Why would you even want to read this?
Because organizations/ brands are built and destroyed in the
consumer’s mind. It is for this very reason that most organizations try to
create a favourable impression of their offerings in the Consumer mind space. However,
very few brands have been able to create a consistent and time tested
relationship with their potential Consumer base. And this mere fact highlights
the enormity of the challenge faced by organizations across sizes, categories
and geographies.
In this and the next article, we would try to understand what
goes into the Consumer Decision process and how does the concept of Brand fits
in it. There is a reason for breaking this topic into a two part post. I have
written it before cramping everything in a single article. It was a classic
example of ‘neither here nor there’ – I was neither able to explain everything
nor I was able to keep it simple for your understanding.
My Approach:
The last two articles were actually written to answer this
crucial question only. In the first, we have tried to understand the EARmodel of Consumer Decision Making. It says that while making any
purchase decision, a consumer, evaluates the available options on a mix of three
parameters: Emotional (E), Aspirational (A) and Rational (R). The weightage
given to each of these parameters are dependent on many factors including the
personal preferences (persona), category, occasion/ reason for purchase and
budget considerations.
In the article related to Brand, we have seen that
Brand, at a concept level, essentially exists in the mind of the consumer. I
have also tried to present my own understanding of Brand: Brand, at a
Concept level, is a differentiator which facilitates the evaluation process in
purchase decision by evoking benefits and emotions associated with them. Before
moving ahead, you may like to revisit those articles just to refresh which
would aid better appreciation of what is to be explained next.
Now that both the concepts have been explained and we are
trying to bring them together, I could bring in elements to further refine as
well as expand both the concepts. You would agree that both Brand and Consumer
Decision Making are too vast to be covered in small articles. Thus, I would
keep on adding elements whenever required to facilitate understanding. In fact,
I intend to keep doing this in this entire series: introduce concepts and add
layers when required.
How do Consumers approach Decision Making?
Just having a model in hand would not help us solve the
problem of Consumer Decision Making entirely. If it would have been so easy,
marketing world would have been much more refined and exciting. We would need
to understand the usual rules in which the model is applicable. These rules
also specify the boundary in which a decision is often made. When highlighted
these appear to be logical but many a times organizations/ brands/ marketers
either forget or overlook these while implementing their strategies to woo potential
customers/ consumers. The following pointers are to be kept in mind while
approaching EAR model to understand the Consumer Decision Making process.
The first point is that (S)he does not want to regret his/
her decision. I would like to claim it to be the universal truth but I have
seen enough world to understand that this would also have alternative
narratives. And though dissonance is very normal too, consumers seek
satisfaction and peace of mind from their decisions.
The second thing to keep in mind is that consumers seek to
simplify their decision process. Just imagine your own life: there are so many things to take
care of, to worry about. Would you like to take added tension for anything
under the sun? The usual answer is No except perhaps for the things which actually
are significant in your life. Pause a moment and you would realize that we have
touched the idea of ‘Involvement’ here. Involvement refers to the time and
effort a consumer is willing to commit for purchase. In traditional texts,
purchase is usually categorized into High and Low Involvement. The general
perception is that products with low financial value or those in routine buying
behavior are low involvement products and those which have significantly higher
value or bought infrequently. What is often missed in this understanding (and
present in most textbooks) is the factor of risk be it financial, social or
personal. The recognition of these risks also guides the way decision is made. What
is to be noted, however, is that even with a high involvement purchase, a
consumer likes to take minimum hassles to reach the final decision. This is
one of the primary reasons behind the emergence and growth of the new-gen
search and delivery models like Amazon, Trivago, Makemytrip, Zomato, Swiggy
etc.
I would put in one last point for stimulating your thought
process before moving on to the model. Before approaching brand and consumer
decision making, we must acknowledge that there is only so much an average
human mind can recall and put into context at any given point of time. Thus,
while making a decision, it is quite common to overlook certain options even if
they are not into your ‘no-no’ list. As a result, it is also possible that
certain options which were left behind while making last decision may make a
comeback while making the next decision.
With these 3 broad points, let us revisit our EAR model of
decision making. We know that while making a decision, a consumer usually
evaluate on 3 parameters: Emotional, Aspirational & Rational (and thus
named brilliantly EAR by me). The priorities of these elements/ parameters vary
depending on person, category, occasion etc. It looks like the figure given
below.
Though it is self-explanatory, I am anyhow mentioning that
the following options would not feature in the Consumer Decision Making
process:
1.
Options of which consumers are unaware
2.
Options of which consumers are aware of but know very little
about and hence do not play a role in Decision Making
3.
Options of which consumers are aware of but somehow do not
come to fore at the time of decision making
I have deliberately used the word ‘Option’ here and not ‘Brand’.
It is just to highlight that anything which is differentiated enough to be
considered as an option by the Consumer is a Brand to him/ her (just to make
the definition clearer). We will now use the word Brand much freely.
We know that brand resides in the mind of buyers/ consumers. We
also know that all the options are evaluated through the prisms of Emotion,
Aspiration and Rational. At any given point of time, for every relevant
category, a brand map exists in consumer mind which maps all the active options/
brands on these three parameters. This map keeps on changing with time,
exposure and experiences. This presents twin challenge to the marketers: the
first one is to be present and stay in that active map all the time; the next
one is to be present in the relevant zone for that category & target
consumer group. We will take these two in detail in upcoming articles.
Mind Zones
You would have guessed at least three zones by now: they come
with the model, right? Emotional, Aspirational and Rational zones are pretty
evident but there are others too which are a mix of these elements.
Most of the brands, in most of the categories, lie in and
around the Rational zones. It is most crowded/ cluttered space to be in. In
fact, ideally any new Brand would enter the Consumer mind space through this
route only.
A few brands would be present in the zones around Aspiration.
By the construct, very few brands would actually be in the Aspiration zone and
a few in the zones around it. You may argue that this would actually be a
crowded space too for many, as the brand list may become bigger and bigger as
one moves towards the socially and economically deprived. This brings me to
discuss briefly the concept of Brand Relevance. It is important because we
are discussing brands in the context of Purchase Decision Making.
Purchase is bounded by two realities: Budget and
Accessibility. This makes very few options relevant to consumer for that
decision. Thus, true brand options for any consumer in and around the
Aspiration zone would be limited. So, if I have to buy a car and my budget is
only around INR 6 Lakhs, all the mid segment and luxury cars would move out of
the purview for that purchase decision. Similarly, if I want to buy furniture
but Ikea does not cater to my geography, I cannot buy from Ikea and hence it
does not feature in my decision making.
Emotional on the other hand is a far elite club where only a
few brand exist. This zone is cultivated in Consumer mind space through years
of exposure, interaction and experience.
Apart from the three basic zones, thus, there are four
secondary zones as illustrated in the figure above.
Way Forward:
Now that we know about the mind zones, in the next article, we
would see how brands are mapped in different zones. If I would have explained
it here, it would have been an overdose. Besides, that article would need
illustrations and live examples to make the concept clearer. We would also
discuss some interesting facets about various zones.
Post Script:
There is another zone which is not explained here. A brand
can evoke none of the emotions associated with any of the zones strongly for a
significant population. Thus, while, it may evoke some benefits/ emotions
in an individual’s mind, its overall standing is diffused and hence cannot be
zoned in any particular way. These brands are weak and can be termed as
‘listless’.
Comments