A “new study”—so many questions.
It took us a while, too, to recover from the German national team’s completely unexpected elimination from the World Cup—which is why our newsletter is a little late this week. And as if that weren’t bad enough, we’re reading from the consulting firm Roland Berger: “New Study—Brands Are Losing Influence.” For some in the marketing community, the phrase “new study” is practically synonymous with “future truth,” and the findings are immediately adopted by management without a second thought—even though the headline alone says it all. We, just like you, dear reader, are a bit more critical and actually take a closer look at the study. In this case, we read: “Only 21 percent of respondents cite brand reputation as one of the three most important reasons for making a purchase. At the same time, personal networks have risen to become the second-most-important source of product information: 40 percent discover products through friends and family, and 21 percent through direct peer recommendations.” And that immediately raises so many questions: Since when do consumers admit that they let “brand reputation” influence their purchasing decisions? If it’s “only” 21 percent now—how much was it before? If personal networks are the “second most important source of products”—what, then, is the most important one? And, anyway, what is a “source of products”? And when friends and family (apparently the product source?) recommend a product, are they really just recommending a “product” (“I recommend this web-enabled multifunctional food processor that also…”) or perhaps a brand after all (“I love my Thermomix!”)? Doesn’t a recommendation have anything to do with brands? And, finally, shouldn’t a renowned management consulting firm be able to describe its study results with a minimum of clarity and care? Too many questions for a small study?
What do you think?
Leave a Reply