Qualitative Market Research

Beech Aircraft has been making small aircraft for private pilots for decades. They have a high safety record and their products are well liked. From time to time, however, they are the subject of lawsuits over issues related to assignment of responsibility when airplane design is deemed to be a factor in a crash.

For an upcoming lawsuit case in Federal court, which strategy should Beech take as the defendant side of the case?

A series of “mock juries” with citizens very much like the ones that will be jurors in the actual case. Mock Jury #1 hears strategy #1 and the “deliberations” are viewed by the lawyers through a one-way mirror to determine what evidentiary elements created the verdict reached. Mock Jury #2 hears strategy #2 and the process is repeated. The lawyers can then decide which approach will create a significant chance for winning the case.

One of the strategies worked better than another to reach the verdict desired by the lawyers. That is the route they chose to present in Federal court and Beech won the case, avoiding a payout of millions of dollars in settlements.

The case hinged around whether the pilot ignored six warnings by Beech to retrofit specific safety materials. The actual jury indicated that it was not the responsibility of a company to call each of its 56,000 customers to see if they complied, the responsibility was to insure that the warnings had been received.

Based on the success of the “Mock Jury” process, Beech has determined that they are an important research tool when the outcome of a case cannot be predicted on the face of the evidence.

Kimberly Clark had created a new “disposable fabric” from the by-products of producing consumer paper products. The “fabric” was discovered by accident [much the same way Post-its were discovered by accident when the incorrect glue was used as an adhesive]. Now that KCC had this “fabric,” they needed a use for it. Engineers and market researchers inside of the company could not agree on the best way to use the material, so it was decided to test it with consumers.

Past research had indicated that the need for “disposable clothes” was currently limited to the health care industry and that there wasn’t much “need” for disposable clothing items among general consumers, so the problem was finding a target market that could use the “fabric.”

Six focus groups with homeless men and women to see if they could find a use for the “fabric”.

Yes, the homeless “community” could find a practical use for the “fabric” and, in fact, determined six different ways the product would be useful to them and to the organizations that serve the homeless.

In 1985, Coca-Cola wanted to launch a sweeter Coke product to go to head-to-head with Pepsi and blind taste tests showed that even Pepsi fans liked “New Coke” better than regular Pepsi. Through the power of metrics, it became clear that “New Coke” might achieve a whole new set of users. Based on very positive survey findings, Coke decided to “retire” its flagship beverage in favor of “New Coke” and ran out first ads to promote the new product. No one was ready for how consumers would respond to the “retirement” of regular Coke. Stories emerged around hoarding regular Coke and boycotting stores that carried “New Coke.”

Coca-Cola management wanted to know the hearts and minds of their loyal fans to determine how to solve the problem created by the launch of “New Coke.”  Qualitative research design called for segmented studies across age, race, and gender groups in key US cities.

RIVA won a portion of the bid to conduct a series of focus groups with men and women in the mid-Atlantic states in mirrored facilities with observers from Coca-Cola headquarters in attendance.   The moderator’s guide started with respondent history and perceptions about brand image of Coke products and moved on to their “take” on the idea of “New Coke” on store shelves. 

Across the country, no matter the moderator or the respondents, four elements emerged:

1. Coca-Coke is not just a product, it is an icon 
2. Coca-Cola did a terrific job, for nearly 100 years building an unshakable brand image 
3. Consumers revered Coca-Cola on the same platform as the American flag and the   National Anthem 
4. Yes, “New Coke” might have tasted better than Pepsi in a taste test, but the brand called Coke stood for more than taste 

“New Coke” disappeared from shelves and “Coke Classic” returned. While Coca-Cola has launched a number of “line extensions,”  since the retirement of “New Coke”, now they know to always honor their flagship product.