Concept Testing: The Value of Historical Norms In the past, market research depended on historical norms to judge the potential success of a new concept.

Why? Because concept testing relied on stated appeal and purchase intent scores to screen new ideas... and norms provided a means to "interpret" those stated measures.

Although most would agree that this has been the best approach available, there were some inherent flaws.

For example, while this process can help screen out poor performing ideas, it cannot predict market performance. Why? Because PI scores do NOT translate into actual behavior. A key reason is that the concepts are not tested in a realistic context. Consumers make their buying decisions based on the choices available at that moment in time. As those choices change daily, norms look backward, not at the moment of purchase.

Can historical norms help? Yes, they can help establish thresholds for further investigation. But again, they CANNOT predict market performance. This is because norms assume that the market is stable. In reality, the market is in constant flux... more choices, different channels, and different decision makers.

The good news... with improved technology and new research tools, we are now able to test concepts in the context of an actual buying experience. This ability to test a concept versus a competitive set allows us to better predict performance... without reliance on historical norms. In fact, when we present the full competitive set in the context of a shopping experience, we generally mirror what happens in the actual marketplace.

A shopping experience task provides a much more accurate measure of trial. And the results can be validated by comparing a control cell to actual sales.

Predictive Validity of Brand Share (control cells only)

For more information call or e-mail Alex Sodek (800.800.2124 x232).