The segment about Dr. Rapaille’s three step technique to find out the true wants and desires of customers was very interesting. I had not really thought that market researchers took such a deep look into the psyche of the consumer. It was also very interesting that Dr. Rapaillle had a background in psychology of autistic children. He said that his background helped him in consumer research because he was used to finding out the thoughts of people that couldn’t talk. He belivs that consumers as a whole are like autistic children—we don’t articulate what we really want.
Dr. Rapaille’s technique was used in order to decode human behavior. He said that if a consumer is placed into a regular focus group in which they were asked direct questions about why they liked the product, what they thought of when they were told different words, and so forth, they wouldn’t actually be able to articulate what they really felt. Consumers don’t usually say why they really did buy a certain product. Therefore, Dr. Rapaille delves into the human unconscious to try to break past reason to the “primal core”—where the real reason for purchasing lies. In the first stage of his technique, he just asks regular focus group type questions. For example, he asked them what they thought of when they read the word “luxury”. He says that he only goes through this step to get the subjects warmed up and to get them conformable with the process. After this session, he lets the subjects take a break. When they return, he asks them to tell a story as if they were a four year old from another planet. He does this in order to get the subjects into a different mindset. He wants them to stray away from reason and stop being logical. At this point, they don’t understand what they are doing anymore as this is not a typical focus group question. However, Dr. Rapaille wants his subjects to be confused. The subjects again break for a moment and when they return, there are no more chairs in the room. This again serves to disorient them. He then tells them he wants them to go back to the very first time they experienced luxury. He turns off the lights and then turns them back on in order to simulate the subjects going to sleep and waking up. He believes that when you wake up, you remember things from your past you might have buried before. They then write down these memories of their first experience with luxury.
Dr. Rapaille does all of these odd things in order to discover the reptilian hot buttons that propels us into action. He believes that this reptilian code always win because we are so driven by our primal core. Once he is able to discover the code, he is able to share it with their clients whom believe in his advice and think that discovering the primal desires that drives consumers is the only way to achieve success in their products. Unfortunately the video doesn’t say what Dr. Rapaille finally discovered in his attempt to find the code for luxury. It said that various marketers of high end products had paid a great deal in order to be given his advice, so they couldn’t release the information.
After learning about the marketer’s vision for Song Airlines, I was excited. I would love to fly an airline with organic food (instead of the “meat” other airlines sometimes serve). I am a huge fan of Kate Spade, so flying with flight attendants in Kate Spade uniforms would make me feel like was part of something so chic. Thus, I immediately googled the airline and was sad to learn that it had failed. However, after thinking about it, I realized that I was probably a small majority of the population that would have really enjoyed the airline. The markets said they were targeting a specific type of woman, however, I think it was wrong to base an airline of only a woman. This is because many women travel with their families. Therefore, the husband and children are not going to appreciate the stylish uniform of the flight attendants and the children do not even know what organic means. In my research, I also learned that you had to pay for the meals—the men wouldn’t be too happy about that. Thus, I could see how Song had trouble being successful, mostly when it was in competition with JetBlue. I think that JetBlue’s vision is appealing to a larger number of people. It still has the feeling of being modern with their logo, interiors of their planes, the interesting snacks they serve, and the ability to watch satellite TV in the sky. However, it also gives the feeling that is it efficient and is not too feminine that it discourages male travelers. Overall, I thought that Song’s vision was interesting however there target market just wasn’t big enough.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Monday, March 9, 2009
Malcolm Gladwell and Gaining Insights
I really enjoyed reading the excerpt from Malcolm Gladwell’s Blink because it didn’t just lay out rules of how to conduct market research, but he delved into the things we should be weary of when doing so. It is a human tendency to get so caught up in what task is at hand that you forget to look at the ways you are executing the task poorly. Through reading the excerpt, I gleaned two main lessons about how to better gain insights with your customers.
The first lesson Gladwell teaches is that there can be problems with the outcomes of market research that result from the context of the research. One of the examples he uses to illustrate this point is the Pepsi Challenge taste test of the 1980s. By just looking at the result of this taste test, market researchers believed that Pepsi was more appealing to consumers than Coke. However, there was a problem with the context of this taste test. First, the test only allowed the taster to consume a small portion of a can. This didn’t allow the taster to decide on whether he or she liked the overall taste of the entire serving (which was important because consuming a full can a Pepsi is too sweet for some). Second, the test was done in a testing facility, which was not the context a person would normally be consuming a soda. Gladwell stresses that the contexts of market research really can affect the outcome.
One way I can see that this lesson used is in performing market research on a personal item such as toilet paper. If a person is stopped in a grocery store and asked to decide which toilet paper brand is softer and more durable if given two comparable brands, the results are probably not going to be predictive of the preferences of the total consumer market. The main reason for this is that the context of the test is affecting the outcome. First, the consumer is asked to feel with their hands the texture of the toilet paper. The feel of the toilet paper on your hands is not going to be the same as on your rear end. Furthermore, your hands may favor a quality of the toilet paper that your bottom may not. Secondly, the testing is in the store not in a person’s home space. The location of the test will definitely change the outcome. In this case, market researchers can begin their research with in store tests, but must be aware of the context. I think it is important that they then perform tests where they actually let a testers use the toilet paper in their home to gain a better insight to their true preferences.
A second lesson from Gladwell’s article is to not always trust a consumer’s first impression because it is human nature to sometimes dislike the “unusual”. Gladwell gives the example of the Aeron chair to describe this lesson. When the chair was first placed in a market research test, consumers disliked the chair, calling it very ugly. However, it eventually became one of the best selling chairs in history. The reason for this initial consumer response was because the chair’s design was very unique and unlike anything the consumers had seen before. Gladwell suggests we should take a consumer’s first reaction to a unique product with a grain of salt as they often confuse the shock of the newness of the product with dislike. I believe human tendency comes from the fact that people don’t like change even though it may be best for them. Thus, as marketers, we must convince our customers that the change really is for their own good.
One way I think this lesson could be applied to a current product is with new lines of cars. Cars are products that consumers keep for a long period of time. Thus, they get used to their design and feel. When their old car gets run down but they were happy with the experience of the car model, they often go back and buy the new version of their previous car. However, car designs often change after a few years. Thus, many consumers are initially not going to like the new design because it is different. For example, my mom had owned the boxy model of the Suburban for about seven years. When she went to buy a new Suburban, the design had become much more rounded. At first, she hated it. However, with time she began to like it and even began to see that it was a better looking car than her old one.
Overall, the lesson Gladwell is trying to teach us is to delve deeper into our product research. We can’t just focus on one aspect of the product or test in only one way. We have to form well rounded ideas that draw from all different aspects of the consumer experience.
The first lesson Gladwell teaches is that there can be problems with the outcomes of market research that result from the context of the research. One of the examples he uses to illustrate this point is the Pepsi Challenge taste test of the 1980s. By just looking at the result of this taste test, market researchers believed that Pepsi was more appealing to consumers than Coke. However, there was a problem with the context of this taste test. First, the test only allowed the taster to consume a small portion of a can. This didn’t allow the taster to decide on whether he or she liked the overall taste of the entire serving (which was important because consuming a full can a Pepsi is too sweet for some). Second, the test was done in a testing facility, which was not the context a person would normally be consuming a soda. Gladwell stresses that the contexts of market research really can affect the outcome.
One way I can see that this lesson used is in performing market research on a personal item such as toilet paper. If a person is stopped in a grocery store and asked to decide which toilet paper brand is softer and more durable if given two comparable brands, the results are probably not going to be predictive of the preferences of the total consumer market. The main reason for this is that the context of the test is affecting the outcome. First, the consumer is asked to feel with their hands the texture of the toilet paper. The feel of the toilet paper on your hands is not going to be the same as on your rear end. Furthermore, your hands may favor a quality of the toilet paper that your bottom may not. Secondly, the testing is in the store not in a person’s home space. The location of the test will definitely change the outcome. In this case, market researchers can begin their research with in store tests, but must be aware of the context. I think it is important that they then perform tests where they actually let a testers use the toilet paper in their home to gain a better insight to their true preferences.
A second lesson from Gladwell’s article is to not always trust a consumer’s first impression because it is human nature to sometimes dislike the “unusual”. Gladwell gives the example of the Aeron chair to describe this lesson. When the chair was first placed in a market research test, consumers disliked the chair, calling it very ugly. However, it eventually became one of the best selling chairs in history. The reason for this initial consumer response was because the chair’s design was very unique and unlike anything the consumers had seen before. Gladwell suggests we should take a consumer’s first reaction to a unique product with a grain of salt as they often confuse the shock of the newness of the product with dislike. I believe human tendency comes from the fact that people don’t like change even though it may be best for them. Thus, as marketers, we must convince our customers that the change really is for their own good.
One way I think this lesson could be applied to a current product is with new lines of cars. Cars are products that consumers keep for a long period of time. Thus, they get used to their design and feel. When their old car gets run down but they were happy with the experience of the car model, they often go back and buy the new version of their previous car. However, car designs often change after a few years. Thus, many consumers are initially not going to like the new design because it is different. For example, my mom had owned the boxy model of the Suburban for about seven years. When she went to buy a new Suburban, the design had become much more rounded. At first, she hated it. However, with time she began to like it and even began to see that it was a better looking car than her old one.
Overall, the lesson Gladwell is trying to teach us is to delve deeper into our product research. We can’t just focus on one aspect of the product or test in only one way. We have to form well rounded ideas that draw from all different aspects of the consumer experience.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Paper Brainstorm: Barbie
For my paper, I’m planning on writing a case study on the Barbie brand. The reason I’m interested in this topic is because I’ve always loved Barbie and I collected vintage Barbies when I was younger. I’m also very interested in this brand because I think it is one of the best examples of art imitating life. By this I mean that Barbie has been around for 50 years (in fact she just celebrated her 50th birthday) but she is contentiously changing with the times. I’m also interested in the fact that even her occupations and hobbies change based on the status of women change. When she first came about in the 1959, it was not as acceptable for women to be a part of the workforce as it is now. However, as times have changed, there have been Barbie doctors, veterinarians, scuba divers, ect.
Within my paper, I’m going to examine these changes Barbie has undergone over her 50 years of existence. I will look into how Mattel has researched the trends and values of its current customer base and created a Barbie fit for the times. I’m thinking about breaking up the time periods into decades or major social movements. I will also examine how Mattel has positioned Barbie in the market compared to the other toys and try to find out the secret for their great success at making Barbie not just a toy but an iconic figure recognizable to people in every age group and in every country.
Another main part of my paper will be looking at the Barbie brand’s current status. I will examine more thoroughly the current marketing strategies of Barbie and what Mattel is changing to satisfy the needs of the current customer base. For example, I will look at how Barbie is becoming a bit sexier to keep up with kids who are growing up a lot faster than they did 20 years ago. I will also look into how Barbie is competing with new brands of dolls like Bratz. This competition is interesting because for the most part, Barbie has maintained a classy image even though she has gone through edgier phases. On the contrary, Bratz dolls send a completely different message to children (just look at the brand name). Thus, I will examine how Mattel is dealing with this competition as Bratz dolls have been widely popular. Is Mattel going to follow Bratz’s lead and become more like them, or retain their image? Also, because Mattel is currently in a lawsuit with the owner of the Bratz brand, I may look at this too (however, I’m not sure if this will completely flow with the focus of my paper).
Another interesting part of Barbie’s current status in the market is how she is competing with the other types of toys children and tweens are using. When Barbie first started, she was the “it” toy because she was more modern than the cloth baby dolls of the time periods before. However, now kids have so many more options on the types of toys they play with because technology has advanced so much. With the internet, video games, and other high-tech games of today, how will Mattel continue to grab the attention of kids? It seems like it will be a challenge for Mattel to do this as kids are using their imagination less and less as they have access to so many toys that imitate life so well. Are kids in 10 years going to want to play pretend with plastic dolls that can’t even move or speak on their own?
I think I need to narrow my focus down a bit more because I think I will be able to do this better once I’ve researched more. However, I have found one really interesting article in the Wall Street Journal about how Mattel is giving its marketing strategies a makeover for Barbie’s 50th birthday. The article is called “Building an Edgier Barbie to Revive Franchise Sales” and can be found on the Wall Street Journal website.
Within my paper, I’m going to examine these changes Barbie has undergone over her 50 years of existence. I will look into how Mattel has researched the trends and values of its current customer base and created a Barbie fit for the times. I’m thinking about breaking up the time periods into decades or major social movements. I will also examine how Mattel has positioned Barbie in the market compared to the other toys and try to find out the secret for their great success at making Barbie not just a toy but an iconic figure recognizable to people in every age group and in every country.
Another main part of my paper will be looking at the Barbie brand’s current status. I will examine more thoroughly the current marketing strategies of Barbie and what Mattel is changing to satisfy the needs of the current customer base. For example, I will look at how Barbie is becoming a bit sexier to keep up with kids who are growing up a lot faster than they did 20 years ago. I will also look into how Barbie is competing with new brands of dolls like Bratz. This competition is interesting because for the most part, Barbie has maintained a classy image even though she has gone through edgier phases. On the contrary, Bratz dolls send a completely different message to children (just look at the brand name). Thus, I will examine how Mattel is dealing with this competition as Bratz dolls have been widely popular. Is Mattel going to follow Bratz’s lead and become more like them, or retain their image? Also, because Mattel is currently in a lawsuit with the owner of the Bratz brand, I may look at this too (however, I’m not sure if this will completely flow with the focus of my paper).
Another interesting part of Barbie’s current status in the market is how she is competing with the other types of toys children and tweens are using. When Barbie first started, she was the “it” toy because she was more modern than the cloth baby dolls of the time periods before. However, now kids have so many more options on the types of toys they play with because technology has advanced so much. With the internet, video games, and other high-tech games of today, how will Mattel continue to grab the attention of kids? It seems like it will be a challenge for Mattel to do this as kids are using their imagination less and less as they have access to so many toys that imitate life so well. Are kids in 10 years going to want to play pretend with plastic dolls that can’t even move or speak on their own?
I think I need to narrow my focus down a bit more because I think I will be able to do this better once I’ve researched more. However, I have found one really interesting article in the Wall Street Journal about how Mattel is giving its marketing strategies a makeover for Barbie’s 50th birthday. The article is called “Building an Edgier Barbie to Revive Franchise Sales” and can be found on the Wall Street Journal website.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Even the Name Needs a Change...
Like clockwork every year, my sister and I dress up in our most conservative clothes we own, roll our eyes, and jump in the car with our parents to drive to the Petroleum Club for a Christmas time feast with the grandparents. The Petroleum Club is the restaurant/banquet center on the top of skyscraper in Houston. The name says it all—it is a club for current and ex-oil businessmen. It started as a club where men in the 1950’s could take their associates and clients out for a nice business lunch or woo them at a fancy dinner party. The decor is classic but a little old and the food is fancy but boring. My grandparents love it though. Why? Because it is exactly the same as it was 30 years ago. It’s the same group of good ‘ole boys on the board and their favorite part is there is a dance floor. Of course this is not the dance floors of my generation, it is very PG. There is always a man with a synthesizer playing some sort of waltz or foxtrot, or if things are getting really spicy, he may play a samba. All the old ladies set down their fur coats and join their husbands on the floor.
The majority of the clubs members are at least legally seniors, however there are a few younger ones. I believe this is only because they want the ability to kiss up to their bosses. Thus, this type of business club is only really liked by a (sadly) dying generation. The generation now is used to a plethora of choices for their clubs, restaurants, bars, social activities and so on. A young business man or woman now with newly disposable income does not want to pay a club fee every month to go to a restaurant that serves the same steak and buttery potatoes every night. This generation wants to try out all the new, hip restaurants. This generation is willing to stand in line for an hour to get into the hottest club. And most importantly, this generation (again, sadly) does not know how to do the fox trot.
So where does that leave the Petroleum Club and other social clubs like it? They must change with the times and market a new kind of club. However, this will not be easy as the club has been doing the same thing for the last 40 years. Also, I think the management of the Petroleum Club is not even aware that their customer base is rapidly declining. It is common for business to be so caught up in how much they like their product, they forget to really check into their customers and see if they are satisfied.
As a member of the younger generation myself, I have a couple suggestions for the club. First, they need to change the decor. I’m not suggesting a completed overhaul that would leave the club looking like a wannabe hipster establishment. I’m just suggesting that it remove the gaudy gold and red theme and create something a little younger. Also, they need to change the menu and change it often. My grandparents generation objects to choices and always talks about returning to the good ‘ole days when there was only one type of laundry detergent and the neighborhood butcher picked out their cuts of meat for them. On the contrary, the new generation does not like to be stuck in a rut. The Petroleum clubs needs to offer more innovative menus that change often and cater to the newbie member’s taste buds. Thirdly, they need to create a different line of events for its members. Instead of dance club parties, they could host wine tasting events and cater golf tournaments. Finally, they need to slowly try to market themselves in a new way. It’s important that they advertise that they are not just a stuffy club for men of ages past. Hopefully, the management of the Petroleum Club can see the changes coming their way and can see the big picture.
The majority of the clubs members are at least legally seniors, however there are a few younger ones. I believe this is only because they want the ability to kiss up to their bosses. Thus, this type of business club is only really liked by a (sadly) dying generation. The generation now is used to a plethora of choices for their clubs, restaurants, bars, social activities and so on. A young business man or woman now with newly disposable income does not want to pay a club fee every month to go to a restaurant that serves the same steak and buttery potatoes every night. This generation wants to try out all the new, hip restaurants. This generation is willing to stand in line for an hour to get into the hottest club. And most importantly, this generation (again, sadly) does not know how to do the fox trot.
So where does that leave the Petroleum Club and other social clubs like it? They must change with the times and market a new kind of club. However, this will not be easy as the club has been doing the same thing for the last 40 years. Also, I think the management of the Petroleum Club is not even aware that their customer base is rapidly declining. It is common for business to be so caught up in how much they like their product, they forget to really check into their customers and see if they are satisfied.
As a member of the younger generation myself, I have a couple suggestions for the club. First, they need to change the decor. I’m not suggesting a completed overhaul that would leave the club looking like a wannabe hipster establishment. I’m just suggesting that it remove the gaudy gold and red theme and create something a little younger. Also, they need to change the menu and change it often. My grandparents generation objects to choices and always talks about returning to the good ‘ole days when there was only one type of laundry detergent and the neighborhood butcher picked out their cuts of meat for them. On the contrary, the new generation does not like to be stuck in a rut. The Petroleum clubs needs to offer more innovative menus that change often and cater to the newbie member’s taste buds. Thirdly, they need to create a different line of events for its members. Instead of dance club parties, they could host wine tasting events and cater golf tournaments. Finally, they need to slowly try to market themselves in a new way. It’s important that they advertise that they are not just a stuffy club for men of ages past. Hopefully, the management of the Petroleum Club can see the changes coming their way and can see the big picture.
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Too many choices?
The Barry Schwarz pod cast discusses how our modern world is significantly different than the world of previous generations because of the vast amount of choices available to everyone. One of his examples was that before there was only one type of jean, but now you have boot cut, straight leg, zipper, buttons, stone wash, acid wash, ect. He notes that while some choice is good, many choices are not necessarily good. The two negative effects are that these numerous choices produce paralysis rather than liberation, meaning that there are so many choices that people find it hard to choose at all. Also, even if we manage to make a choice, we will end up unhappy with our choice because we can imagine that we might have made a better choice. This idea relates strongly to consumers making decisions about products and services. If we go into an upscale department store to purchase a watch, we are faced with hundreds of options. There are sports watches, fine watches, medium quality watches. There are many different brands with many different styles. We must also choice whether we want gold, silver, a combination, or if we want to add precious stones. Often a consumer will look at all the watches but not be able to make a decision because there are too many choices. From what I have witnessed, people usually will leave and come back to make a decision. I believe this is especially true for when purchasing expensive items like watches because there is more money at stake. When a mother is purchasing diapers for her baby she may have to spend more time looking at all the diaper brands before choosing. However, she will probably not walk away from the decision because diapers are something she really needs right at that moment. She will not get so overwhelmed that she will leave and not purchase the diapers at all because in this case, she is not investing a large amount of money in her purchase. Therefore, in this case, I do not believe that Schwarz’s theory applies completely. I believe that only in situations where a lot of money or time is at stake will people perhaps avoid making a choice if they are presented with too many choices.
I do, however, agree with Schwarz's theory that we have so many choices, we often end up less satisfied with the option we chose. The California Management Review stages that people don’t often come into a store with a clear idea of what they want, even when they have a clear idea of the characteristics of the alternatives. Instead, people often construct their preferences when faced with a specific purchase decision. With this assumption in place, it is easy to see how Schwarz’ theory applies to consumer purchases. Without a clear idea of what they want, a consumer will have to personally choose a product out of the variety of choices. The choice is completely theirs so they will have to accept the responsibility if their chosen products isn’t perfect.
So how can marketers get past this dilemma to satisfy their customers? The role of a market is to discover and satisfy. The most general need marketers can satisfy is happiness. Therefore, is crucial that marketers avoid giving consumers too many choices. If they give too many choices, a consumer may be too overwhelmed to even make a choice that could possibly bring them the happiness they need. Even if they do manage to make a choice, with too many options, they will regret the choice they make and therefore will again miss out of the happiness. Large superstores, for example, should then avoid giving too many options of products and perhaps look at market segments and decide for them what they believe the best product would be for each segment. Perhaps they could have one diaper for the money conscious mom, one for the quality seeking mom, and one for the mom seeking a good combination.
One time in my life when I experienced the paradox of choice was when I was choosing a college. Back in my parent’s time, if you were lucky enough to go to college you just went to your state college, no questions asked. Students at the very top of the social rank may go to ivy leagues, but it was very rare that a Texan would go to the University of Virginia. However, when it came time for me to apply to college, I was given an endless list of possible college to apply too. Not only was I needing to choose what state to go to college in but I had the option of liberal arts colleges, colleges with excellent business schools, colleges with great social scenes, small colleges, all-women colleges, and just about everything in between. It was very overwhelming and I put off applying to the colleges because I didn’t know where to start. I believe that had I not had parents and an upbringing that greatly valued a college education, I may have even given up all together because the task of choosing seemed too daunting. However, I did eventually choose to apply to 6 different colleges and I ended up getting into 5 of them. Then, I had the task of choosing which of the five. I eventually chose the University of Texas; however, I faced the fear of choosing the wrong college. Because I had so many options, I knew that perhaps this college wasn’t the perfect one for me. I spent my entire freshman year examining my experience and comparing it to my friends at other colleges. Whenever something was unsatisfactory, I would fear that I had made the wrong choice even though overall I was really enjoying UT. Thus, although it was great that I was given more options of colleges because this meant that I could probably find a college that best suited me, I still was not able to be completely satisfied with my choice.
I do, however, agree with Schwarz's theory that we have so many choices, we often end up less satisfied with the option we chose. The California Management Review stages that people don’t often come into a store with a clear idea of what they want, even when they have a clear idea of the characteristics of the alternatives. Instead, people often construct their preferences when faced with a specific purchase decision. With this assumption in place, it is easy to see how Schwarz’ theory applies to consumer purchases. Without a clear idea of what they want, a consumer will have to personally choose a product out of the variety of choices. The choice is completely theirs so they will have to accept the responsibility if their chosen products isn’t perfect.
So how can marketers get past this dilemma to satisfy their customers? The role of a market is to discover and satisfy. The most general need marketers can satisfy is happiness. Therefore, is crucial that marketers avoid giving consumers too many choices. If they give too many choices, a consumer may be too overwhelmed to even make a choice that could possibly bring them the happiness they need. Even if they do manage to make a choice, with too many options, they will regret the choice they make and therefore will again miss out of the happiness. Large superstores, for example, should then avoid giving too many options of products and perhaps look at market segments and decide for them what they believe the best product would be for each segment. Perhaps they could have one diaper for the money conscious mom, one for the quality seeking mom, and one for the mom seeking a good combination.
One time in my life when I experienced the paradox of choice was when I was choosing a college. Back in my parent’s time, if you were lucky enough to go to college you just went to your state college, no questions asked. Students at the very top of the social rank may go to ivy leagues, but it was very rare that a Texan would go to the University of Virginia. However, when it came time for me to apply to college, I was given an endless list of possible college to apply too. Not only was I needing to choose what state to go to college in but I had the option of liberal arts colleges, colleges with excellent business schools, colleges with great social scenes, small colleges, all-women colleges, and just about everything in between. It was very overwhelming and I put off applying to the colleges because I didn’t know where to start. I believe that had I not had parents and an upbringing that greatly valued a college education, I may have even given up all together because the task of choosing seemed too daunting. However, I did eventually choose to apply to 6 different colleges and I ended up getting into 5 of them. Then, I had the task of choosing which of the five. I eventually chose the University of Texas; however, I faced the fear of choosing the wrong college. Because I had so many options, I knew that perhaps this college wasn’t the perfect one for me. I spent my entire freshman year examining my experience and comparing it to my friends at other colleges. Whenever something was unsatisfactory, I would fear that I had made the wrong choice even though overall I was really enjoying UT. Thus, although it was great that I was given more options of colleges because this meant that I could probably find a college that best suited me, I still was not able to be completely satisfied with my choice.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
As a member of Generation Y and after reading these articles, I’m not sure if I’m being captured accurately. This may be because I’m a little different than the people described in the articles, but I also believe it is because the term “Generation Y” is too broad of a term. This generation spans many different age groups so I believe it is dangerous for marketers to segment the market just by using the group of people who are the offspring of the baby boomers. Within this Generation Y, there are kids just entering high school to adults that are a lot older than me. Thus, the interests of this generation vary immensely. The freshmen in high school still love the Jonas Brothers and there purchases are probably still guided by their parents. However, my age group is interested in a much larger section of music. This is because my age group is more independent and in the stage where they are trying to be different. Some love rap and hip hop, some love the pop princesses, while others love discovering new independent bands. And then there are people like me who love a little of each. Another part of the Generation Y included people older than me that are starting out in the working world. This section is very different than my own because they are all making their own money and thus will probably be less frivolous in their spending. Their purchases will probably be more thought out and of higher quality. Also, even if marketers divided Generation Y into these three groups—high school, college, and new professions—they would have trouble making wide assumptions about each group. Each of these segments has their own individual segments that depend on socioeconomic status, geographic location, and perhaps even ethic background. For example, I some high school girls view Coach and Dooney and Burke bags as the ultimate designer bag, while I have seen other high school girls spending an arm and leg on Chloe bags. Thus, I believe marketers need to take care in making sure they segment Generation Y correctly.
Although I do believe there are some threads that carry across all segments within Generation Y. For example, I believe our generation is a lot more tech savvy than any other. We have grown up with computers and have evolved with all the changing technology. In psychology I learned that the part of the brain that controls finger coordination is far more developed in kids of in middle school than they are in adults. They hypothesize this due to all the texting kids do at a young age. Marketers can take advantage of this and reach us in new ways. I also believe that our generation is more concerned with labels instead of finding the best deal. I think this is due to the fact that our generation has been exposed to far more advertising than the generations before us, making us brand focused. Also, our generation is more independent from our parents. Every generation of the past century has a rebellious crew (flappers, hippies, disco divas, ect), however, our generation you can be different from the norm and still not viewed as a juvenile delinquent. There are Goths, emos, faux-hippies, rapper impersonators, and many other groups that try to be different. Also, Generation Y is always wanting to buy the latest trend because things go out of fashion fast. The younger crowd waits in anticipation for the newest gaming box. While the older group has gone through a craze for Razrs, then Blackberrys, and now iPhones.
I believe marketers should really focus on utilizing technology as this generation is so used to it. When I see a product I like on TV or in a magazine, I expect to be able to Google it, find the website for the product, and learn how to buy it. If there is a product without a website or with a website merely displaying the logo and some pictures, I don’t move any further in trying to purchase it. Also, marketers should focus on convenient. There are so many products now that companies need to differentiate themselves so now they can focus on convenience like online ordering, helpful employees, and a lenient return policy.
Although I do believe there are some threads that carry across all segments within Generation Y. For example, I believe our generation is a lot more tech savvy than any other. We have grown up with computers and have evolved with all the changing technology. In psychology I learned that the part of the brain that controls finger coordination is far more developed in kids of in middle school than they are in adults. They hypothesize this due to all the texting kids do at a young age. Marketers can take advantage of this and reach us in new ways. I also believe that our generation is more concerned with labels instead of finding the best deal. I think this is due to the fact that our generation has been exposed to far more advertising than the generations before us, making us brand focused. Also, our generation is more independent from our parents. Every generation of the past century has a rebellious crew (flappers, hippies, disco divas, ect), however, our generation you can be different from the norm and still not viewed as a juvenile delinquent. There are Goths, emos, faux-hippies, rapper impersonators, and many other groups that try to be different. Also, Generation Y is always wanting to buy the latest trend because things go out of fashion fast. The younger crowd waits in anticipation for the newest gaming box. While the older group has gone through a craze for Razrs, then Blackberrys, and now iPhones.
I believe marketers should really focus on utilizing technology as this generation is so used to it. When I see a product I like on TV or in a magazine, I expect to be able to Google it, find the website for the product, and learn how to buy it. If there is a product without a website or with a website merely displaying the logo and some pictures, I don’t move any further in trying to purchase it. Also, marketers should focus on convenient. There are so many products now that companies need to differentiate themselves so now they can focus on convenience like online ordering, helpful employees, and a lenient return policy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)