Here’s how I’ve just upped my game in NPD and brand architecture research…

In the past I’ve always done NPD by showing respondents a concept board and getting their response. You get lots of rich insight from this, but it does feel very removed from real-world decision making, and is therefore wide open to the accusation that ‘it’s got nothing to do with how people really make choices’.

So, here’s a new approach that aims to keep all the richness and depth you get from exploring NPD concepts in a group setting, but helps to replicate decision making in order to ‘get real’ too.

In a recent project for a sleep brand, Harp Bhambra (the graphic designer who put together my brand identity – link at the end of this article) ‘reproduced’ sleep brand packs. I ended up with lots of ‘to-scale’ packs that looked like this…

Here’s what we (me, the client and Harp the graphic designer) did next…

One: Harp developed a number of new pack JPEGS

We all teamed up together to imagine how the brand could develop in the future and the client shared her NPD vision

Two: I bought a big pin board

I wish I’d bought a foam board, I lugged a heavy pin board around London.

Three: Referred to photos of the fixture

I’d been to Boots and worked out how the fixture was arranged. So I ‘recreated’ the look of the fixture on my pin board to make sure that respondents were getting to choose from the key brands and product formats on offer.

Four: Added in a couple of NPD ideas alongside the current offer

Nestled in with the current brands on offer were a couple of NPD ideas… I also wrote price and product descriptors on the back of each brand and the NPD ideas too

Five: Mapped out another three alternative pinboard fixtures

These would be explored in the sessions too…

Six: Ran the groups a bit differently too

So the groups ran with the usual warm up and intro sessions, to make sure everyone felt comfortable and knew what to expect. I then ran the ‘Board Meeting Game’ with individual respondents – asking respondents to come up to the board in turn, and in their own time select the brand they would be most interested in buying in-store to solve their sleep problem. Respondents were encouraged to ‘review’ information on any product that intrigued them and make a final selection. I then interviewed them about the choice they had made.

Whilst the individual choice exercise was going on, other respondents were having conversations with each other about sleep problems and completing a writing exercise which gave lots of rich language and insight into their own personal sleep issues.

Once all the respondents had played The Board Game, the group as a whole discussed their choices/ motivations and we then explored alternative ideas, ‘pinned up’ on the board, placed in the competitive set context.

So what’s different/ better about this approach?

New ideas seen in context…

Respondents first encounter of the new idea is within the context of the competitor set, and it’s a real wake-up call to see how often respondents will just go into the safe zone and pick ‘their’ brand choice over anything new. So this approach offers you context which is really important.

Alone time with respondents

The researcher gets to see decision making in action and explore this with respondents, so you get a much better view of why choices are being made and where the respondent is coming from

Un-moderated element in the group

Respondents chat to each other about their problems/ preferences whilst others are visiting the ‘board’ and making their choice, and this warms the group up and helps develop a more creative atmosphere (see my other article on how conversation helps with creativity).

Helps lock in choice behaviour into the conversation

Respondents realise that the concept has to ‘sell itself’ to them, and they are less likely to ‘rationalise’ their interest in a concept that doesn’t have shelf appeal.

The ‘Board Game’ felt like a much better way to do NPD/ Brand Architecture research than the normal concept board approach. Health warning: it took time and effort in the set up – but then of course you always get out what you put in.

If you use this idea in your projects don’t forget to credit Qual Street! Contact Harp for help you might want on getting together concept designs: Harp’s website