1) What was the biggest surprise for you in
the reading? In other words, what did you read that stood out the most as
different from your expectations?
The biggest surprise for me is that marketers stepped away from the notion of segmented demographics. It seems like that would be an extremely reliable indicator of someone's inclination to purchase your product. Someone with certain "values and tastes" could enjoy something expensive, but if they're not in the correct income bracket, why waste effort marketing to them?
2)
Identify at least one part of the reading that was confusing to you.
Nothing in the article was really confusing. The author did a good job of piecing together various anecdotes where trying to force non-demographic segments into a marketing plan failed and the best answer was ultimately keeping the market traditionally segmented.
3)
If you were able to ask two questions to the author, what would you ask?
Why?
What is the best way to link lifestyle choices to the product being examined? This was hinted at in the "Which attributes matter to the buying decision?", but did not go into detail.
What would be the most practical way to reintroduce segmentation into traditional demographics (age, sex, education, and income)? Is the answer as simple as firing the statisticians who decidedly turn market research into a canvas for their creativity in lieu of KISS (keeping it stupid simple)?
4)
Was there anything you think the author was wrong about? Where do you disagree
with what she or he said? How?
I do not really disagree with anything written by the author. I think it was an extremely well-pieced article that shows how we try to over-create things when the answer is right there. It's almost as if the spawn of non-demographic segmentation is the result of self-preservation of market researchers trying to stand out among the crowd of competition, and in effect, make a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. (Well, we can offer you 300 pages of graphs compared to our competitions 150 pages - and do it at a cheaper cost!)
No comments:
Post a Comment