The Buying Brain: Secrets for Selling to the Subconscious Mind (34 page)

Figure 14.2

The Deep Subconscious Response (DSR) test measures
subconscious resonance in the brain.

Quality

Quality

Goodness

Goodness

Frequency

Frequency

Baseline

Deep Subconscious

Brainwave measurement

Exposure to the stimuli

Response

Source:
NeuroFocus, Inc.

P1: OTA/XYZ

P2: ABC

c14

JWBT296-Pradeep

June 7, 2010

10:4

Printer Name: Courier Westford, Westford, MA

The Buying Brain and Packaging

167

Baseline

First, we conduct neurological testing to measure the brain’s responses to, in this case, three brand attribute words. This measurement establishes a “baseline,”

giving us a clear picture of how the brain reacts to these specific stimuli.

The chosen words are inserted among other “distracter” words, so no special attention is paid to them during this phase of the test.

Brand/Product Presentation

The next step is to show an image of the brand or product. In California Olive Ranch’s case, we had bottles with the two different label designs on them.

Message Resonance

The third step is to repeat exposing the words, intermixed with the distracters.

Comparing the neurological results of the first baseline test with the results from the second “resonance” round, after exposure to the brand/product, reveals the degree to which the subconscious mind associates those attributes with the brand. From a scientific perspective, this process produces unequivocal evidence—there are no other variables involved, so the results are clear and reliable indicators of the brand’s attributes.

In this California Olive Ranch example, the results of the neurological testing of the overall package design, coupled with the brand attributes study,
gave the company detailed knowledge
of how consumers would respond to the two different labels. The savings that can be realized at this stage of a new product launch are considerable, when you factor in the expenses incurred in the conventional model of having to conduct focus groups, test-market two different bottles, and so on.

In comparison, neurological testing cuts right to the central issues and delivers precise, concise answers, in a fraction of the time at a fraction of the cost of traditional methods. What did measuring consumers’ subconscious responses to the two different package designs produce for California Olive Ranch? How did this new brand measure up against two existing brands?

Here are some top-line findings:

“Map” versus “Orchard”

Ladies and gentlemen, we had a winner. It was “Orchard.”

Consumers’ brains preferred that label design in every one of our six metrics: Attention, Emotional Engagement, Memory Retention, Purchase Intent,

P1: OTA/XYZ

P2: ABC

c14

JWBT296-Pradeep

June 7, 2010

10:4

Printer Name: Courier Westford, Westford, MA

168

The Buying Brain

Novelty, and Awareness. In five of the six, the margins were significant—sometimes major. In memory retention, the two designs were close enough to be called even, although there was an identifiable edge for “Orchard.”

When we developed an overall Neurological Effectiveness score for both bottles, “Orchard” notched significantly higher than the “Map.”

Brand Attributes

Both label designs attained positive rankings for the brand attributes studied. “Orchard” gained the upper hand in two-thirds of the target messages.

Competitive Products Comparison

Both California Olive Ranch package

designs fared well against the two competitors that were tested. While there was more variance across the six individual NeuroMetrics than in the head-to-head comparison between the two California Olive Ranch bottles, the net outcome was:

r “Orchard” scored higher than the competition in overall Effectiveness (by as wide a margin in one case and even greater in the other as it had against “Map”), as well as in Emotional Engagement, Purchase Intent, and Awareness.

r “Map” also scored well in these categories, with rankings greater than or equal to the competition.

Why Use Neurological Testing for Packaging?

Scores and other statistics

are excellent objective quantifiers of a packaging design’s performance. But, as central and useful as they are, they only reveal the results of any market research methodology, including neurological testing. Discerning the broader, underlying
strategic reasons
for the results are where neuromarketing really adds critical value. Being able to offer specific, highly actionable recommendations on how to improve package design puts neurological testing ahead of the pack.

In California Olive Ranch’s case, here’s a small sampling of what we deduced from the brainwave and eye tracking measurements we conducted. Consider these as Neurological Best Practices for packaging design and execution:

Clutter-free is a decided plus
. Both competitors’ packaging is very
cluttered, and the fact that both of California Olive Ranch’s designs
were markedly less so gave the brand a clear competitive advantage.

P1: OTA/XYZ

P2: ABC

c14

JWBT296-Pradeep

June 7, 2010

10:4

Printer Name: Courier Westford, Westford, MA

The Buying Brain and Packaging

169

Going natural scores points
. California Olive Ranch had already
made good use of “natural” imagery, which the brain prefers in association with food products. We counseled that what would likely improve
scores even more was to incorporate more realistic “natural” imagery
(for example, the olive and orchard trees).

Off-center is a good thing.
Our studies have shown that the brain
prefers an attentional focus that is slightly off-center. California Olive
Ranch already had imagery at the center of the label, which is basically
pleasing to the subconscious. But shifting the central imagery a little to
the left—because the brain prefers images on the left side of the visual
field—might further spike effectiveness.

There were additional specific recommendations made, ranging from ideas for improving effectiveness using the top of the bottle to the application of certain design elements such as color and text in other locations.

The Resolution

Coming back to the client package study I addressed at the outset of this chapter, for our client’s product and the irritatingly similar competitive product, we tested the two package designs. Sure enough, the competitor’s product scored significantly higher on all measures of Attention, Emotion, and Memory. It also fared a bit better on Deep Subconscious Response to messaging. Here’s what we found:

r Imagery and Iconography: Competitor had better product feature-related imagery

r Font Structure: Too many fonts, hard to read r Numerosity: Too many image groups, hard to process r Product Reveal: Competitor product easier to see—more effective r Messaging Effectiveness: Competitor scored higher on key messages such as “new” and “tasty”

A few months later, a new package design rolled out. What did it look like? It was cleaner, more in resonance with the product, and overall a more pleasing design. All of this is all well and good, but most important of all, sales are up.

P1: OTA/XYZ

P2: ABC

c14

JWBT296-Pradeep

June 7, 2010

10:4

Printer Name: Courier Westford, Westford, MA

170

The Buying Brain

Takeaways:

r Strive for clean, uncluttered package designs; the brain prefers them r Highlight what’s new; the brain seeks out what is novel r Use the specific Neurological Best Practices outlined above to stimulate better receptivity by the brain, and, therefore, higher Attention, Emotional Engagement, and Memory Retention

r The smallest details in a package design can have outsized effects on the subconscious. The brain takes it all in; neurological errors subtract from overall package design effectiveness

P1: OTA/XYZ

P2: ABC

c15

JWBT296-Pradeep

June 7, 2010

7:45

Printer Name: Courier Westford, Westford, MA

the Aisle

At the end of this chapter, you’ll know and be able to use the
following:

r What the brain avoids in the retail environment r The essential framework the brain uses to organize the shopping experience

r Best practices for retail environments

r How to activate Neurological Iconic Signatures at the store The Problem: How to Rock the Aisle?

A cookie and cake mix manufacturer was going around and around with focus groups on how to design a new concept for a product display that would appeal to shoppers as they approached the end of the aisle.

Focus group results kept coming back consistently conflicted (yes, that’s an oxymoron, but apt). Should they try the new design or stick with the known way of doing things? The time and financial investment involved was significant, and as we know, shoppers don’t want to learn a new aisle configuration unless there is a good reason for it.

It’s a jungle in there. Literally, from your brain’s point of view, when you walk into a store—let’s say, your typical supermarket—regions of your brain react the same way that they did when our ancient predecessors made their dangerous progress across the Serengeti.

For example, what would you guess would alarm your subconscious, setting off a 100,000-year-old internal warning system as you wander the aisles?

171

P1: OTA/XYZ

P2: ABC

c15

JWBT296-Pradeep

June 7, 2010

7:45

Printer Name: Courier Westford, Westford, MA

172

The Buying Brain

The answer is something as common as an end cap (that’s the display area at the end of most supermarket aisles). It triggers what neuroscience describes as an avoidance response deep within your subconscious. The sharp edges of the metal shelves pose a potential threat to you—just as the sharp tip of a branch would in the jungle. You could be blinded, cut, perhaps bleed to death, right there amid the Cheerios and Cap’n Crunch.