Business & Market Research

Drivers & Expectations

Consumers shop against the background of the category Ideal for whatever it is they’re looking. This is synonymous with the Ideal brand or Ideal offer. In our model, the Ideal is generated entirely by consumers themselves, and they buy what best meets their expectations at the time.

The category Ideal comprises four main drivers, expressed as a bar chart (chart 3).

The most important driver is on the left, the least important on the right. These are numbered #1 to #4.

These four bars collectively represent everything that consumers want from the Ideal brand in the category.

Chart 3

The percent contribution each driver makes to the Ideal is illustrated here as 40%, 25%, 20% and 15%, respectively. These percent contributions are category specific, and differ from one product category or service to another.

The percent contributions refer to their relative importance to consumers in the category, and hence to their capacity to engage consumers with brands, to influence brand choice, and ultimately to secure loyalty for one or more brands.

This also means (for the percent contributions illustrated) that a marketing investment positioned and targeted to resonate with consumers in driver #1 will potentially yield double the return for the brand as the same investment targeted at driver #3.

The height of the bars indicates the level of expectations consumers hold for each of the drivers. This is expressed as an index; the higher the index the more opportunity for a brand seeking to differentiate itself.

Consumer expectations differ from one driver to the next, and from one category or service to another. They indicate where consumers want the category to go. They therefore have high predictive value.

In Chart 3 the height of the first driver is shown at 122. This indicates that consumers have expectations for this driver that are 22% higher than the benchmark (100) for brands in this category or service.

Consumers may have higher expectations for a less important driver, which is often the case for category values like ‘price’ – where it is not (except among deal-seekers) the most important driver, but rather the driver for which consumers often hold high expectations: i.e. they want to pay as little as possible.

Brand equity is a measure of the overall engagement consumers have with the category Ideal. This is expressed in the chart as a single index score of 119, and is calculated as the weighted average of consumer expectations across all four drivers.

In the case of a brand, the most practical way to view brand equity is the degree to which the brand is seen to meet or exceed the expectations that consumers hold for the category Ideal.

Comparing your brand on a driver-by-driver basis with the category Ideal – and with each main competitor – allows you to diagnostically measure your relative strengths and weaknesses against them on a strategic basis.

ABVs Inside the Drivers

Each driver comprises a set of attributes, benefits and values (ABVs) specific to the category under study.

The ABVs are chosen in advance of fieldwork for the category as a whole, and are derived from a combination of client knowledge and direct consumer input via focus groups.

Chart 4

Respondents rate the importance of each ABV during the research, and then effectively assign each ABV to a particular driver.

Each ABV makes a percent contribution within its driver and all the ABV contributions within the driver sum to 100% (chart 4).

In every study, the ABVs for the category are identified and their individual percent contributions determined within their drivers. A typical ABV in the category Ideal for Mobile Network Service, for example, might be “transparent price plans” or “easily understood cost structures”.

For convenience, each main driver is usually named to reflect the dominant ABVs within it. A typical driver in the Sector Ideal for Retail Banking, for example, might be labelled “Corporate Image & Reputation”.

The ABVs are the tactical buttons a marketer needs to press to achieve consumer resonance and engagement with the brand in one driver rather than another.

Reading the charts

These charts provide a strategic overview of the category and how a brand may best capitalise on emerging opportunities. When reading and interpreting one of these charts, always give the following priority to the metrics: Ideal first, brands second, ABVs third.

Order of driver importance: which driver is most important? Which next?
Percent contribution of each driver: how are driver contributions distributed?
Expectation level for each driver: what driver has the highest expectations?
Your brand: where is your brand strong or weak against the Ideal?
Competitor brands: where is each competitor strong or weak?
Opportunities & Threats: where do the greatest opportunities & threats lie?
ABVs within drivers: what ABVs are most important in the driver with most opportunity?
Leveraging competitor mistakes: are competitors covering on key drivers & key ABVs?

The following case studies are based on recent projects, but simplified to make a clear point. The category and client have been disguised in the first two cases. We also do not disclose the component ABVs here. A difference of five points or more between figures is statistically significant.

Case 1 (BrandWorks)

What are the main drivers in my category? How do consumers see my brand and my main competitor?
Why is my competitor doing better in the marketplace? What are my options?

Chart 5

The metrics for the category Ideal are first determined and charted (blue); the standing of each brand is then inserted alongside (chart 5). The key points to note are:

Family Choice as driver #1 dominates the category Ideal, this is because it accounts here for 40% of driver importance. Expectations are also high in this driver at 122. Neither brand, but especially the client brand (green), comes near to meeting consumer expectations in this key driver. This is an opportunity.

Although the competitor is significantly ahead of the client in driver #1 (yellow), everything is still to play for there. It is in this driver that the battle for share will be won and lost, due to its dominance and unfulfilled expectations. This is the source of the client’s trouble, and where the client brand must focus its positioning and marketing efforts.

The top scoring ABVs in the first driver would indicate exactly how the client should position the brand. These would also serve as a tight brief for the ad agency.

The client brand more or less meets the Ideal in the three remaining drivers – which indicates that it is a strong brand, but this cannot compensate for its marked deficiency in the all-important first driver.

The overall brand equity score for both brands is the same at 113, but the competitor has the edge because it currently has the lead in driver #1, which counts the most. By re-directing its positioning as indicated, the client can overhaul this lead and regain share.

Case 2 (AdWorks 1)

The client’s PR dept wants the brand to sponsor a major annual televised public event. Others prefer to support the brand through advertising and programme sponsorship via an attractive deal negotiated with TV3. Which option is best for the brand, and why?

Chart 6

This issue comes down to determining in advance of spend which option would bring most benefit for the brand, and whether this is a sufficient return.

The brand’s current standing absent any support (green) shows it meeting or almost meeting the Ideal in the final three drivers, which is a good sign. But the brand is substantially below the Ideal in the first and most important driver. This means the brand is exposed and vulnerable to a competitor in that driver.

The event sponsorship option (yellow) resonates very strongly for the brand in the fourth driver, and quite strongly in the third. But it does nothing at all for the brand in the first driver where support is most needed; in fact the brand stands to be degraded in the first two drivers.

Strategically and financially, the event sponsorship option would be a poor investment for the brand. In fact it over-delivers in the fourth driver, far beyond expectations, and is therefore wasteful of resources.

On the other hand, the TV3 advertising option (orange) concentrates support for the brand in the first two drivers, particularly in driver #1. This would potentially lift the brand there to within a whisper of the Ideal. Brand equity would also be lifted. This clearly is the best option to choose.

Case 3 (AdWorks 2)

The client’s public relations dept is recommending that its service brand should sponsor a major annual public event. Others would prefer to support the brand through TV advertising and programme sponsorship via an attractive deal negotiated with TV3. The budget won’t stretch to both. Which option should the brand choose, and why?

Chart 7

This issue comes down to determining in advance how much the brand stands to benefit from each option, which option would bring most benefit, and whether this is a sufficient return.

The brand’s current standing shows it meeting or almost meeting the Ideal in the final three drivers, which is a good sign. So it needs no further support in these. But the brand is substantially below the Ideal in the first and most important driver. This means the brand is exposed and vulnerable to a competitor in that driver.

The event sponsorship option resonates very strongly for the brand in the fourth driver; it also provides some directional uplift in the third driver. But it does nothing at all for the brand in the first driver where support is most needed; in fact the brand stands to be degraded a little there.

Strategically and financially, the event sponsorship option would be a poor investment for the brand.

On the other hand, the TV3 advertising option concentrates support for the brand in the first two drivers, particularly in driver #1. This would potentially lift the brand there to within a whisper of the Ideal. Brand equity would also receive an uplift. This clearly is the best option to choose.

Note that the event sponsorship option pumps up the brand’s standing in the fourth driver to substantially above what consumers demand and expect there. This represents a waste of resources because the brand already satisfies consumer expectations there and cannot therefore earn a tangible return by offering more.

Case 4 (MediaWorks)

Blackberry asked Brand Keys to do two things: (i) predict the likely success of a sales promotions event, and (ii) demonstrate in advance of spend the most effective cross-media buy to support the event.

Chart 8

Look first at the way target consumers see the world (blue). What Ideal do they hold for the category? How is their Ideal defined in terms of what’s important to them, and how important? Where do their greatest expectations lie?

Next, examine how the Blackberry brand measures up to the Ideal, driver by driver, in the absence of any promotions event or media support (green). This creates the most insightful benchmark possible against which to measure the brand’s efforts.

With the Ideal and the brand benchmark in place, the research measured what would happen when the Blackberry promotion took place – i.e. before the event actually happened (yellow).

Clearly, the event looks promising. And because these metrics also offer a strategic view, Blackberry could see exactly how the event would lift the brand, bringing it up to the Ideal in the two most important drivers, Connectivity and Value for Price.

Overall engagement with the brand is also lifted, from 121 before the event to 127 with it (the Ideal being 134).

When the digital media campaign was added, Blackberry could look forward to even better results, especially in the important Connectivity driver (orange). Overall engagement with the brand would now reach 134, the same as for the Ideal.

The potential effect of supporting TV advertising was also measured; it produced an engagement metric of 130, less than for digital.

This case study shows clearly – before the spend – that the event would succeed and digital media would produce the better return. This is exactly what happened, as a sales validation study completed six months later revealed. The results proved beyond question the high predictive ability of these metrics (chart 9).

Chart 9

Case 5 (MediaWorks Plus)

To what extent will the brand benefit from an ad campaign running on TV only? Would a multimedia campaign across several platforms be significantly better for the brand? How much better? What combination of media options promises the optimum return for the brand and the investment?

Chart 10

Look first at the category Ideal (blue) and note how the level of consumer expectations is highest by far in the first and most important driver.

Now examine how the client brand in the absence of any media context (green) measures up to the category Ideal.

The client brand falls significantly short of meeting the Ideal in the first and fourth drivers, but comes close to meeting the Ideal in the second and third drivers.

The brand most needs support in the first driver where expectations are highest. It would also benefit from some support in each of the remaining three drivers. The strategic aim is to have consumers perceive the brand as meeting or exceeding their Ideal for the category.

Now look at the engagement effect of TV on its own (yellow). It lifts the brand substantially in the first driver, to just above the Ideal. This would be a good outcome for the brand strategically, but it provides no uplift for the brand in the second driver and very little in the two remaining drivers. Is there a better option?

The multimedia campaign illustrated (orange) would provide substantial uplift for the brand in all four drivers, exceeding the Ideal in every instance.

Eleven different multimedia combinations were identified from this research, with the one illustrated being the optimum investment choice for the brand.

Note that this result reflects the brand’s media presence only, and is quite separate from any engagement effects due to the brand’s advertised message. More than 20 different media touch-points were assessed.

Past 60-day sales data among a robust sample of brand-exclusive users were collected separately. The correlation between the eleven multimedia groupings and the corresponding average past 60-day purchases of the client brand was high at 0.78.