VIEW ON MARKETING
Published in September 2009
Stop the Creative Blood Loss
During Market Research
Allen Stegall, Partner
Bob Costanza, Partner
“Hello, I’m a Mac.”
“And, I’m a PC.”
If Apple used the same market research techniques to test this cre-
ative concept that is customarily used in the pharmaceutical industry, this
terrific campaign might never have seen the light of day.
Imagine the deal-breaking research comments that might have sealed
its fate.
“I hate it when you people bash the competition.”
“Where are the product features and benefits?”
“It’s funny, but not very relevant to how I would choose a product.”
Scout Marketing Inc.
Or, consider Geico’s “So Easy a Caveman Could Do It” campaign.
There is real genius here because the campaign achieved impact by mak-
ing fun of a class (cavemen) who are no longer around to be offended.
Depicting them as “offended” is part of the device, and a remarkable way
to break through the clutter in the insurance space.
One can only imagine the pushback if this had been tried in the world
of medical advertising. After all, even though there are no cavemen, there
is still the general notion that one should not offend.
In truth, there are many good, provocative, and powerful advertising
ideas within the pharma industry. However, far too many of our best
ideas end up on the cutting room floor in favor of “safer,” and lesser, alter-
natives.This happens because we are a safety-oriented industry, not only
in marketing communications but also in the ways we evaluate creative
ideas in the market research environment.
Our Industry’s Approach
Typically, a brand team takes three or four concepts into research in
order to decide how to proceed. Each concept is shown to paid research
subjects in a serial fashion, often in three or four selected cities.
After a few warm-up questions, the subjects are asked to consider
each ad concept.What are your general impressions? What do you think
they are trying to say about Brand X? Is it clear? Is it relevant to your
practice? What would you change? Ultimately, respondents are asked to
rank the concepts, or somehow indicate their favorites.
This all sounds innocent enough. And certainly the researchers make
good faith efforts to remain unbiased and select the “right” concept. But
there are several ways in which this process can and does go horribly
wrong. Not that this process will often lead to a completely ineffective
ad, but it will certainly filter out any concepts that are provocative, unex-
pected, or even mildly polarizing — even when that would be the abso-
lute best thing for your brand.
SCOUT MARKETING is a full-service healthcare marketing firm that brings the experience of seasoned healthcare marketing experts to the specialty pharma community.
For more information, visit www.scoutmarketing.net.
September 2009 VIEW on Marketing
A SUPPORTING PUBLICATION TO PHARMAVOICE
More brand teams need to realize
that while market research is invaluable,
it can’t replace judgment.
What Should We Do Differently?
First, we should broaden our scope. For example, why not put
together a panel of experienced marketers with specific therapeutic cat-
egory knowledge who might offer very different and equally valid rec-
ommendations? They have the experience to know that sometimes a
great idea will make some people a little uncomfortable (remember the
Orkin commercial that showed fake roaches on your television screen?).
There are enough personal contacts among marketers on the brand
team to put such a group together.We believe this would serve as a ben-
eficial complement to physician research.
Second, we should limit the research questions to those doctors can
actually answer. Doctors can tell you what they think the main message
is and how clear that message is, but in a research setting they can’t hon-
estly tell you which ad would stop them most. Nor can they tell you the
relative power of one concept versus another on their future prescrib-
ing. But this doesn’t mean they won’t give you an answer if the question
is asked.
Third, we should do more “day after” follow-ups with the physician
research subjects.“Hi, Dr. Smith.Yesterday I showed you four ad concepts.
Which one comes to mind first?” Doing this would give us another objec-
tive measure of how our concepts work subconsciously (and isn’t that
where they are supposed to do their job?).
Finally, we suggest that more brand teams should realize that while
market research is invaluable, it can’t replace judgment. That market
research report you received probably doesn’t factor in the competitive
environment, the difficulty in breaking through and registering a message,
the size of your budget versus your competitor’s, where your brand is in
its lifecycle, or any of a hundred other important considerations.
So, by all means, do the market research. But then consider and dis-
cuss the meaning of the research in the broader context of your brand’s
marketing challenges. And talk to your agency team. They want your
brand to succeed as much as you do, and they probably have the expe-
rience necessary to see past the limitations of a market research project.
Be Brave! ■