In today’s business reality, decisions cannot be based on random,

uncontrollable factors such as luck. The same goes for the assessment of

which insights to take on in the innovation funnel. In this fast-moving

environment the risk of failure is greater than ever.

Figures reported by the Doblin Group show that 96% of all new product

introductions and innovations fail to return their cost of capital (Marsh,

2012). The current market space requires brands to validate each step of the

entire innovation process, starting with the validation of insights.

What to

expect

Consumers are social animals

and our decisions are colored by

group thinking or herd behavior

(Earls, 2009). The majority of

consumer decisions are taken in

a social setting. Nevertheless, we

do not take this social dimension

into account in survey research.

We keep on conducting

surveys in an individualistic

setting, where participants are

asked the one question after the

other without being able to

connect and reflect with other

participants.

1 From insight to innovation

Consumers are bad witnesses of

their own behavior. Survey

research traditionally taps into

the so-called ‘system 2 thinking’

of our brain. Nonetheless, the

entire thinking behind behavioral

economics and the work of

Daniel Kahneman (2011) show

that our decisions are mainly

taken quickly, automatically

by the so-called ‘system 1’

side of the brain. Therefore we

need to tap more into implicit

attitudes and procedural

knowledge in our surveys.

The majority of consumer

decisions are taken in a given

context or occasion. It is

important to grasp the contextual

background consumers are in

when making certain decisions.

We need to get a better

understanding of the

variations in consumer

behavior depending on the

consumer situation or

context.

1 2 3

Survey research copes insufficiently with the

complex reality of consumer behavior.

Decisions are influenced by a number of dynamics

and it is important that surveys mirror these different

aspects in order to provide valuable input for the

decision-making process.

Considering the importance of validating these insights for

the innovation process, the need for accuracy is more

present than ever. Can insight validation through surveys

reclaim its position to provide consistent and rich data for

decision-making by capturing the complex consumer reality,

while at the same time increasing the engagement level?

A PARADIGM SHIFT

Today, consumers expect to go beyond

simply ‘responding’. Yet the foundation of

survey research, as Pete Comley (2006)

describes, is a parent/child relationship between

researcher and participant. The sole role of

participants is to respond to a researcher’s

questions, without allowing them to return with a

question themselves. Therefore the time has

come for us to allow participants to play a

more active role in research and become an

empowered partner. This empowerment starts

with creating an engaging survey experience for

participants by fostering feelings of autonomy,

competence, relatedness and value.

In research we can identify three supplementary

collaboration modes between researcher, brands

and consumers: listening, doing and co-

creating.

These collaboration modes can be plotted against

a second dimension representing the inter-

consumer relations or interactions. Theories such

as Herd’s make us realize that we are more

socially determined than we think. We need to

move away from solely looking at the

individual respondent and to start

recognizing the value of consumer

interactions. This is where our second dimension

comes in, a continuum going from ‘individual’ to

‘connected’ in 3 phases: me, crowd, group.

Figure 1. Research collaboration framework

By combining both dimensions, we can

identify a framework with twelve quadrants

(see Figure 1). Traditional insight validation

research primarily focuses on one single

cross-point in this framework, namely

‘individual’ and ‘asking’. Yet we can benefit

greatly from going beyond this single-

box thinking. This does not imply that we

should completely let go of asking questions

to participants; that will still remain the core

of insight validation research. However,

combining the different collaboration

modes will allow us to better uncover

the underlying dimensions of an insight

strength and better capture the

complex consumer reality behind an

insight.

7

CLOETTA CASE

STUDY

Cloetta is a leading confectionery company founded in

Sweden in 1862. Cloetta owns some of the strongest

brands in the market (e.g. Läkerol, Jenkki), all with a

long heritage. Cloetta’s goal is to build a solid

foundation of consumer understanding as the

key to success for break-through and break-out

innovations in fun yet rather mature categories such

as candy, chocolate, chewing gum and pastilles.

Insight validation research is firmly embedded in their

innovation process as it helps the Cloetta team decide

which insights to take forward in their innovation

funnel. Their quest for consumer understanding

translates into the need to understand why

certain insights underperform and how they

could be optimized.

1 Project background

In order to assess the impact of this new

approach, we split-ran the survey. Some

participants got a traditional insight validation

survey whereas others got the enriched version

containing some new engaging tools and a

’Village’ dimension. The research approach is

based on our new survey thinking where we

go beyond asking questions and apply the

principles of the self-determination theory

to better engage participants.

2 Project methodology

After the main survey, participants were invited to

enter “The Village”, a second optional survey

dimension where engaged participants could take

their collaboration with the Cloetta brand a step

further. After having filled out the survey, the

participants had the choice to opt in for this part

where they could connect with other participants

and participate in some additional contextual

tasks. The Village is a platform consisting of

different buildings, each containing a

different task-based element.

Figure 2. Cloetta project framework

This insight validation survey thus went

beyond the traditional single-box

thinking of ‘individual’ and

‘asking’. The different tools in and after

the main survey can be plotted on our

framework (see Figure 2). The survey

still consisted of various research

questions assessing the strength of an

insight, yet on the individual dimension

we also introduced some task-based

exercises. Next to that, the

introduction of The Village allowed

us to involve the crowd through the

social dimension embedded in these

tools. More detailed information on each

of these tools is available in the next

section.

Next to the traditional questions and key performance indicators measuring

the insight strength, we introduced some new tools in the survey:

3 Project approach

IMPLICIT MEASUREMENT TOOL

Through emotional measurement, we map

the emotions which are triggered by an

insight as well as their relative emotional

positioning. Knowing the emotional space

claimed by an insight is powerful information

for ideation, concept development, future

communication and brand activation.

To map this, we used our implicit association

tool. This tool allowed to understand which

emotions are natural, potential or

limited. Through a action-based exercise,

we avoid stated responses and over-

rationalizations. This implicit measurement

exercise allows plotting all emotions on two

dimensions: (1) the percentage of

participants linking the emotion to the

insight and (2) the time required to press

the space bar, resulting in four

quadrants (see Figure 3).

NATURAL

ASSOCIATIONS

POTENTIAL

ASSOCIATIONS

NICHE

ASSOCIATIONS

LIMITS

These are spontaneous emotions; the

majority of participants link the emotion

with the insight within an above-average

reaction time.

These emotions are triggered only

amongst a few participants, yet the

reaction time is above average.

These emotions are highly associated

with the insight; they do however

require some reflection (response time is

below average).

Few participants link the emotion to the

statement; the reaction time is below

average.

Figure 3. Implicit Measurement quadrant

FREQUENCY

RE

AC

TIO

N T

IME

One of the key performance indicators when testing an insight’s strength is

relevance. Relevance can be driven by personal identification or by

peer identification. Traditionally we measure identification using a stated

question in which participants are asked to indicate on a 7-point scale to

which extent they identify with the statement. This question is then

followed by an open-ended question, asking them to elaborate on their

response.

In the new survey set-up we took this a step further by showing

participants the results of this question - including their own

answers and the answers of other participants up until that point

in the survey. We asked participants to interpret and explain the results

using their own background and knowledge as a reflection point. This

‘crowd interpretation’ approach puts them in a co-researcher role.

After having filled out the survey, the participants could opt in for

‘The Village’ where they could connect with other participants

and further collaborate with the Cloetta brand. The Cloetta Village

consisted of five buildings: Lounge, Ideation, Picture Shop, Internet café

and Gallery (see Figure 4).

RESULT SHARING TOOL

The Lounge (1) is the most central

building of the Village where

participants can connect with one

another, start a discussion on topics created

by the researcher and even post topics of

their own. This is where participants can

connect with one another, the researcher and

the Cloetta team.

In the Lounge we introduced three featured

topics where participants could introduce

themselves, give feedback on the survey and

share their advice with the Cloetta brand.

This introduction topic enhances the

feeling of being visible as a consumer.

Not only did we introduce Cloetta as a brand

in this topic, we also openly shared the

objectives of the research. The latter

encourages consumers to provide valuable

feedback to help a brand. Apart from these

featured topics, participants could create

their own posts related to the research

topic, which allowed them to discuss

and interact with other participants.

This open social space helped to gain

additional insights as it provided us with

answers to questions we did not even ask.

51

2

43

In the “Picture Shop” (2) participants were invited to participate in 5 tasks by uploading

pictures and reflecting on these. Such a task-based element allows to get a better understanding of

the consumers’ context. The different tasks are inspired by observational and ethnographical research:

consumers are asked to explore their environment, observe their own behavior by taking pictures and

reflect upon them. In the Gallery (5) building, participants could view the work of others, ‘Like’ it and

comment on it.

In the Ideation building (3) participants could brainstorm and share ideas on three topics

related to the insights tested in the survey. Besides posting their own ideas, participants could see

what other people posted and ‘Like’ it or comment on it. This idea sharing allows involving participants in

discovering the solution space. The output of this exercise is the creation of ‘idea cards’, which

combine a consumer idea with an inspirational visual that can be used in future ideation or concept

writing workshops.

In the Internet café (4) participants created the Facebook page of the typical person who

would identify with one of the key insights tested in the survey. The participants could create this

persona by uploading pictures, adding socio-demographic information and a description of that person’s

interests.

In the Gallery (5) participants could view the reviews of others, ‘Like’ them and add reviews

themselves.

The additional task-based elements lead not only to more data, but also to better data. These findings

show that by involving consumers in an interpretive role, we can gain a greater

understanding. The reason behind these findings can be explained by additional research

conducted by Balcetis and Dunning (2011).

The contextual output from the new tools and challenges, composed of consumer visuals, stories and

ideas, allowed us to add more sensing and understanding to the research results.

In the Internet café participants were invited to create the Facebook page of the typical person who

would identify with one of the key insights. This exercise resulted in different Facebook personae.

The most recurring personae were hard-working women in their late 30s with a nice

career and young children. They were visualized by images like a 7-armed woman (see Figure 5)

- returning home, checking her e-mails, feeding the kids, running the household.

4 Research findings

IMPACT FOR THE RESEARCHER

Figure 5. Persona matching the survey data

In addition, the involvement

of consumers in shaping the

consumer space (Ideation

tool) and the possibility to

share their advice and

feedback allowed us to

shape very tangible

recommendations for

future improvement or

product ideas.

A first key benefit for Cloetta was the addition

of contextual understanding to the

validation process.

This new survey approach helped Cloetta

get a sense of why certain insights

perform better than others and how they

could be optimized.

The task-based elements in The Village

allowed for Cloetta to grasp the contextual

space behind a consumer insight and

identify cultural differences.

The consumer-generated visuals and stories

helped bring these differences to life.

By sharing the results of the identification KPI we

gained 66% of additional learnings, especially

regarding some subtle wording of the

insights.

Consumers explained for example how some

words should be avoided, helping Cloetta to

understand how they could rephrase the

insight and increase its potential.

Next, the open conversations and discussions in

the Lounge gave Cloetta a feel for the

spontaneous conversations and topics

linked to the insights areas.

IMPACT FOR CLOETTA

5 To conclude

Traditional insight validation surveys should thus be enriched with engaging tools

and tasks that allow us to grasp the contextual space behind an insight

and help form tangible recommendations for improvement.

The quest to uncover high-potential consumer insights will never end. Yet

the calculation of an insight’s strength score is not enough. The goal should be to

enrich this validation process, so that it helps us understand how certain

insights can be improved and optimized and why others should be ignored.

Insight validation therefore is more than gathering those go/no-go decisions; it is

about gaining an understanding as to why certain insights perform well

and others do not.

References

• Balcetis, E. & Dunning, D. (2011). Considering the situation: Why

people are better social psychologists than self-psychologists.

Self and Identity, 1-15.

• Earls, M. (2009). Herd: How to Change Mass Behaviour by

Harnessing Our True Nature. Wiley.

• Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. Macmillan. ISBN

978-1-4299-6935-2.

• Marsh, L. (2012). 8 ways to ensure your new-product launch

succeeds. Retrieved January 6, 2014, from

http://www.fastcompany.com

Katia Pallini

Survey Innovation Manager

InSites Consulting

Mechtild De Bruin,

International Knowledge & Insights leader

Cloetta

Annelies Verhaeghe

Managing Partner

InSites Consulting

Thank you!

@InSites

marketing@insites-consulting.com

www.facebook.com/insitesconsulting

www.slideshare.net/InSitesConsulting