Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
1
2
3
4
“COOKOUT GRILL”
5
“ORGANIC PRODUCE”
6
HAIR SPRAY (Product Class), FLAVORED POTATO CHIPS (Product Form), SCOPE MOUTHWASH (Brand)
7
Means-End Chains of Product Knowledge
NO COMMENTS
After you have learned about the three types of product knowledge in my previous post,
now it’s time to know how consumers form a simple associative network called a means-
end chain when they combine the three types of product knowledge.
2. Not every means-end chain leads to a value. The end of a means-end chain can be a
functional consequence (Stops cavities), a psychosocial consequence (I can be the real
me), an instrumental value (I will be clean), and to a value (Self-esteem). If the product
attributes have no connections to consequences, this means that consumers do not
really know what the attribute is good for.
3. Some of the means-end chains are incomplete, with missing levels of meanings. This
means that the actual product knowledge in consumers' means-end chains does not
necessarily contain each of the four levels of product meaning.
9
4. Some product attributes may have multiple means-end chains. Although not shown in
the figure above, these means-end chains can be conflicting. This means that some
attributes can lead to both positive and negative ends. Consumers who engage in this
line of means-end chain may have difficulty making purchase decisions.
Identifying the product attributes that a consumer considers when he or she makes a
purchase decision involves three ways of identifying the most relevant attributes: direct
elicitation, free-sort task, and triad task. Below is an example:
Direct elicitation
Consumer: Let's see. I think about the cost, the high-tech features, the color and
style, and the lacing pattern.
Free-post task
Researcher: Here are several brands of running shoes. Assume that you are
thinking of buying a pair of running shoes. I want you to sort these brands into
groups so that the shoes in each pile are alike in some way important to you and
are different from the shoes in the other piles.
or
Here are several brands of running shoes. I want you to sort them into groups
using any basis you wish.
or
Now please describe what each pile means to you. Why are these brands
together? How are these shoes different from those other shoes?
Consumer: Well, these shoes are all high-tech and expensive. Those are cheaper
and have fewer fancy features. And these brands are in-between.
Triad task
10
Researcher: Here are three brands of running shoes. Assume that you were
thinking of buying a pair of running shoes. In what important way are two of
these similar and different from the third? Are there any other ways?
Consumer: "Hmmmm. Well, these two shoes have special construction features
to keep your heel stable and solid. This one doesn't. And there two have a
staggered lacing system while this one has a traditional lacing pattern."
The next one is an interview process called laddering. It is designed to reveal how the
consumer links product attributes to more abstract consequences and values. This
process may help managers understand what product attributes means to the
consumers. Below is an example of a laddering interview:
Researcher: You said that the lacing pattern in a running shoe is important to
you in deciding what brand to buy. Why is that?
Consumer: A staggered lacing pattern makes the shoe fit more snugly on my
foot. [physical attribute and functional consequence]
Researcher: Why is it important that the shoe fit ore snugly on your foot?
Researcher: Why is it important that you can relax and enjoy the run?
Researcher: Why is it important for you to get rid of tension from work?
11
Researcher: Why is it important that you feel better about yourself?
The End
To summarize, the means-end chain model proposes that the meaning of a product
attribute is given by its perceived consequences. A basic advantage of means-end chain
models is that they provide a deeper understanding of consumers' product knowledge
than methods focusing only on attributes or benefits. In addition, marketing managers
can then use the consumer insights gained from the means-end research to develop
more effective marketing strategies. Effective marketing strategies connect the product
to important psychosocial consequences and values, thus making the product personally
relevant to consumers.
» Source
Pages 81-86, Consumer Behavior and Marketing Strategy, 7th edition, J. Paul Peter and Jerry C. Olson, McGraw-Hill
International Edition
» Image
http://www.scribd.com/doc/40472740/Consumer-Behaviour-and-Marketing-Strategy-Peter-Olson-Chapter-004
It seems we can never have enough help when it comes to organizing our thinking. As one of our
favorite authors says -- via his main character -- in one of his novels, “I never know (for sure)
what I think until I see what I say.” Writing down your thoughts and “displaying” them with
colleagues always invites helpful dialogue and, usually, better overall thinking. Among the many
organized-thinking tools that we have used so effectively for years now is the Benefit Ladder.
The tool probably owes its genesis to a combination of sources: first, from Abraham Maslow, the
famous American clinical psychologist; and second, from the fairly common market research
technique called “laddering.” Maybe you recall from school that Maslow created a “hierarchy of
needs,” which he used to demonstrate that we humans require an ascending series of needs --
from basic physical ones, like hunger and thirst satisfaction -- in order to reach the higher, more
emotional ones, like being loved and, ultimately, feeling “self-actualized.” One of the keys to
fulfilling those higher-order needs was, in fact, the order of them: in other words, if one’s basic
physical needs were not met, then the higher ones would not be me either. Said another way,
the linkage in the hierarchy is critical.
As for the market research technique called laddering, it followed from Maslow’s theory. Roughly
sometime in the 1970’s market research firms began adapting Maslow’s hierarchy theory for
consumer interviews… as a way to better understand the linkages among consumer’s purchase
behaviors and their end-values. Upon completion of a quantity of interviews, the researchers
would construct a kind of chain-map that linked product features & attributes (at the lowest,
most obvious-tangible level of the chain) to ultimate consumer values (at the highest level of the
chain). In this way brand marketers might find potential emotional need-benefits that best fit
their product’s attributes and functional outcomes.
12
So, in keeping with this history, the Benefit Ladder literally begins with meaningful product
features and attributes (at the bottom-most rung) and progresses up to lower-order functional
benefits, higher-order functional benefits, and finally to the highest-order emotional benefits (at
the top-most rung). When completed, a Benefit Ladder—or even a series of different Benefit
Ladders—enables a brand team to better understand and check out with target consumers the
strongest, most competitive Benefit & Reason Why proposition for the Brand Positioning.
As you can see, each rung addresses a progressively logical link to the ones above it…starting
with those meaningful features and attributes that suggest or explain all of the benefits. When
completed, a given ladder enables a sound dialogue among the brand team. Sometimes, teams
are inclined to load multiple benefit options into each of the benefit rungs; but we’ve found that
it’s much better to limit the benefits per rung as much as possible -- and to construct multiple
ladders instead. That way it’s much easier to perceive the logical linkages. In fact, prior to
conducting any consumer research around potential Benefits & Reasons Why for a brand’s
positioning, it’s really helpful to construct multiple ladders, assess each one’s soundness, and
then select the best options for sharing with consumers or customers.
But, prior to sharing any ladders (or parts of ladders) with consumers or customers, we
recommend the brand team “inspect” each ladder for the following:
Are the components of the ladder in the right places? For example, are what’s listed
or bullet-pointed on the bottom rung truly features and attributes? And, are the emotional
benefits truly expressive of feelings?
Are the components expressed as competitively as possible? If the brand can truly
claim and support a product benefit such as “makes teeth cleaner and whiter,” is the benefit
articulated this way? Or, if the ladder contains two consumer functional benefits, is at least
one of them written as a legitimate advantage—as in “Bayer is the only leading brand that
can effectively relieve pain (parity benefit) and also save your life (superiority benefit)?”
Is there an inherent integrity to the ladder? As you read from bottom to top, do the
parts link tightly? Would a target consumer/customer see this integrity the same way?
Most important of all, does the ladder also link cohesively to the rest of the
Brand Positioning? In other words, does it address (on a real or perceived basis) true
needs the target consumer/customer has? Is the emotional benefit consistent with the
13
target’s psychographic profile and driving attitudes? Does the ladder’s content fit with the
brand character?
But one of the things we like best about ladders is that they are pretty darn simple.
14