to generate excitement within its category. For example, if you’re making washing powder, it just has to be more exciting than the other washing powders on the market – it doesn’t have to be more exciting than the iPhone!

Of course it’s all very well to say:” be exciting” – but harder for products to actually do it.

The research we conduct across the innovation pipeline – from insight to launch – tells us what happens to exciting ideas later on in the innovation process. By tracking the diffusion of new launches, we can see that exciting products are naturally far more likely to attract good word of mouth. We can also see that products which get good word of mouth are a lot more likely to be trialled by consumers. So excitement, as you’d expect, leads to talkability and consumer buzz.

The interesting thing is that, again, it doesn’t matter if you’re selling a car or a tube of toothpaste: the word of mouth effect is genuine and observable across every category. While word of mouth may come less naturally in low involvement categories, its impact when it does manifest is just as strong.

So how do ideas get to be exciting in the first place? This really does vary across categories. It depends what your consumers want and need and how well those needs are met. What we believe happens is this: a new idea offers a consumer a definable benefit (or several benefits) based on the needs it fulfils. But generally it also presents the consumer with some barriers – for example, it may cost too much, not work in practice or suffer from perception issues. These benefits and barriers can be practical or emotional, but if the nett sum of the benefits exceed that of the barriers, you have a success.

With an exciting idea, the gap between the benefits and the barriers is unexpectedly big. Maybe a benefit is so huge it outweighs all possible barriers – an anti-aging cream that actually works, for instance. The new product is answering an unmet need which the consumer previously did not think could be resolved. That’s where consumer excitement comes from, and we believe that’s one of the missing pieces of the innovation jigsaw.