1 / 33

Additional Insights from the BrandSpark / Better Homes and Gardens American Shopper Study TM : A Three-Year Longit

Additional Insights from the BrandSpark / Better Homes and Gardens American Shopper Study TM : A Three-Year Longitudinal Update. James J. Kellaris, Ph.D. James S. Womack / Gemini Chair of Signage and Visual Marketing Lindner College of Business University of Cincinnati

zlata
Download Presentation

Additional Insights from the BrandSpark / Better Homes and Gardens American Shopper Study TM : A Three-Year Longit

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Additional Insights from the BrandSpark / Better Homes and Gardens American Shopper StudyTM:A Three-Year Longitudinal Update James J. Kellaris, Ph.D. James S. Womack / Gemini Chair of Signage and Visual Marketing Lindner College of Business University of Cincinnati National Signage Research & Education Conference October 10, 2013

  2. The BrandSpark / Better Homes and Gardens American Shopper StudyTM Annual survey by BrandSpark International, a leading independent market research firm, conducted in conjunction with the Better Homes and Gardens Best New Products Awards program. Insights from a consumer panel representing households in all 50 states are mined by BrandSpark in collaboration with academic partners in UC’s Lindner College of Business.

  3. A Brief Look Back… The 2011 survey established that: Signs draw traffic to businesses Consumers infer quality from signage Signage trumps radio, internet, newspapers About half of the population has driven by and failed to find a business due to signage communication failure

  4. THE 2012 SURVEY Longitudinal update of 2011 survey Added new items concerning: Signage communication Aesthetics of signage

  5. THE 2013 SURVEY Replicated previous surveys. Added new items concerningfactors that can make signs difficult for consumers to read.

  6. SAMPLE US “mini survey” conducted as supplement to the annual BrandSpark/Better Homes & Gardens American Shopper Survey Sent to a panel of US consumers, ages 18+, in all 50 states Stratified sample (N = 880), weighted to conform to US MRI data and reflect the principal shopper Gender Age Census region

  7. Part I: Longitudinal Findings “I have been drawn into unfamiliar stores based on the quality of their signs.” 2011 = 29% yes 2012 = 35.8% yes 2013 = 34.8% yes

  8. Longitudinal Findings “I have made quality assumptions based on a store having clear and attractive signage.” 2011 = 34.5% yes 2012 = 41.5% yes 2013 = 42.2% yes

  9. Longitudinal Findings “I have driven by and failed to find a business because the signage was too small or unclear.” 2011 = 49.7% yes 2012 = 60.8% yes 2013 = 64.0% yes

  10. To whom has this happened? Characteristics of shoppers who have driven by and failed to find a business due to sign communication failure: Women (68%) more prone than men (53%) Positively associated with education level Affects all age groups – not a “senior” problem 30-34 age group (77.6%) No geographic correlation

  11. Part II:Communication & Aesthetics “One of the first things I notice about a new or unfamiliar business is the signage outside its building.” 2012: 75.2% agree 20.4% neutral 4.5% disagree 2013: 76.0% agree 19.1% neutral 4.9% disagree

  12. Signage Communication “In addition to identifying a business, signs can convey the personality or character of the business.” 2012: 85.7% agree 11.9% neutral 2.4% disagree 2013: 83.9% agree 14.5% neutral 1.6% disagree

  13. Signage Communication “The letters on signs should be large enough for passing motorists to read at a glance.” 2012: 90.9% agree8.4% neutral 0.7% disagree 2013: 91.4% agree 7.8% neutral 0.8% disagree

  14. Signage Communication “I get frustrated and annoyed when signs are too small to read.” 2012: 81.5% agree 13.7% neutral 4.8% disagree 2013: 83.0% agree 13.9% neutral 3.1% disagree

  15. Summary of Communication Findings Signage… drives traffic creates first impressions implies quality conveys personality must be easily legible can cause loss of business and consumer frustration when it is too small / illegible

  16. Communication Preferences “I prefer signage that uses symbols or icons rather than words.” 2012: 12.7% agree 51.7% neutral 35.6% disagree 2013: 9.3% agree 47.4% neutral 43.3% disagree

  17. Communication Preferences “I prefer signs that use a combination of words and non-verbal symbols or icons.” 2012: 47.9% agree 44.2% neutral 7.9% disagree 2013: 44.4% agree 44.4% neutral 11.2% disagree

  18. Communication Preferences New item for 2013 “In the future, there will be no need for signs if everyone has a smart phone.” 6.1% agree 15.2% neutral 78.6% disagree

  19. Signage Aesthetics “Smaller signs are generally more attractive than larger signs.” 2012: 13.5% agree 52.1% neutral 34.3% disagree 2013: 14.1% agree 51.3% neutral 34.7% disagree

  20. Signage Aesthetics “Variety of signage design within a business district is interesting and appealing.” 2012: 62.7% agree 30.1% neutral 7.2% disagree 2013: 69.5% agree 26.9% neutral 3.6% disagree

  21. Signage Aesthetics “Uniformity of signage within a business district looks attractive, but makes businesses harder to identify at a glance.” 2012: 58.0% agree 31.5% neutral 10.5% disagree 2013: 56.4% agree 34.1% neutral 9.5% disagree

  22. Signage Aesthetics “Vintage signs are worth preserving due to their historic and cultural value.” 2012: 77.1% agree 18.9% neutral 4.0% disagree 2013: 76.1% agree 20.5% neutral 3.5% disagree

  23. Summary of Aesthetics Findings Most consumers prefer variety over uniformity of signage. < 10% of the population prefers non-verbal signs. 4 times as many do not. Smaller signs are not perceived as per se more attractive than larger signs. Consumers demand legibility. A large majority of consumers believes vintage signs are worth preserving.

  24. What Makes Signs Difficult to Read? #1 - The letters are too small (83.3%)

  25. What Makes Signs Difficult to Read? #2 – The placement of the sign makes it hard to see (71.4%) #3 – The sign is not sufficiently lit at night (63.6%) #4 – The color of the letters does not stand out from the background (60.3%) #5 – Digital signs change the message too fast (52.6%)

  26. What Makes Signs Difficult to Read? #6 – The letters use a fancy font (47.8%) #7 – The letters are spaced too closely together (35.6%)

  27. What Makes Signs Difficult to Read?

  28. What Makes Signs Difficult to Read? #8 – The sign looks very similar to other signs nearby (34.4%) #9 – There are distracting visuals on the sign (31.7%)

  29. What does this all mean for planners and regulators? Objective research evidence can be used to make informed decisions vs. reliance on opinion/theory/customary practice. Sign regulators can conduct such research in their own communities to gauge local preferences. Planners can help mitigate drive-by failures through size & placement. Small/uniform ≠ aesthetically pleasing.

  30. What does this all mean for those who design signs? Consider consumers’ communication preferences Balance of verbal/non-verbal content Legibility Target audience differences Using design to mitigate drive-by failures

  31. What does this all mean for the signage industry? Objective basis for making product claims Customer education Dissemination of information Company web sites and brochures Trade publications Associations

  32. Thank you!

More Related