Читать книгу Why People Buy - Louis Cheskin - Страница 11
ОглавлениеTHE STRUCTURE OF A MARKETING PROGRAM
IN A CASUAL conversation at an informal gathering, a man said he was having some trouble with his digestion and was going to see a doctor. One of the group suggested that he see a specialist in this particular ailment. “Oh no,” my friend said, “I don’t like specialists. They cure their specialty instead of your actual trouble.” This statement made me think that marketing, like medicine, is full of specialists, each seeing his specialty as the only or most important element in a marketing situation.
Advertising people generally operate on the premise that the advertising theme or plan, plus a big budget, is the key to any marketing success. The introduction of the Edsel is an excellent example of maximum concentration on advertising and promotion.
Obviously, the 1958 Edsel was launched on the assumption that the design of the car was not a vital factor in marketing an automobile and that the name of the car was of minor importance. The name could be chosen for sentimental reasons, those in charge must have reasoned, since, after all, the advertising and promotion will be the biggest and best ever.
The marketing failure of the 1958 Edsel is one demonstration of the falsity of the assumption that with a big advertising budget and great promotion campaign you can sell anything.
Another demonstration that a big advertising budget is not all that is needed to sell a product is the case of a manufacturer of a breakfast food. The agency for the breakfast food was interested in developing a new marketing theme. The agency men decided that in order to get a fresh sales approach, they needed a new package. They sold management on the idea and a new package design was created.
When the marketing effectiveness of the new package design was measured by means of tests conducted on an unconscious level, it failed to pass the tests. The brand managers and the agency executives did not like the test results which contradicted their opinions and were not in tune with the marketing theme they conceived.
The research findings were disregarded and the new packages were produced and delivered to the stores. However, they remained on the store shelves. Although a big advertising campaign backed the introduction of the new package, the old consumers did not recognize the brand in the new packages and the new packages did not attract new consumers.
The company was forced to discontinue the new packages and cut off the new campaign. The old familiar package reappeared on the market.
The launching of the 1958 Edsel car and the introduction of a new package for an old brand of breakfast food are both excellent examples demonstrating that an advertising campaign by itself, no matter how good or how big, does not assure having a successful marketing program.
Not only advertising specialists are often guilty of considering their special field the only major factor in marketing. Package designers frequently stress packaging above everything else.
Designers are creative individuals. They love to create new ideas and new forms. They naturally strive to change. They normally consider everything that is new superior to everything that is old.
The greatest contribution of designers is their originality and creativity, which can, under some conditions, be negative factors in marketing.
Consumers in general are tired of the old, but fear the new. They are stimulated by and are also made to feel insecure by the new. Many people are attracted by new objects and new forms, but they resist them because they are strange. Although the old forms and objects give people feelings of security, they are often boring or unstimulating.
Research has shown that people readily accept something new about the old. The old part makes them feel secure and confident; the new aspect is stimulating and interesting.
The question is how much of the old and how much new should there be in a product in order for it to have maximum consumer acceptance?
We get the answer to questions of this kind from research, the kind of research that reveals true consumer attitudes and shows actual behavior of consumers in relation to the product or article.
Such research has disclosed that a new package is not always more effective than the old one, that the package of good taste is not always the best marketing tool and that the most original design is not always the best for a particular product. Marketing experience has later confirmed the results of tests that were conducted on an unconscious level.
Sales people often have their eyes focused at one point. They are frequently guilty of considering aggressive selling techniques as the most important factors in marketing. Sales managers are apt to disregard everything else in a marketing program and stress only aggressive selling. They put all emphasis on the sales pitch and on beating the pavements.
Sales specialists often stress competitive pricing as the key to increasing the volume of sales. If the product does not move fast enough, lower the price, is the dictum of many a sales manager.
Too rare is the sales manager who studies the nature of the advertising or looks into the effectiveness of the package or point of sale material.
Production men also are generally over-specialized. They, too, are immersed in production problems and often fail to see the company-and-consumer relationship as a whole or the marketing side.
The automotive engineer is convinced that the car having the best engine will have the greatest sale. The average engineer can’t understand or believe that styling has more to do with selling a car than the engine. It makes no sense to him.
The production manager of a candy manufacturing plant could not believe that the candy with the most expensive ingredients did not have the greatest consumer acceptance. Quality is an objective reality to a production man. Good is good for everybody. The best is the best for all, according to many production managers.
Our highly industrialized, complex society must have specialists. Knowledge has become so wide and great that no one person can possibly know all or even the basic principles of more than one or two fields of knowledge. We must rely on specialists. However, we should always keep in mind the weaknesses or dangers inherent in specialization.
Specialists generally look for their specialty. They are apt to overlook the real weakness, the true source of trouble, because they look with the eyes of the specialist. They find only what they look for because they unconsciously and naturally look for the thing in which they specialize.
When I was a boy I heard the following story: A benevolent ruler of a city state was reaching the age of retirement. He was making plans to hand over the governing duties to one of his assistants. He could not decide which of two would be the better ruler. Both of them flattered him and catered to his wishes. But what would either one of them do if he were master? That was the question. So the wise old man sent the two young men out to do a research job. Each was given an assignment to make a journey to a well known distant city state to study its people. He wanted a report on the integrity, honesty, diligence and cooperative spirit of the residents of that city state.
One young man brought back a report that this city state was full of rascals, gangsters, crooks and ne’er-do-wells.
The other young man’s report disclosed that the citizens o£ that city state were good, honest, hard-working and cooperative.
Each of them found the kind of people he was looking for. The one who looked for goodness found it. The other who searched for evil found it.
All of us are apt to see things according to our own yardsticks. We generally find what we are looking for, and too often we fail to see anything that we are not looking for, no matter how vital it may be.
To assure success, marketing men must guard against this danger. They must look at all the four sides of the marketing structure. They must examine all four walls that support the marketing roof. They must concentrate on all the sides that make profit possible.
The Product
The most important side of the marketing structure is the product. A product that is not as good as that of competition is not likely to be a great success, no matter how good everything else is.
A strong promotion, a large advertising budget or an appealing package may make the first sale to the consumer. But for repeat sales, the product must be at least as good as that of competition.
Better still, is having a product that is superior to that of competition. A superior product means superior in the eyes of consumers. It does not necessarily mean superior in terms of objective values or according to laboratory standards. The following examples show that actual value or cost and consumers’ concepts of value are not always the same.
In a test with consumers of four kinds of candy, we found that the most costly candy did not have great consumer acceptance.
Four types of imported silk yard goods were tested with consumers. The finest silk had low preference, about as low as the poorest quality. The second best, or the second highest in cost, had the highest consumer preference, regardless of price.
Neckties ranging from $1.00 to $10.00 in value were offered as prizes. Each person was free to take any tie he wanted. The $5.00 ties had the greatest acceptance, the $7.50 ties were second highest in preference and the $2.50 ties were a close third. The $10.00 ties and the $1.00 ties were taken by very few.
Six makes of suits were offered as prizes to men who participated in a test. The values of the suits were $45, $75, $95, $125, $175 and $225. The greatest number of choices were for the $125 suit. The $175 suit was a close second and the $95 one was third. The $75 suit and the $225 one had few takers. The $45 suit had no takers.
These are a few of many examples illustrating that actual quality is not the same as consumer acceptance or the consumer’s idea of quality. This is true in all fields and with all products.
Because objective standards are not always the same as consumers’ standards, a new product should be tested with consumers before it is put on the market. It should be made up in various experimental forms and reliable research people should be employed to test its acceptance with consumers.
After you have ascertained that you have a product that meets consumers’ concepts of quality, you have to investigate the second side of the marketing structure, the package.
The Package
For the present-day market, a product has to be packaged or styled or both. A food, a drug or a cosmetic needs a container. A machine has to be endowed with pleasing form and attractive color.
Generally, people know little about the actual product. They habitually judge a book by its cover, a grocery product by its label, a drugstore product by its bottle and an automobile by the styling.
Packaging is the second most important side or wall of a marketing structure. The package is second in importance only to the product itself. It represents the product. The package is a visual image of the product. It is the symbol. The consumer does not judge the product, he judges the package. The package tells the shopper whether the product is of high or low quality, whether it is the kind of a product he wants or does not want.
A quarter of a century ago, the package was merely a physical container. It was a measuring and handling device. It was designed to protect the product. Under present marketing conditions, the package is a psychological factor. It is a marketing tool. It is a silent salesman.
The package is no longer merely physical in character. It is no longer simple. In fact, the common, typical, present-day package is very complex. It has a brand-identifying image. It has a brand name. It has form and pattern or design. It has color. It has components such as instructions or recipes, premium offers and product illustrations, usually in the final, usable form. Any package that has these elements, not of the best, is not an effective marketing tool.
The brand name can be the key to success or failure of a marketing program. A half a century ago, a car with the unpronounceable (at that time) name, Chevrolet, could become a success because any carriage that could move without a horse pulling it was automatically a success.
Nowadays, there are many cars of equal quality in performance, fighting for the consumer’s dollar. A brand name, therefore, is of great importance. A name is a symbol. It may symbolize high quality or low quality. It may be a symbol of reliability or lack of it. It may be favorably associated with the product or unfavorably. It may motivate people to buy the product or a competitive product of equal quality or performance.
Compare Thunderbird with Edsel. Both cars are made by Ford. The Thunderbird suggests action. It has appropriate symbolism. What does Edsel symbolize? It is the name of a gentleman. It is the name of the man who was the head of the company that manufactures the car. What kind of an image does it bring to your mind? What symbolism does it have? What association does it have with the character of the particular car? What does it mean? The name is no doubt one of the major reasons why the new 1958 Edsel was not a marketing success.
Research shows that the brand-identifying image is a vital part of every effective package. It is the focal point. It is a brand-identifying device. It has symbolic meaning. It has quality or lack of quality connotations.
A package without a brand-identifying image that is appealing to consumers and easily remembered is very rarely an effective marketing tool. Excellent examples of brands with effective brand-identifying images are the following: Standard Oil of Indiana, Good Luck margarine, Dove, Parliament cigarettes and Cheer detergent.
The logotype is also important. It, too, is vital in building a favorable brand image. Type faces or letters have symbolic meaning. Some lettering styles symbolize strength, some weakness; some say delicate, some denote roughness. Some are static and other styles suggest motion.
Easy readability is important. A brand name that is difficult to read is a deterrent in marketing. It has to symbolize the character of the product or the company. It has to be interesting and has to communicate literally and symbolically.
Still another factor in effective packaging is color. The color can also mean either marketing success or failure.
The right color combination is one that attracts attention and at the same time has appeal.
Because high preference colors have poor retention in the memory and those that have strong retention in the memory rate low in preference, colors frequently have to be used in pairs, usually in complementary pairs. One of the colors is to attract the eye and the other is to provide the appeal. In choosing a color, we must make sure that it does not have negative associations with the particular product. If possible, it is advisable to use a color that has favorable associations with the product.
In my books, Color for Profit and Color Guide for Marketing Media, I discuss the problems of color in detail.
The quality of the printing, particularly if appetite appeal is involved, is also of great importance in marketing. A poorly printed package is a poor marketing tool.
The present-day package is indeed complex. That is why the best designers have to be employed to develop packages that can be effective marketing tools.
However, the best designers cannot tell whether a package design will be an effective marketing tool. Packages are complex, and human beings still more complex. Designers are by nature, conditioning and training, the most complex individuals.
Certainly, designers are not typical consumers. Their tastes, preferences and ideas are not in keeping with those of the masses of consumers. They cannot be, because of the kind of personality, background and experience a designer must have in order to be able to create.
Therefore, research must be used to determine whether the design is an effective marketing tool. There is no one test that can provide this information because too many factors are involved. We must have tests that determine display effectiveness, attraction power, attention-holding power and brand name readability.
We must have tests that reveal consumer attitudes and actual preferences, or choices in which self-interest is involved. Mere interviews will not disclose such information. The tests have to be conducted on an unconscious level so that the respondents feel free to express their true attitudes and real feelings.
I have seen some of the most beautiful packages fail to pass an eye-movement test that measures eye-flow and attention-holding power.
I have seen some stunning packages that failed the readability test. In other words, the brand name or product name on the package was too difficult to read from the shelf.
Many appealing, aesthetically fine packages fail in the visibility test, which means that they are lost in the super market. They fail to attract attention.
There are packages that have great display effectiveness. They pass all three ocular tests—visibility, readability and eye-movement—but they fail in the association or preference tests.
A package that is effective in display, that has a high percentage of favorable associations and rates high in the preference test, is an effective marketing tool.
After the manufacturer of a consumer product knows he has a product of the right quality and an effective package, he should examine the advertising problem.
The Advertising
Advertising is the number three wall of a marketing structure. The kind and amount of advertising has much to do with the degree of success of any marketing program. Without doubt, the quantitative aspect of an advertising program is a major factor in any successful marketing. However, as I have pointed out, there are many instances in which the sheer weight of a large sum of money was not sufficient for producing a successful marketing program.
The qualitative aspect of advertising is at least as important as the quantitative one. No one will deny that the character of the campaign, the nature of the marketing theme, the type of printed ads and kind of filmed commercials have much to do with the success or failure of a marketing program.
Ad agencies have “copy geniuses,” men and women who have a natural or acquired ability to create unusual advertising copy. Like most geniuses, like most creative people, they often talk to their own kind, not to the general public. Many ad agency executives are aware that printed ads and filmed commercials have to be tested with potential consumers to determine their marketing effectiveness. And how do most of them test the printed ads and filmed commercials? They use “playbacks” or “recognition” tests. Such tests are conducted on the assumption that printed ads and filmed commercials affect people, only on a conscious level.
Studies that have been conducted in the last twelve years show conclusively that individuals are influenced by advertising without being aware of that influence. An individual is motivated to buy something by an ad, but he often does not know what motivated him.
Most advertising agencies plan all advertising on the assumption that printed ads and filmed commercials affect consumers only on a conscious level. That is why they measure the effectiveness of ads by means of “playbacks” or “recognition” tests. The ad that is recalled or recognized by the greatest number of potential consumers is considered the best ad. Filmed commercials are tested on the same general principle.
I have known a number of advertising campaigns consisting of ads with high “retention” and “recognition” scores that have failed^ Neither the agency nor the client could understand why the campaign was a flop. The fact that the ads antagonized people did not enter their minds.
That consumers had unfavorable attitudes toward the ads did not occur to them. That the ads did not motivate people to buy had no meaning. They were impressed only with the fact that a carefully chosen sample of potential consumers of the product remembered the ad once they had seen it and could recognize the filmed commercial after viewing it once.
Since most people are not always conscious of having seen an ad, billboard or filmed commercial, they cannot always tell about it in an interview. Thus, the most effective, the most motivating experimental ads may have been discarded because they were not remembered or recognized by most of the respondents.
We have conducted many tests in the last dozen years showing conclusively that people have to be motivated to remember objects or ads and have to be motivated to buy a specific product. Over ten years ago I reported experiments showing conclusively that ads have much more effect on the unconscious mind than on the conscious.
We have much evidence that for advertising to be effective, it must not merely tell people to buy the product, it must motivate them to buy it. For an ad to be motivating, it must be pleasing, not irritating. It must have favorable connotations and pleasant associations.
How do we determine the effectiveness of an ad if not by “playback” and “recognition” tests? We have a number of tests, each of which shows one aspect of effectiveness.
First we put the ad through an eye-movement test that shows how the eyes travel over the ad and where attention is held. If this test is favorable, then the ad is put through two types of association tests, one that shows consumers’ attitudes toward the ad and another that discloses whether the ad upgrades or downgrades the product. The second test is conducted because the ad is not supposed to sell itself. It has to sell the product. In conjunction with the association test, we have an indirect preference test that shows actual preference, consumer action in which self-interest is involved.
We don’t want to know merely whether the potential consumers remember the ad. We want to find out whether the ad makes the potential consumer favorably disposed toward the product. We want to know whether it motivates the potential consumer to buy the product.
Price
The fourth side or wall of a marketing structure is price. The average consumer assumes that price is based on cost. We all know that the manufacturer must consider a multitude of factors in determining the price. He has to add up the cost of producing, promoting and selling the article before he can establish its retail price. Here I want to discuss an often neglected factor in pricing, the psychological factor.
Before going further into the discussion of pricing, we should divide all merchandise into necessities and luxuries. These are broad classifications which are important elements in pricing.
Seasonal vegetables and fruits are necessities. The same produce, out of season, is a luxury. In June, strawberries can be considered as a necessary food, but in January, strawberries are definitely a luxury. Meat is a necessity; steak is a luxury. Fish from a nearby body of water should not be classified as a luxury. Sea fish on the coast is not a luxury. Any food that has no more nutritional value than a less costly food should be classified as a luxury.
Commodities that are necessary for daily living are highly competitive and, at best, are profitable only because they are sold in large volume. Pricing of staples is almost entirely based on cost plus a small margin of profit per unit. Retail prices of common foods and other necessities in communities of unskilled workers whose incomes are minimal can be set primarily on two considerations, cost and competition.
In the United States, in communities where the standard of living is generally high, luxuries become necessities, psychological satisfactions become needs and emotional factors become daily habits.
In primitive and agricultural societies, symbolism played a major role only in religion. In our present-day, highly industrialized society, symbolism plays a vital role in almost every aspect of life.
Most people buy symbols, not products. Consumers generally know little about the actual quality of the product. They buy the image of the product, the image that is inspired by the brand name, the brand-identifying image, the label, the printed advertising, the filmed commercials and the publicity about the product or company that makes it.
A man buys a Chevrolet, Ford or Plymouth for transportation, but he gets a Cadillac, Lincoln or Imperial for other reasons, mainly psychological reasons. The luxury car is a class symbol. It is a prestige identification element. It provides ego satisfaction. It has social status.
The ego-involvement and prestige identification in owning a luxury car are not often admitted by the owner. Generally, the owner is not aware of the psychological reasons for getting a luxury car. If you ask a man why he drives a Cadillac or a Lincoln Continental, he will nearly always try to give you practical reasons. He will point out the safety features and even economy. He will normally say nothing about the ego satisfaction, the prestige symbolism and the social status it gives him.
Because consumers know little about most products, they look for labels, trademarks and brand names in the super market, the drug store, hardware store and in the department store.
Price is a major factor in the “quality image.” To the consumer, a high quality product is a costly product. A fine article is an expensive article.
To most consumers, poor quality and low price are synonymous. When a woman says this is a cheap garment, she usually means that it is both poor in quality and low in price.
Price, like the package, is a psychological factor. High price is a symbol of status and is associated with prestige. High price and an expensive looking package are the necessary marketing twins for articles that are commonly used as gifts by the upper middle classes. The package has to express the price. To have status, an article has to look expensive and be expensive.
Many a product failed because the package or the product styling looked cheap and the price was too low. Of course, many products also fail because they are too high in price for the particular strata of consumers for which the product is intended.
The market for the product is an important factor in pricing. If the product is to be sold to consumers in the lowest economic strata, the lower the price the greater the volume of sales there will be. If the product is intended for executives, it is generally advisable to have the most attractive packaging with a high retail price.
In some communities, there are shoppers who will not buy an object because it is priced too low. In other communities, shoppers will not buy the product or cannot afford to buy it because it is priced too high.
Articles that are commonly bought to be used as gifts have to be priced in keeping with the gift concepts of the particular class of consumer. For some markets a typical gift is a $2 or $3 article. In others, a gift is generally from $5 to $10, and for some special markets, gifts range from $25 to $100 and more. Gifts are status symbols.
Price, the fourth side of profit is as complex as the other three because it too involves psychological as well as practical elements. The right price of the particular product for a specific class of consumers is vital in successful marketing. The price is a status symbol.
How do we know whether the product or article is priced right? The answer is by testing. We have founds that the ideal way is for the consumers to decide the price. Tests conducted with potential consumers, on an unconscious level, show clearly what the right price is for the product. I have seen many examples in which consumers priced an article higher than the actual price. I have seen cases in which consumers priced a product much lower than the actual price.
In one test most consumers priced a set of dishes at $35, whereas the manufacturer was going to have it retailed at $24.50. Another set of dishes was to have a retail price of $45, but a large majority of consumers in controlled tests priced it at $29.50. This part of the test in itself indicated that the set of dishes was overpriced for the market and the marketing program would not be a success.
I recall a study of ladies’ sports clothes that were to be sold at $7.50 and $12.50. In this test, consumers priced the articles the opposite way. They thought the $7.50 articles were superior to the $12.50 ones, and they priced them accordingly.
In another study, four grades of men’s shoes were tested. The retail prices were $12.50, $17.50, $19.50 and $24.50. A large majority of consumers thought the $17.50 shoes were the best and the $19.50 ones were second best.
Determining the consumers’ idea of the price of the article is one way of measuring the marketability of the product. The shopper likes to feel that he is getting the maximum value for his money. Often, the best quality does not look like the best to the shopper.
Product tests that are conducted at the Color Research Institute are designed so that they reveal three marketing aspects; 1—consumer attitudes, 2—price evaluation and 3—actual preference.
The Four Sides
Product quality is the number one side in a profitable marketing program, the package is the number two side, advertising is the number three side and pricing is number four. Actually, a marketing program depends on all four, equally. Weakness of any one of the four sides will cut sales and diminish profits.
The total brand image in the mind of the consumer is the key to successful marketing. The XYZ Company is not selling vegetables, it is selling XYZ vegetables. The ABC fruit grower’s corporation is not selling fruit, it is selling ABC fruit, which is no ordinary fruit.
The fruit stand on the highway is there to make sales. The farmer sets up a fruit stand and hopes to attract many of the travelers who happen to drive by the stand. A company cannot grow merely by making sales. A company must make customers. The growth of a company depends on building brand loyalty and making repeat sales.
Products such as fruit, fish and meat obviously cannot be identified with a company or brand by the styling, form or design of the product. Such products can only be given brand character by labeling or packaging.
For the label or package to have maximum marketing effectiveness, it has to have an appealing brand name, a psychologically meaningful brand-identifying image or symbol, an easy to read logotype and optically and psychologically correct color. The label or package as a whole has to have display effectiveness and favorable connotations.
The package is a basic factor in the total brand image, and the brand name and brand-identifying image are the basic elements of the package. The package is the visual manifestation of the product or brand. It symbolizes the character of the product or brand.
For the package to have the greatest effectiveness in building brand loyalty, it must be supported by a product better than that of competition, or at least as good.
The brand-identifying image and the package should always be incorporated into all advertising and promotion material.
The price should be in accordance with the class of consumer and the “quality image” of the product.
The product, the package, the advertising and the price have to be coordinated into one image, into a single entity and into a unified effect.
It is not possible for management to be in the position of a typical consumer. The character of management is totally different from that of the consumer. Most executives do not live, feel, and act like typical consumers and they cannot predict how consumers will behave.
Much business is still conducted on the basis of hunches. We hear about those who rose to the top because they made the right marketing decisions. Most wrong business decisions are never heard of. Running a business on hunches is a precarious business in these highly competitive times.
Necessity is the mother of invention. Because of the great growth of competitive enterprise, marketing research was given impetus. Much progress has been made in marketing research in recent years. We no longer need to rely on hunches and hope that we have guessed right about how consumers will react to a new product.
Modern research can get for us the answer to every marketing problem. Great strides have been made in the field of psychology, and the techniques from the field of psychology are being applied to marketing research. Tests that are conducted on an unconscious level reveal the true attitudes of consumers and disclose real preferences.
In modern research, we do not rely on what people say about a new product, a new package, a new brand-identifying image, a new brand name or about an ad or a filmed commercial.
We know now that people cannot or will not tell how they feel about a product. Usually they are not aware how they feel about the matter. Often, they think they know, but believe that they should not tell for a number of psychological reasons. The respondent in an interview normally wants to make a favorable impression. He desires to be fashionable or pleasant. All sorts of defense mechanisms come into play in an interview.
However, in tests that are conducted on an unconscious level, the respondents are not aware of what is being tested. The tests are structured; controls are built into them. The tests are designed and conducted so that the representative individuals in the consumer test respond naturally, spontaneously, and reveal their real feelings and true attitudes.
Tests conducted on an unconscious level are being used for measuring the effectiveness of all sides of the marketing structure—product, package, advertising and price—and for determining the marketing potential of the total marketing program.
In order to use modern methods for predetermining the marketing effectiveness of a marketing tool or a new product, we must free ourselves from past practices of conducting business on the basis of hunches and open our minds to the new ways, to the new techniques and procedures for solving present-day marketing problems.
Those who have vested interests in the old ways, in the old research methods, are resisting the new research techniques. They try to confuse, to mislead and throw suspicion on the new methods. In every field the old resists the new. This is in the nature of life itself.
Those of us who are alert and progressive do not fear the new. We open our eyes and minds and examine the facts objectively, coolly, without preconceived notions and without prejudice.
The techniques of testing on an unconscious level were introduced into the marketing field in September of 1944. I trace the history and progress of unconscious level testing in my book, How to Predict What People Will Buy, which was published in September, 1957. I outline the techniques used, and report on the marketing successes that confirmed the findings of the tests. I tell about the research that was done on Good Luck margarine and Lux soap, both products of Lever Brothers, Marlboro cigarettes, Bissel sweepers and many other well-known brands.
My main objective here, however, is not only to outline the interdependence of the four sides—product, package, advertising and pricing—in supporting a healthy, profitable marketing program, but to go deeper into the scientific, psychological, unconscious-level factors in marketing.
