I. Introduction
a. Thesis- Since its inception, The Walt Disney Company has used its unique culture to provide a favorable and rewarding experience for its guests at the Disney theme parks.
i. Origins
ii. Environment
iii. Culture
iv. Comparison to other theme parks
II. Body
a. Origins
i. Walt Disney
1. Link to customer insights: Creating the ultimate customer experience is rooted in the creator of the Disney theme parks: Walt Disney.
a. He did not come up with the theme park idea and try to force it on potential customers. Instead, he observed people around him and realized there was an untapped segment that he could really satisfy: families.
b. He used his insights to create a place where families could leave reality together, but where each family member would have a unique experience based on their fantasies.
c. Walt Disney wanted to build a theme park with “technically advanced attractions and a commitment to excellence.”
2. There are many different myths about how Walt Disney came up with the Disney theme park idea.
3. The actual story involves Walt Disney striking a deal to create both a theme park and a TV show based on Mickey Mouse.
4. Even though it’s been 40 years since Walt Disney’s death, the company’s focus on providing the parks’ guests with the most mystical and entertaining experiences.
b. Environment
i. The layout of the Disney theme parks plays an important role in a guest’s experience.
1. The scale of both Disney World and Disneyland are immense.
2. Both parks are organized into distinct areas, some of which include Fantasyland, Frontierland, and Adventureland.
a. Each area follows a specific theme, which is presented restaurants, employee clothing, decorations, etc.
b. This allows for easier navigation and travel for guests.
ii. Each theme park follows a “mini-city” concept.
1. Each area within the park must adhere to specific guidelines when it comes to cleanliness, safety, and order.
a. Employees are hired specifically to ensure that the park is in excellent condition at all times.
2. No detail is overlooked when it comes to the Disney theme parks.
a. Every single prop and person is there for a specific purpose and adds to the overall experience for guests.
b. Guests may not realize the extent to which everything is detailed, but even the most overlooked props, such as flowers and plants, are placed in a specific area to enhance the theme.
3. Disney theme parks are also completely self-sufficient.
a. Anything that a normal person would need can be found within the park grounds, which is extremely convenient.
4. Although each theme park is a “mini-city,” the parks are seen as utopian.
a. Nowhere else can you experience fireworks every night or take a magical ride through time.
iii. Link to customer insights: The environment of the Disney theme parks helps enhance the experience for guests of the park. Due to the simple layout of the park, guests are able to easily navigate through the different areas, which leaves them more time to enjoy attractions. Additionally, the “mini-city” model reinforces the utopian aspect of the parks by maintaining strict guidelines that would be followed in any regular city. The self-sufficiency of the parks is also convenient for guests, who once again can focus on attractions instead of worrying about leaving the park for anything.
c. Culture
i. One of the theme park’s best attributes is its global appeal.
1. Every individual who walks through the entrance gates at one of the parks is in store for a unique experience.
a. Since there are many different areas to visit, guests can determine which order to go through the parks, which rides to select, etc.
b. The selection of what to do is different based on each person since so much is available to choose from.
2. The parks also stimulate into the 5 senses of a guest.
a. Sight- colorful, massive attractions/constructions, parades
b. Sound- live music, sounds from attractions, other guests
c. Taste- food (organized by theme based on the area)
d. Touch- interactive exhibits that involve guests, souvenir shops, meeting “cast members”
e. Smell- food, nature
3. Link to customer insights: One of the most important aspects of the parks is the ability of guests to take their experience with them when leaving
a. Pictures/souvenirs usually do not suffice.
b. Since a guest’s experience at a Disney theme park is so individualistic, that person can leave the park with memories of the trip from their perspective, even if they went with other people. The park really taps into people’s emotions and brings back childhood memories.
ii. The Disney theme park employees also make sure that guests are having the ultimate experience.
1. Imagineers are the creators of the various attractions in the parks.
a. These employees must maintain certain levels of creativity when creating products.
b. Products must not only be engaging but must be executable. It does not help if a product is impressive but cannot be ridden.
2. A Disney “cast member” includes anyone who comes in contact with a park guest.
a. In order to become a “cast member,” potential employees are required to audition for roles by wearing costumes and interacting with people.
b. “Cast members” are also required to wear their costumes for a significant portion of time outside of the park in order to become comfortable with their role.
3. Link to customer insights: Disney employees are expected to say in character at all times when they are on park grounds. Essentially, they are told to be actors who are on stage. They have been trained to recognize certain signals from customers and respond to these signals in specific ways. This shows that the Disney theme park employees are constantly working to enhance the customer experience.
d. Comparison to other theme parks
i. There are other parks that can learn a few lessons from Disney
1. Currently, Sea World has some rides and shows available for guests
a. To make the Sea World more complete, the company could use Disney’s “mini-city” model.
i. Sea World could make more use of an “under water” theme, which could be applied to all of its rides. Currently the park looks like many different rides who happen to be placed near each other with no connection.
ii. Additionally, although Sea World is based on a water-themed world and is likely to be less clean than an average theme park, it is important that employees are more diligent when it comes to cleaning because it will make more guests visit the park.
ii. Although Disney is at the front of the pack when it comes to theme parks, there is another park chain that Disney can learn from.
1. Universal Studios provides many more adult-centric rides.
a. It is understandable that Disney does not have any adults-only rides in the main park since the park is focused on providing the utopian experience for families.
b. However, Disney could have one area based on an adults-only theme for couples who visit who do not have children or for groups of young adults.
III. Conclusion
a. Thesis- The Disney theme parks’ focus on customers’ individual needs help it provide an unforgettable experience for guests.
b. What I have learned from this study
i. Revisit key research findings
ii. The origins, environment, and culture of the Disney theme parks help make the Disney experience an unforgettable one for guests.
c. Application to customer insights
i. Learning what customers want, both in the long term and short term, and satisfying their needs will create a more positive experience for them and enhance your brand
**I want to be sure I'm not writing a love letter to Disney and that I've appropriately addressed how my topic is connected to customer insights. Thanks!
Sunday, April 12, 2009
Monday, March 30, 2009
I Salute You, iPhone
For my second “free” blog topic, I decided to focus on something that I use constantly in my life: my iPhone. The topic may be pretty popular considering how many people have iPhones now, but I’m going to focus on how I think the iPhone provides consumers with the ultimate experience.
Apple's iPhone
I’ve broken my ideas down into different categories so my reasoning is easier to understand:
Everything You Need in One Place
I never really thought that I’d want access to the Internet 24/7, but let me tell you, now that I have my iPhone, I’m not sure what I used to do before it. Sure, sure, I would probably be fine if I never gotten the phone to begin with, but it just makes everything so convenient and accessible, which is always appreciated.
Since I’m able to check my email at any time, it’s easier to coordinate with friends, family, group members, and job recruiters, especially when deadlines are involved. Having the ability to look up directions or the weather at any time is really convenient, and of course, the ability to have my iPod built into my phone is great because that’s one less thing I have to constantly be carrying around.
This feature to me is probably the most important aspect of the iPhone that makes the customer experience so fantastic. Nowadays, consumers are always looking for the easiest way to access information, and I think Apple hit the nail on the head with this one. This feature, I think, is important because it’s universal and practical. No matter what type of iPhone user you are, you have the constant ability to check your email, access the Internet, or listen to your music.
The iPhone's Many Uses
Fun, but Completely Unnecessary, Gadgets
There is really an iPhone app for everything. And I mean EVERYTHING. There are the typical apps, such as Facebook or Google Mobile. But then there are apps like the Whoopie Cushion or BubbleWrap, which really serve no purpose in life. But when you’re bored one day and these apps are being offered for free from the App Store, why not download them? They’re ridiculous, yes. But yet again, there are at least a few apps for every single iPhone user, no matter who they are. Maybe somebody secretly loves popping bubble wrap. Now he or she doesn’t have to go through old boxes to find an old stash of wrap. Instead, he/she can download this app and enjoy the popping noise at any time.
BubbleWrap Application
In Your Face, Interface
Although the first aspect I mentioned may be the most practical to consumers, I really think the iPhone interface has catapulted Apple to the top when it comes to touch screen phones. The iPhone’s competitors don’t stand a chance when it comes to their product’s interfaces.
First, the fact that a touch screen phone can be so much fun and easy to use boggles my mind. The keyboard does take a little getting used to (by little, I mean about a week, which really isn’t anything in the grand scheme of things). But more importantly, the actual screen itself displays every single thing in such a great way. My personal favorite is text messaging because the conversation looks like an instant messaging conversation online.
Text messaging on the iPhone
With Love, from Apple
Let’s face it. If you’re an Apple user, you feel a certain type of pride that PC users just don’t understand. In addition to my iPhone, I’ve been a MacBook user for about a year now, and I can’t explain to you how glad I am that I made the transition to the brighter side. The same goes for owning an iPhone. Apple consumers are seen as being cooler and more fun and hip than any other PC or phone company. Consumers LOVE feeling like they’re part of a community, and Apple is probably one of the best neighborhoods to live in.
That’s probably because going into an Apple store is such a great experience. Whether you’re browsing, buying accessories, or going in for a maintenance appointment, it’s so much fun to be in an Apple environment because everything is so customer friendly. When you enter an Apple store, Apple employees make you feel incredibly welcome and comfortable. On top of that, convenience is really valued: users can make appointments online from anywhere so they don’t have to waste time waiting in line at the store.
Apple Store in New York City
For all of these reasons, I think Apple has really created a one-of-a-kind customer experience with the iPhone.
Apple's iPhone
I’ve broken my ideas down into different categories so my reasoning is easier to understand:
Everything You Need in One Place
I never really thought that I’d want access to the Internet 24/7, but let me tell you, now that I have my iPhone, I’m not sure what I used to do before it. Sure, sure, I would probably be fine if I never gotten the phone to begin with, but it just makes everything so convenient and accessible, which is always appreciated.
Since I’m able to check my email at any time, it’s easier to coordinate with friends, family, group members, and job recruiters, especially when deadlines are involved. Having the ability to look up directions or the weather at any time is really convenient, and of course, the ability to have my iPod built into my phone is great because that’s one less thing I have to constantly be carrying around.
This feature to me is probably the most important aspect of the iPhone that makes the customer experience so fantastic. Nowadays, consumers are always looking for the easiest way to access information, and I think Apple hit the nail on the head with this one. This feature, I think, is important because it’s universal and practical. No matter what type of iPhone user you are, you have the constant ability to check your email, access the Internet, or listen to your music.
The iPhone's Many Uses
Fun, but Completely Unnecessary, Gadgets
There is really an iPhone app for everything. And I mean EVERYTHING. There are the typical apps, such as Facebook or Google Mobile. But then there are apps like the Whoopie Cushion or BubbleWrap, which really serve no purpose in life. But when you’re bored one day and these apps are being offered for free from the App Store, why not download them? They’re ridiculous, yes. But yet again, there are at least a few apps for every single iPhone user, no matter who they are. Maybe somebody secretly loves popping bubble wrap. Now he or she doesn’t have to go through old boxes to find an old stash of wrap. Instead, he/she can download this app and enjoy the popping noise at any time.
BubbleWrap Application
In Your Face, Interface
Although the first aspect I mentioned may be the most practical to consumers, I really think the iPhone interface has catapulted Apple to the top when it comes to touch screen phones. The iPhone’s competitors don’t stand a chance when it comes to their product’s interfaces.
First, the fact that a touch screen phone can be so much fun and easy to use boggles my mind. The keyboard does take a little getting used to (by little, I mean about a week, which really isn’t anything in the grand scheme of things). But more importantly, the actual screen itself displays every single thing in such a great way. My personal favorite is text messaging because the conversation looks like an instant messaging conversation online.
Text messaging on the iPhone
With Love, from Apple
Let’s face it. If you’re an Apple user, you feel a certain type of pride that PC users just don’t understand. In addition to my iPhone, I’ve been a MacBook user for about a year now, and I can’t explain to you how glad I am that I made the transition to the brighter side. The same goes for owning an iPhone. Apple consumers are seen as being cooler and more fun and hip than any other PC or phone company. Consumers LOVE feeling like they’re part of a community, and Apple is probably one of the best neighborhoods to live in.
That’s probably because going into an Apple store is such a great experience. Whether you’re browsing, buying accessories, or going in for a maintenance appointment, it’s so much fun to be in an Apple environment because everything is so customer friendly. When you enter an Apple store, Apple employees make you feel incredibly welcome and comfortable. On top of that, convenience is really valued: users can make appointments online from anywhere so they don’t have to waste time waiting in line at the store.
Apple Store in New York City
For all of these reasons, I think Apple has really created a one-of-a-kind customer experience with the iPhone.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
A Song for Rapaille
Overall, I enjoyed watching The Persuaders. Even though I thought the content was a little outdated (since Song aircrafts have already been absorbed by Delta), it was still interesting to learn how marketing plays such an integral part in almost every industry, including politics. It’s funny how the wording of a certain topic can make citizens gravitate towards voting for or against a certain candidate.
One of the more interesting parts of the documentary was the interview with Dr. Rapaille, which I have to talk about for this blog assignment anyway. Basically, Dr. Rapaille has a three stage process that ultimately discovers what a consumer expects from a certain type of product, even if the product differs from company to company. For example, the documentary examined Dr. Rapaille’s work with the word luxury, and what people associated with that word.
His three stage psychic process includes (1) past reason (2) through emotion (3) to the primal core.
The first stage, past reason, Rapaille just asks people bluntly what their opinions are regarding a certain topic. At this point, people can answer easily and quickly. They want to show how intelligent they are, and are very happy because they can answer all of his questions.
After a short break, the second stage, through emotion, occurs. During this stage, Rapaille asks his participants to tell him a short story as if he was a 5 year old from another planet. This stage is important because people don’t try to be logical or intelligent—they must speak in the most basic vocabulary to ensure that a 5 year old can understand them.
After another short break, participants visit their primal cores, where all of a consumer’s purchase decisions really exist. Rapaille removes all of the chairs from the room at this point so that participants can relax in a room filled with very little light. Participants are forced to go back to the very first time they went through an experience dealing with the topic at hand, due to their environment. According to Rapaille, if these “reptilian hot buttons”, the innate reactions of consumers to certain words, are discovered, companies can use this information to position their product to be successful because they will know what consumers respond positively to. Ultimately, I never learned what ideas are associated with "luxury" since that information is valuable to various companies, which was disappointing.
I enjoyed learning about Rapaille’s findings dealing with his process in general. Essentially, he said he learned that if companies discover successful properties through consumers’ primal cores, this information can really help a company. The reason I found this finding so interesting is because I instantly linked it back to another concept we discussed a few weeks ago from Malcolm Gladwell’s Blink. We talked about how consumers’ first impressions can’t be trusted because they aren’t experts. Similarly, Rapaille states that during the first stage of his process, consumers’ answers can’t be trusted because they are first responses to situations. Instead, Rapaille travels further into participants’ minds to discover their real desires. I found it really enlightening that Rapaille’s and Gladwell’s concepts fit together.
Friends! Gladwell (above) and Rapaille (below)
Learning about Song Airlines was actually really pleasant. I thought the way the documentary chronicled the progression of Song’s creation through its introduction and thereafter was pretty informative and in-depth.
In case you haven’t heard of Song, it was a subsidiary of Delta Airlines that was aiming to compete with the more hip, low cost carriers in the industry. Song executives wanted to create a new type of culture around their airline by focusing on a different target market: women. Song researched women’s desires when it came to airlines and used the information to make Song attractive by offering low fares, organic food, and various entertainment options on board. In addition to that, Song relayed its culture in almost every way possible—“Song” was considered an adjective that meant "hip" or "cool," used to describe employees. Also, every item related to Song was characterized with pastel colors that would be appealing to women.
One of Song Airline's airplanes
I really thought Song’s ideas on how to enhance the customer experience were pretty great, but that could be because I’m a member of their target market as a young woman. I may not have my own disposable income just yet, but I think Song’s greatest asset was reinforcing its culture in multiple ways so every potential consumer knew what Song meant. I enjoyed watching Song’s launch party at the beginning of the documentary because it looked entertaining and exciting—a great way to get people’s attention.
Unfortunately, there were downsides to Song. Although the company had great ideas, execution of those ideas didn’t go very smoothly. I think the company could have improved the way it first created awareness for itself by improving its ads, which were somewhat confusing and misleading. They never showed airplanes or mentioned travel, which left many potential users in the dark. Also, Song’s parent company, Delta, did not end up doing so well in the long run so all of Song’s airplanes were absorbed by Delta eventually.
One of the more interesting parts of the documentary was the interview with Dr. Rapaille, which I have to talk about for this blog assignment anyway. Basically, Dr. Rapaille has a three stage process that ultimately discovers what a consumer expects from a certain type of product, even if the product differs from company to company. For example, the documentary examined Dr. Rapaille’s work with the word luxury, and what people associated with that word.
His three stage psychic process includes (1) past reason (2) through emotion (3) to the primal core.
The first stage, past reason, Rapaille just asks people bluntly what their opinions are regarding a certain topic. At this point, people can answer easily and quickly. They want to show how intelligent they are, and are very happy because they can answer all of his questions.
After a short break, the second stage, through emotion, occurs. During this stage, Rapaille asks his participants to tell him a short story as if he was a 5 year old from another planet. This stage is important because people don’t try to be logical or intelligent—they must speak in the most basic vocabulary to ensure that a 5 year old can understand them.
After another short break, participants visit their primal cores, where all of a consumer’s purchase decisions really exist. Rapaille removes all of the chairs from the room at this point so that participants can relax in a room filled with very little light. Participants are forced to go back to the very first time they went through an experience dealing with the topic at hand, due to their environment. According to Rapaille, if these “reptilian hot buttons”, the innate reactions of consumers to certain words, are discovered, companies can use this information to position their product to be successful because they will know what consumers respond positively to. Ultimately, I never learned what ideas are associated with "luxury" since that information is valuable to various companies, which was disappointing.
I enjoyed learning about Rapaille’s findings dealing with his process in general. Essentially, he said he learned that if companies discover successful properties through consumers’ primal cores, this information can really help a company. The reason I found this finding so interesting is because I instantly linked it back to another concept we discussed a few weeks ago from Malcolm Gladwell’s Blink. We talked about how consumers’ first impressions can’t be trusted because they aren’t experts. Similarly, Rapaille states that during the first stage of his process, consumers’ answers can’t be trusted because they are first responses to situations. Instead, Rapaille travels further into participants’ minds to discover their real desires. I found it really enlightening that Rapaille’s and Gladwell’s concepts fit together.
Friends! Gladwell (above) and Rapaille (below)
Learning about Song Airlines was actually really pleasant. I thought the way the documentary chronicled the progression of Song’s creation through its introduction and thereafter was pretty informative and in-depth.
In case you haven’t heard of Song, it was a subsidiary of Delta Airlines that was aiming to compete with the more hip, low cost carriers in the industry. Song executives wanted to create a new type of culture around their airline by focusing on a different target market: women. Song researched women’s desires when it came to airlines and used the information to make Song attractive by offering low fares, organic food, and various entertainment options on board. In addition to that, Song relayed its culture in almost every way possible—“Song” was considered an adjective that meant "hip" or "cool," used to describe employees. Also, every item related to Song was characterized with pastel colors that would be appealing to women.
One of Song Airline's airplanesI really thought Song’s ideas on how to enhance the customer experience were pretty great, but that could be because I’m a member of their target market as a young woman. I may not have my own disposable income just yet, but I think Song’s greatest asset was reinforcing its culture in multiple ways so every potential consumer knew what Song meant. I enjoyed watching Song’s launch party at the beginning of the documentary because it looked entertaining and exciting—a great way to get people’s attention.
Unfortunately, there were downsides to Song. Although the company had great ideas, execution of those ideas didn’t go very smoothly. I think the company could have improved the way it first created awareness for itself by improving its ads, which were somewhat confusing and misleading. They never showed airplanes or mentioned travel, which left many potential users in the dark. Also, Song’s parent company, Delta, did not end up doing so well in the long run so all of Song’s airplanes were absorbed by Delta eventually.
Saturday, March 7, 2009
Kenna's Dilemma
A few posts ago, I discussed Malcolm Gladwell’s TED talk about creating the perfect spaghetti sauce. This post is about the chapter titled “Kenna’s Dilemma” from his book, Blink. There were two big points that I took away from the chapter—areas I think marketers could really learn from, and I’ve outlined them below.
Lesson 1- It is important to understand if consumers really hate a product because of the product itself or because the product makes them nervous because it is different from anything they’ve ever seen before (pgs 173-174).
The implications of this lesson for marketers are pretty obvious. First, if a company’s product is terrible, it should be taken back to the drawing board for a revision. If the product is beyond repair, it should just be tossed out. It’s extremely important for marketers to find out what consumers want so they can provide them with useful products. Consumers buy certain products for specific benefits, and if they don’t believe a product can satisfy their needs, they won’t buy it.
In one of my past marketing classes, we discussed products that failed miserably, and one of my favorites was Harley-Davidson perfume. Why would anyone want to buy Harley-Davidson perfume? The brand caters to rich professionals who buy motorcycles to access their “wild” sides. When you think Harley-Davidson, what comes to mind? For me, I think of dirt and sweat. I wouldn’t want to buy perfume from a company that advocates riding a bike out in the sun. This was a brand extension that just wasn’t thought out completely.
Harley-Davidson Perfume
On the other hand, if the product just makes consumers nervous because it’s something new or different, then that’s a great place for marketers to step in. Companies should provide potential consumers with as many samples and trials of these types of products at stores, expos, etc., as possible. Consumers need to be exposed to new products repeatedly so they can see the benefits provided. If they see those benefits, they’re more likely to purchase the product.
I have a personal story when it comes to a product that I thought was going to fail miserably, but actually has been doing pretty well in the market. I’ve always been an avid Coke drinker, but I never liked that one can of Coke has so many calories. I went home to Houston one weekend, and my dad had bought a case of Coke Zero. The first thought that came to mind when I thought about Coke Zero is that it would taste nothing like regular Coke, or worse, it would taste like Diet Coke (which I absolutely cannot stand). When I took my first sip, I was pleasantly surprised. Coke Zero actually tastes pretty similar to regular Coke, and it doesn’t have any calories. This example actually leads to the second lesson I learned from the chapter.
Lesson 2- Only experts can “reliably account for their actions” (pg. 179). Essentially, only experts’ first impressions are real.
As consumers, we don’t really understand what happens during the creation of a product. This isn’t our fault at all—we’re obviously busy living our lives, which rarely includes researching in detail each product we buy. After trying a product for the first time, we may think we know the product well enough to decide whether we like it or not, but the truth is that we don’t.
Back to my Coke Zero example. Coke Zero may taste the same as regular Coke to me, but then again, I’m not an expert Coke drinker. Yes, I may have been drinking Coke for many years, but my life does not revolve around tasting different Coke products and determining which ones come out on top.
I think marketers can really use this lesson to position their products perfectly in the minds of their consumers. This lesson is essentially saying that if a product is not successful immediately, it’s alright…Use that second chance to take a step back, figure out how to expose consumers to your product correctly so they can figure out whether or not they actually want to purchase your product. Determining the right marketing mix is essential for a product’s success. Marketers need to be sure they’re selecting the right combination of promotions and distribution channels when introducing any product.
When I was trying to come up with a personal experience dealing with experts, one stuck out in my mind. It’s a little out there, but I think it supports my ideas. I think judges at dog shows are really fascinating people. Imagine, your whole job is to determine which dog is the best based on its body structure, fur, personality, among other things within a very short period of time. My dog, who was part of my family for 11 years, passed away last May, but I can still remember when we first brought her home. That’s because when my sister and I first saw her, we knew she was supposed to ours. She was a really beautiful dog—her breed was Shetland Sheepdog, so she was destined to look like a mini-Lassie. The thing is that even if she didn’t have that innate beauty, my family and I still would have thought she was beautiful because she was part of our family.
My dog, Shellie
This is where the dog show judges come in. The judges’ perception of beautiful can’t be determined by how much love they feel for a dog because that wouldn’t be fair. They have to judge the dogs using specific criteria within a few hours. That’s why sometimes the winners at these shows aren’t necessarily the most attractive dogs. No offense if you own one of them, but I personally don’t think that the Bull Terrier (the 2006 winner of the Westminster Kennel Club Dog Show) is particularly nice to look at. However, judges look past that and determine the best dog because they’re experts in the field.
A Bull Terrier
Lesson 1- It is important to understand if consumers really hate a product because of the product itself or because the product makes them nervous because it is different from anything they’ve ever seen before (pgs 173-174).
The implications of this lesson for marketers are pretty obvious. First, if a company’s product is terrible, it should be taken back to the drawing board for a revision. If the product is beyond repair, it should just be tossed out. It’s extremely important for marketers to find out what consumers want so they can provide them with useful products. Consumers buy certain products for specific benefits, and if they don’t believe a product can satisfy their needs, they won’t buy it.
In one of my past marketing classes, we discussed products that failed miserably, and one of my favorites was Harley-Davidson perfume. Why would anyone want to buy Harley-Davidson perfume? The brand caters to rich professionals who buy motorcycles to access their “wild” sides. When you think Harley-Davidson, what comes to mind? For me, I think of dirt and sweat. I wouldn’t want to buy perfume from a company that advocates riding a bike out in the sun. This was a brand extension that just wasn’t thought out completely.
Harley-Davidson PerfumeI have a personal story when it comes to a product that I thought was going to fail miserably, but actually has been doing pretty well in the market. I’ve always been an avid Coke drinker, but I never liked that one can of Coke has so many calories. I went home to Houston one weekend, and my dad had bought a case of Coke Zero. The first thought that came to mind when I thought about Coke Zero is that it would taste nothing like regular Coke, or worse, it would taste like Diet Coke (which I absolutely cannot stand). When I took my first sip, I was pleasantly surprised. Coke Zero actually tastes pretty similar to regular Coke, and it doesn’t have any calories. This example actually leads to the second lesson I learned from the chapter.
Lesson 2- Only experts can “reliably account for their actions” (pg. 179). Essentially, only experts’ first impressions are real.
As consumers, we don’t really understand what happens during the creation of a product. This isn’t our fault at all—we’re obviously busy living our lives, which rarely includes researching in detail each product we buy. After trying a product for the first time, we may think we know the product well enough to decide whether we like it or not, but the truth is that we don’t.
Back to my Coke Zero example. Coke Zero may taste the same as regular Coke to me, but then again, I’m not an expert Coke drinker. Yes, I may have been drinking Coke for many years, but my life does not revolve around tasting different Coke products and determining which ones come out on top.
I think marketers can really use this lesson to position their products perfectly in the minds of their consumers. This lesson is essentially saying that if a product is not successful immediately, it’s alright…Use that second chance to take a step back, figure out how to expose consumers to your product correctly so they can figure out whether or not they actually want to purchase your product. Determining the right marketing mix is essential for a product’s success. Marketers need to be sure they’re selecting the right combination of promotions and distribution channels when introducing any product.
When I was trying to come up with a personal experience dealing with experts, one stuck out in my mind. It’s a little out there, but I think it supports my ideas. I think judges at dog shows are really fascinating people. Imagine, your whole job is to determine which dog is the best based on its body structure, fur, personality, among other things within a very short period of time. My dog, who was part of my family for 11 years, passed away last May, but I can still remember when we first brought her home. That’s because when my sister and I first saw her, we knew she was supposed to ours. She was a really beautiful dog—her breed was Shetland Sheepdog, so she was destined to look like a mini-Lassie. The thing is that even if she didn’t have that innate beauty, my family and I still would have thought she was beautiful because she was part of our family.
My dog, Shellie
This is where the dog show judges come in. The judges’ perception of beautiful can’t be determined by how much love they feel for a dog because that wouldn’t be fair. They have to judge the dogs using specific criteria within a few hours. That’s why sometimes the winners at these shows aren’t necessarily the most attractive dogs. No offense if you own one of them, but I personally don’t think that the Bull Terrier (the 2006 winner of the Westminster Kennel Club Dog Show) is particularly nice to look at. However, judges look past that and determine the best dog because they’re experts in the field.
A Bull Terrier
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Disney Theme Parks: A Closer Look at the Happiest Places on Earth
When I was trying to decide what topic to write about for my current topic report, I wanted to make sure that I was really picking a brand that meant something to me. For as long as I can remember, Disney has been my favorite brand.
The Disney arena that I have the most familiarity with is Disney movies (which I am sure is the case for most people). I was first exposed to Disney movies at a very young age, and I still love to watch all of my favorite characters on a regular basis. It is especially interesting to see how Disney has evolved even since I was a child. The style of movies has moved from traditional cartoons such as The Lion King to computer animations like Finding Nemo.
Although the movies are a huge part of my Disney background, there’s an area that I love even more—the Disney theme parks. I’ve been to Disney World three times, Disneyland twice, and Euro Disney (which is in France) once. My last trip was to Disneyland in 2006, and I can feel myself wanting to scratch an itch by visiting another park in the near future.
Me in front of Sleeping Beauty's Castle at Disneyland
To me, the Disney theme parks really illustrate what it means to give customers the best experiences of their lives. For my report, I would like to focus more on the two parks in the US since I have taken multiple trips to both of them. People travel to Orlando and Anaheim from all around the world just to spend a week living in this enchanted world.
I really want to follow the timeline of the Disney parks and explore how Imagineers and “cast members” have worked tirelessly for decades to create some of the most visited tourist spots in the world. And what’s crazy to me is that the parks were created because of one little creature: Mickey Mouse. Who knew that someone so tiny would be the catalyst for the growth of the biggest entertainment company in the world.
Disney "Cast Members"
Even though Imagineers and “cast members” are the most conspicuous employees of Disney—the ones that are interviewed for TV shows or greet guests once they arrive— there are so many other people working behind the scenes to make sure consumers are happy. Not regular happy, but Disney happy. There is a significant difference. Every little thing done at any of the Disney theme parks has been planned for a specific reason, and most of the time consumers don’t even realize it.
Although I think that one of Disney’s best characteristics is that it appeals to both children and adults, I wonder how popular the theme parks are with individuals from the ages of 18 to 25. I know I have always been an avid Disney fan, but do other people my age feel the same way? Another thing I am curious about is how the parks have been able to stay so popular and successful even though so much has changed in our society since Disneyland first opened in the mid 1950s. What are consumers’ motivations for coming to the parks? These are a few areas that I would like to research more.
While initially researching my topic, I found some very interesting articles about the Disney experience and Walt Disney himself. In Walt Disney: Conversations, the author discusses that the reason the Disney experience is sought after is because its founder, Walt Disney, knew how to connect with the American people. After finding a common thread among children and adults, he used that knowledge to create experiences that every person could enjoy. He was also known to be an artist, which meant he found many new ways to portray original ideas. This eventually led to the creation of the Disney theme park, one of “the most important three-dimensional artform[s] of the twentieth century.” King, M. J. (2007, June). Walt Disney: Conversations. Journal of American Cultures, 30(2), 266-268.
Walt Disney
The Disney arena that I have the most familiarity with is Disney movies (which I am sure is the case for most people). I was first exposed to Disney movies at a very young age, and I still love to watch all of my favorite characters on a regular basis. It is especially interesting to see how Disney has evolved even since I was a child. The style of movies has moved from traditional cartoons such as The Lion King to computer animations like Finding Nemo. Although the movies are a huge part of my Disney background, there’s an area that I love even more—the Disney theme parks. I’ve been to Disney World three times, Disneyland twice, and Euro Disney (which is in France) once. My last trip was to Disneyland in 2006, and I can feel myself wanting to scratch an itch by visiting another park in the near future.
I can’t explain what it is about the Disney theme parks that excites me. It is amazing to me that anyone who walks through the gates of Cinderella’s castle (or Sleeping Beauty’s castle if you visit Disneyland) feels a sense of belonging. Whether you’re old or young, you feel like you’re being transported to another time and place when you’re inside those walls. The only word I can use to describe the experience is magical.
Me in front of Sleeping Beauty's Castle at DisneylandTo me, the Disney theme parks really illustrate what it means to give customers the best experiences of their lives. For my report, I would like to focus more on the two parks in the US since I have taken multiple trips to both of them. People travel to Orlando and Anaheim from all around the world just to spend a week living in this enchanted world.
I really want to follow the timeline of the Disney parks and explore how Imagineers and “cast members” have worked tirelessly for decades to create some of the most visited tourist spots in the world. And what’s crazy to me is that the parks were created because of one little creature: Mickey Mouse. Who knew that someone so tiny would be the catalyst for the growth of the biggest entertainment company in the world.
Disney "Cast Members"Even though Imagineers and “cast members” are the most conspicuous employees of Disney—the ones that are interviewed for TV shows or greet guests once they arrive— there are so many other people working behind the scenes to make sure consumers are happy. Not regular happy, but Disney happy. There is a significant difference. Every little thing done at any of the Disney theme parks has been planned for a specific reason, and most of the time consumers don’t even realize it.
Although I think that one of Disney’s best characteristics is that it appeals to both children and adults, I wonder how popular the theme parks are with individuals from the ages of 18 to 25. I know I have always been an avid Disney fan, but do other people my age feel the same way? Another thing I am curious about is how the parks have been able to stay so popular and successful even though so much has changed in our society since Disneyland first opened in the mid 1950s. What are consumers’ motivations for coming to the parks? These are a few areas that I would like to research more.
While initially researching my topic, I found some very interesting articles about the Disney experience and Walt Disney himself. In Walt Disney: Conversations, the author discusses that the reason the Disney experience is sought after is because its founder, Walt Disney, knew how to connect with the American people. After finding a common thread among children and adults, he used that knowledge to create experiences that every person could enjoy. He was also known to be an artist, which meant he found many new ways to portray original ideas. This eventually led to the creation of the Disney theme park, one of “the most important three-dimensional artform[s] of the twentieth century.” King, M. J. (2007, June). Walt Disney: Conversations. Journal of American Cultures, 30(2), 266-268.
Walt DisneySunday, February 15, 2009
Prego and Afro
This past weekend I watched a TED talk by Malcom Gladwell, which you can enjoy below:
The talk was largely focused on Howard Moskowitz, a psychophysicist who helped Prego create and launch its chunky spaghetti sauce, which helped the company’s sales surpass those of Ragu. The article discussed how Moscowitz basically debunked three assumptions regarding consumers (he zoned in on consumers from the food business, but I think his information can be applied to any industry).
The assumptions and his findings include:
Assumption 1: People know what they want and they will tell you.
Moscowitz: Consumers have no idea what they want! Some of the time they agree with their peers even if they don’t want to, some of the time they tell marketers the "right" information, and some of the time they have no idea what they’re talking about.
Assumption 2: Products experience horizontal segmentation, meaning there are different varieties of the same product and only one can really succeed.
Moscowitz: Different types of the same product exist to benefit different kinds of people. Each group should be catered to and satisfied.
Assumption 3: Every dish is “platonic,” meaning there is only one way to make it. (Like I said, Moskowitz’s research was based on food, but from my perspective, I took “dish” to mean any product.)
Moscowitz: We must go past the idea of “platonic” dishes and cater to variability based on consumers’ preferences. That means there should be changes to products based on each person’s needs.
All of Moscowitz’s ideas fit together to reach one idea: if consumers’ various desires can be discovered and satisfied, everyone will be happier.
Gladwell’s videocast caught my attention for a few different reasons. First, after reading his article, “True Colors” for class, I thought his work was entertaining. He has a knack for telling a good story. That being said, the lecture I watched was also really engaging since he talked about Moskowitz’s research for well-known companies such as Campbell’s and Pepsi. Hearing about how Pepsi tried to find the perfect Diet Pepsis, not Diet Pepsi, was really eye-opening because I didn’t realize how hard Moskowitz worked to satisfy multiple consumers’ needs instead of worrying about creating one perfect product.
Next, I thought his views were the complete opposite of Barry Schwarz’s views in his lecture, “The Paradox of Choice,” which I wrote about in my last entry. As I mentioned last time, Barry Schwarz wrote that people now suffer from a paralysis that results from having too many choices when trying to purchase products. I felt that Gladwell’s lecture was saying that that idea itself is what Moskowitz was trying to advocate: that people feel happier when they have the ability to pick from a variety of products because they’re more likely to find what they’re looking for.
Also, I also thought Gladwell’s ideas were fascinating because they supported another article we read in class, “Eager Sellers and Stony Buyers.” That article discussed how companies try too hard to come up with new and exciting products that they think will entice consumers, when in fact consumers are only interested in products that they can truly benefit from. I think Gladwell really hit this one on the head when talking about Moskowitz. Like I said before, Moskowitz helped Prego come up with chunky spaghetti sauce. The success of the chunky sauce really skyrocketed because Moskowitz learned how to benefit consumers by learning what they wanted. If companies could just learn that consumers want to get something out of their products (not just fun), they would be much more successful.
Finally, the last thing that caught my eye about Gladwell was his unforgettable hair. Be proud of your afro!
The talk was largely focused on Howard Moskowitz, a psychophysicist who helped Prego create and launch its chunky spaghetti sauce, which helped the company’s sales surpass those of Ragu. The article discussed how Moscowitz basically debunked three assumptions regarding consumers (he zoned in on consumers from the food business, but I think his information can be applied to any industry).
The assumptions and his findings include:
Assumption 1: People know what they want and they will tell you.
Moscowitz: Consumers have no idea what they want! Some of the time they agree with their peers even if they don’t want to, some of the time they tell marketers the "right" information, and some of the time they have no idea what they’re talking about.
Assumption 2: Products experience horizontal segmentation, meaning there are different varieties of the same product and only one can really succeed.
Moscowitz: Different types of the same product exist to benefit different kinds of people. Each group should be catered to and satisfied.
Assumption 3: Every dish is “platonic,” meaning there is only one way to make it. (Like I said, Moskowitz’s research was based on food, but from my perspective, I took “dish” to mean any product.)
Moscowitz: We must go past the idea of “platonic” dishes and cater to variability based on consumers’ preferences. That means there should be changes to products based on each person’s needs.
All of Moscowitz’s ideas fit together to reach one idea: if consumers’ various desires can be discovered and satisfied, everyone will be happier.
Gladwell’s videocast caught my attention for a few different reasons. First, after reading his article, “True Colors” for class, I thought his work was entertaining. He has a knack for telling a good story. That being said, the lecture I watched was also really engaging since he talked about Moskowitz’s research for well-known companies such as Campbell’s and Pepsi. Hearing about how Pepsi tried to find the perfect Diet Pepsis, not Diet Pepsi, was really eye-opening because I didn’t realize how hard Moskowitz worked to satisfy multiple consumers’ needs instead of worrying about creating one perfect product.
Next, I thought his views were the complete opposite of Barry Schwarz’s views in his lecture, “The Paradox of Choice,” which I wrote about in my last entry. As I mentioned last time, Barry Schwarz wrote that people now suffer from a paralysis that results from having too many choices when trying to purchase products. I felt that Gladwell’s lecture was saying that that idea itself is what Moskowitz was trying to advocate: that people feel happier when they have the ability to pick from a variety of products because they’re more likely to find what they’re looking for.
Also, I also thought Gladwell’s ideas were fascinating because they supported another article we read in class, “Eager Sellers and Stony Buyers.” That article discussed how companies try too hard to come up with new and exciting products that they think will entice consumers, when in fact consumers are only interested in products that they can truly benefit from. I think Gladwell really hit this one on the head when talking about Moskowitz. Like I said before, Moskowitz helped Prego come up with chunky spaghetti sauce. The success of the chunky sauce really skyrocketed because Moskowitz learned how to benefit consumers by learning what they wanted. If companies could just learn that consumers want to get something out of their products (not just fun), they would be much more successful.
Finally, the last thing that caught my eye about Gladwell was his unforgettable hair. Be proud of your afro!
Monday, February 2, 2009
The Paradox of Choice: Another Reason for Consumers to Rip Their Hair Out
I really enjoyed listening to Barry Schwarz’s lecture on the paradox of choice. Essentially, Schwarz talks about how individuals think they are experiencing freedom because they have an endless number of opportunities to choose from. In fact, sometimes as consumers, we have so many different product options to choose from that we ultimately end up not choosing any option at all. And, by some chance, if we are able to pick one of the available choices, we feel unhappy with our choice because we think one of the options we didn’t choose is better than the one that we did choose. Confusing? I think so. I’ll give a personal example.
A few days ago, I was having some allergy issues so I went to CVS to buy some medicine. When I reached the allergy aisle, I was shocked to see how many different types of allergy medicines there were. There were at least three different brand names (Benadryl, Claritin, Zyrtec, etc.), along with the generic brands. On top that, within each brand, there were at least a few different types of medications for people who wanted non-drowsy or nighttime medicines. I literally spent about 20 minutes trying to figure out which brand and type of medicine to buy. I finally settled on Claritin non-drowsy tablets.
I hurriedly came home and took one of the pills, which should have taken effect within 30 minutes. Needless to say, 6 hours later when I was getting ready to go to sleep, the medicine still wasn’t kicking in as well as I would have liked. I was so angry with myself! How was it possible that after spending so much time trying to select from such a variety of medicines that I picked the one that didn’t work!?
That’s Schwarz’s argument. It’s not that the Claritin didn’t necessarily work. It’s just that in my mind, I had set such high expectations for the Claritin that after it didn’t live up to my standards, I felt regret and anger for not choosing another brand. And that anger could only be towards myself because I was the one who decided which brand to buy.
I think Schwarz’s ideas are really enlightening when it comes to consumer decisions. I think his ideas have even bigger implications for marketers. Ask yourself this: how many brands can you think of that only offer one type or version of any product? I honestly can’t think of any. That means that marketers have to work incredibly hard to make their product stand out in consumers’ minds. In department or grocery stores, that’ll be almost impossible for them to do unless consumers already have preconceived notions before entering the store. If a consumer comes into a store similarly to how I did for my allergy medication, it’s really the luck of the draw for which brand he or she will end up picking. That means marketers have to work harder than ever to elevate their brand over the competition.
On the other hand, I do think there is a way for some marketers to take advantage of this paradox of choice idea, and it deals with marketing to consumers online. Like I mentioned in my Generation Y post, it all comes back to technology. If I, as a consumer, am guided through the many choices from which I could potentially choose, I think I would be less frustrated with the choice I end up picking. Usually this guidance doesn’t happen when you physically go to a store because half the time you can’t find any store clerks, but online it is possible. For example, in the picture below (click to enlarge) you can see that when you go to a popular retail website such as OldNavy.com, you have the option to narrow down what’s available by providing the specific sizes you are looking for. Additionally, you can also narrow down the type of clothing you’re interested in, such as pants, tees, skirts, etc., which will make it easier for you to find what you are looking for.
I want to clear something up here. I’m not saying the paradox of choice is a positive thing for consumers if a company has a website. I’m saying that if a brand’s marketers are able to help narrow down consumers’ choices, consumers will be happier with that specific brand because they will have been provided help to shrink down what initially seemed to be an endless list of possibilities. After shopping online, these consumers will be more likely to go to retail locations and purchase products from the company since they were previously satisfied with their online purchases.
A few days ago, I was having some allergy issues so I went to CVS to buy some medicine. When I reached the allergy aisle, I was shocked to see how many different types of allergy medicines there were. There were at least three different brand names (Benadryl, Claritin, Zyrtec, etc.), along with the generic brands. On top that, within each brand, there were at least a few different types of medications for people who wanted non-drowsy or nighttime medicines. I literally spent about 20 minutes trying to figure out which brand and type of medicine to buy. I finally settled on Claritin non-drowsy tablets.
I hurriedly came home and took one of the pills, which should have taken effect within 30 minutes. Needless to say, 6 hours later when I was getting ready to go to sleep, the medicine still wasn’t kicking in as well as I would have liked. I was so angry with myself! How was it possible that after spending so much time trying to select from such a variety of medicines that I picked the one that didn’t work!?
That’s Schwarz’s argument. It’s not that the Claritin didn’t necessarily work. It’s just that in my mind, I had set such high expectations for the Claritin that after it didn’t live up to my standards, I felt regret and anger for not choosing another brand. And that anger could only be towards myself because I was the one who decided which brand to buy.
I think Schwarz’s ideas are really enlightening when it comes to consumer decisions. I think his ideas have even bigger implications for marketers. Ask yourself this: how many brands can you think of that only offer one type or version of any product? I honestly can’t think of any. That means that marketers have to work incredibly hard to make their product stand out in consumers’ minds. In department or grocery stores, that’ll be almost impossible for them to do unless consumers already have preconceived notions before entering the store. If a consumer comes into a store similarly to how I did for my allergy medication, it’s really the luck of the draw for which brand he or she will end up picking. That means marketers have to work harder than ever to elevate their brand over the competition.
On the other hand, I do think there is a way for some marketers to take advantage of this paradox of choice idea, and it deals with marketing to consumers online. Like I mentioned in my Generation Y post, it all comes back to technology. If I, as a consumer, am guided through the many choices from which I could potentially choose, I think I would be less frustrated with the choice I end up picking. Usually this guidance doesn’t happen when you physically go to a store because half the time you can’t find any store clerks, but online it is possible. For example, in the picture below (click to enlarge) you can see that when you go to a popular retail website such as OldNavy.com, you have the option to narrow down what’s available by providing the specific sizes you are looking for. Additionally, you can also narrow down the type of clothing you’re interested in, such as pants, tees, skirts, etc., which will make it easier for you to find what you are looking for.
I want to clear something up here. I’m not saying the paradox of choice is a positive thing for consumers if a company has a website. I’m saying that if a brand’s marketers are able to help narrow down consumers’ choices, consumers will be happier with that specific brand because they will have been provided help to shrink down what initially seemed to be an endless list of possibilities. After shopping online, these consumers will be more likely to go to retail locations and purchase products from the company since they were previously satisfied with their online purchases.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)