11.

N O T I Y A T I O N A L F A C T O R S I N P U R C H A S I N G N E A T M A R Y P A U L M A S O N

Y O U N G & R U B I C A M , I N C . C H I C A G O , l L L l N O l S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Recently, I decided t h a t I was going t o stop smoking. I had seen some advert is ing f o r a smoking deterrent and I thought it might help me-quit t he habi t . So, I went t o my l o c a l drug s tore and bought a pack- age. I d idn ' t open it u n t i l a f t e r I had returned t o my of f ice only t o f ind t o my dismay, t h a t t h e quantity t h a t I thought t h a t I was going t o get , I d idn ' t ge t .

Looking the package over, I discovered t h a t they d i d s t a t e t h e quant i ty t h a t I would receive, but it was ambiguous. s ize of t h e package supported t h a t ambiguity.

Especially, when the

A s a consumer, I f e l t gypped and angry. For t h e f i rs t time i n my l i f e , I wrote a l e t te r . A l e t t e r t o Virginia Knauer, Special Assistant t o the President f o r Consumer Affairs and I copied the company t h a t made the product. I d idn ' t know if I, as one individual, would be heard or not.

A week later, I received a l e t t e r from the company s t a t i n g t h a t they had received s i m i l a r complaints from other customers. they had redesigned t h e i r package, which they attached t o my l e t t e r .

A s a r e su l t ,

A week a f t e r t h i s I received a l e t t e r from Virginia Knauer Was I s t a t i n g t h a t she a l so had received a l e t t e r from the company.

s a t i s f i e d with t h e change? do fu r the r work i n t h i s area.

And i f not, please l e t her know and she w o u l d

The point I ' m t ry ing t o m a k e here i s t h a t - t h a t company made an enormous e r r o r . They apparently did not care o r paid very l i t t l e heed t o the consumer, the person t h a t they wanted t o buy t h e i r product, when they made t h e i r package. many consumers would have had t he same reac t ion t h a t I had. customers did not complain but w i l l never buy t h e i r product again?

For if they had, they would have discovered t h a t How many

This pa r t i cu la r incident, heightened my awareness of my respons ib i l i ty i n my job. What i s my job? Department of Young & Rubicam, Chicago.

I work i n the Consumer Research

My respons ib i l i ty i s t o know the consumer. To l i s t e n t o and t a l k with her . I m u s t know what she thinks, how she f ee l s , what she l i kes , what she doesn' t l i k e , l e t ' s say about Armour and Company, t h e i r products, packaging, pr ic ing and advertising. forms the l i n k of communication between her and Armour and Company. If it i s wrong, then it w i l l a f f ec t how Armour makes t h e i r product and package and how well they communicate back t o the consumer...to you.

For how well I know the consumer

Now, consuners can ' t very well write me a l e t t e r as I did t o Virginia Knauer. Nor, can they c a l l me on the phone. So, it i s up t o m e t o seek them out. And I don ' t mean j u s t t he i r a t e ones, although I do run i n t o them occasionally. And, because w e do t h i s before a product ever ge t s t o the grocer 's case, we've avoided many problems. problems. A t times, we've misinterpreted what women have meant and occasionally, we've misjudged what they've wanted. But, these mistakes are becoming fewer and fewer because we've learned a most important lesson - t o ask, t o l i s t e n , t o probe, t o explore, t o invest igate and t o exchange ideas with t h e consumer.

But t o seek out honest-to-goodness consumers.

O f course, we haven't avoided all of the

Don't l e t me give you the impression t h a t t h i s i s an easy task. It 2s probably one of t h e most d i f f i c u l t t asks t h a t anyone could under- take. Why? Because t h e consumer i s an individual. And, I cannot empha- s i ze t h a t enough. She's d i f f e ren t from everybody else. Nobody i s qui te l i k e her. And, she i s not qu i te l i k e anybody e l se . How she thinks, ac t s and speaks, and what appeals t o her, i s d i f f e ren t . Now, multiply t h i s woman by the mil l ions of women t h a t a re i n the r e a l world, and you begin t o see how d i f f i c u l t and complex the t a sk can become i n knowing the con- sumer.

If everyone i s so d i f f e ren t , then how do we know what motivates them t o buy our products? Quite honestly, I don't know. Nor, does any- body else. And, t h e day t h a t we w i l l know i s far of f .

What do we do u n t i l then? Well, we t a l k t o as many consumers as we possibly can. We t r y t o ge t t h e i r ideas, thoughts and opinions. What she l i kes , what she doesn' t l i k e . Let's say about hot dogs. From t h i s , we t r y t o f i n d a common denominator, or several common denominators. Something t h a t i s common among a l l those women out there . O r , something t h a t breaks them up i n t o groups. The common denominator may be use or nonuse of a ce r t a in product or brand. It might be buys one a week versus once a month. Or, it might be age, income or geographic locat ion. It could be the number of chi ldren she has and how old they are. These common denominators can go on ad infinitum.

We then t r y t o determine who our idea l groups are composed of: most l i k e l y the women who consume most of t h e product would be the start . Then we'd w a n t t o know her geographic location, age, number of children, e t c .

Once we ge t ourselves s i tua ted here, we can start another process. Breaking these groups of hot dog users i n t o smaller groups. people who buy spec i f ic brands of hot dogs. We t r y t o f ind the common de- nominator f o r each brand and so on. Unt i l w e f i nd out which group of women out t he re w i l l most l i k e l y buy Armour, Oscar Mayer, Swift or others.

Groups of

If we wanted t o t a l k about ham, lunch meat or a turkey roas t , we'd have t o go through t h e same process f o r each. d i f f e ren t . And, with each, we 'd have t o f ind the common denominators. Since each meat product has a separate process of i t s own, and reasons f o r i t s purchase, I ' ve chosen t o t a l k on only one of them today.

Because each of them i s

Hot Dogs.

13.

And because I ' m most f a m i l i a r with Armour, I'll be ta lk ing i n terms of them. But it could j u s t as well be Oscar Mayer o r Swift.

When do I t a l k t o these women who buy hot dogs? I guess it would - be best i l l u s t r a t e d by what we c a l l t he marketing and advert is ing process. We t a l k with her from t h e beginning - from the time we start t o make the hot dog t o the end, when it i s i n the grocer ' s meat case. O f course, some of these s teps are not of d i r e c t concern t o the consumer, such as: C a n we get d i s t r ibu t ion i n the s tore or whether OUT s a l e s are increasing, what our t imetables are o r our investment has t o be. But, she i s the bas i s f o r a l l of t h i s whether she knows it o r not!

-

How do I go about obtaining the information we need? I t ' s not - i n . a book. Nor, i s it i n the l i b r a r y or on a sheet of paper someplace. I t ' s not a formula, s c i e n t i f i c or otherwise. And, w e never w i l l be able t o f i n d it i n a book cr make a formula because, as I said before, the consumer i s a variable, an ever-changing f ac to r . Ever-changing because what she said l as t week or l as t year may be d i f f e ren t than what she w i l l say tomorrow or the next day.

W e have f i v e basic techniques f o r t a lk ing with her: by m a i l , telephone, personal interview, group sessions and our newest technique, e lec t ronics . My use of any one of these techniques depends on the scope and nature of t h e questions I w a n t answered.

Supposing t h a t we wanted t o know how many women i n the United S ta t e s use hot dogs? over t h e United States . Maybe 9,000 t o 12,000. The eas i e s t and least expensive method or technique would be the - m a i l . send a questionnaire d i r e c t l y t o them.

W e would want t o contact a great number of women a l l

I n other words, we would

If I wanted t o t a l k with 500-1,000 women, t he telephone would probably be bes t . I n t h i s instance, we have interviewers ca3l women on the phone.

Especially, i f I wanted t o re-contact them several times.

A t other times, I don' t want t o t a l k with a grea t number of women. Perhaps I w a n t 300 or so women t o t es t a product or t o look at some ads. So, I would have interviewers going from door t o door conducting personal interviews with these women.

Then, at times, I may j u s t want d i rec t ion or an idea. So I would ask a group of ladies t o come and t a l k with m e . This i s what w e c a l l a group session. It 's almost l i k e a Koffee Klatch.

And, then we come t o our newest technique, e lec t ronics . There are times when t h e consumer cannot verbal ly respond t o our questions. So, we 've used avai lable technology. We have machines t h a t measure the eye or t h e woman can t u r n knobs or d i a l s . W e can even take a heartbeat and measure t h e skin response.

These are the f i v e basic techniques.

14.

Today, I ' m going t o take you through only three s teps of t he process t h a t I ta lked about a l i t t l e while back - the product, the pack- age and t h e advertising. There are many more s teps but time w i l l not allow me the opportunity t o go through them all with you. O r , even the n i t t y - g r i t t y of each one. Bu t , I would l i k e t o show you what basic techniques we may use t o t r y t o unearth and make some sense of why a woman buys Armour hot dogs.

The most important s tep i s the product. Both for Armour and t h e consumer. Armour produces mil l ions of pounds of hot dogs a year. They come i n a U shapes, s izes , f lavors , colors and spice l eve l s . Armour's objective, of course, i s t o sel l as many of these hot dogs as they possibly can with m a x i m u m eff ic iency. marketplace. Who i s the consumer? Is she married? Single? Young? Old? D o e s she have children? What income does she have? What so r t of education has she? Is she aware t h a t Armour m a k e s hot dogs? Has she t r i e d them? How often? D o e s she l i k e them? What does she l i k e about them? What doesn' t she l i k e about them? Has she t r i e d other brands of hot dogs? What does she l i k e and d i s l i k e about them? These are j u s t a f e w of t he many questions t h a t need t o be answered.

I n order t o do t h i s , they must know t h e i r

Although past experience and judgement could e a s i l y allow us t o answer these questions, we must be absolutely ce r t a in i n our answers. And, i n t h i s instance, we want t o know what women i n Peoria th ink as well as i n Cleveland, Atlanta, Pit tsburgh, Minneapolis, and so on. We want t o contact as many women as we possibly can. We want everybody t o have the opportunity t o be contacted. So we use a National probabi l i ty sample, or representat ive sample. And, i f we w a n t t o t a l k t o a l a rge number of wamen, w e use the m a i l as our technique.

We t a l k t o them v i a a questionnaire. We ask them t o f i l l it out and r e tu rn it. Now, not everybody does t h i s , because not everybody wants t o f i l l out a questionnaire. Some forge t t o and some have found it covered with some beaut i fu l p ic tures t h a t Johnny wanted t o draw. So, 80-90$ of the questionnaires are usual ly returned.

A s we begin t o s i f t through the results of t h i s study, we begin t o get some ins ight about our product and consumer. Most l ike ly , she i s a mother with several s m a l l children. These women are the heaviest purchasers of hot dogs, usually buying them once a week. She buys several. brands of hot dogs t h a t are known t o her. She puts t r u s t i n the qua l i ty of these brand hot dogs and the reputat ion of the company. t h a t were a l i t t l e b i t sp ic ie r , but would r a the r not have them changed because her chi ldren l i k e them bland. She f e e l s t h a t hot dogs are nu t r i - t i o u s f o r her chi ldren and f inds them convenient t o serve a t lunch, when she wants her chi ldren t o have a hot meal. Because the chi ldren e a t t he most of them, she allows them t o request t he brand they want - I F it f a l l s i n t h e group of brands t h a t she would ever consider buying. k ids eat the most hot dogs, adults eat them, t o o .

She might prefer hot dogs

Although the

To these women, hot dogs are associated with fun times espec ia l ly with

And, we f ind t h a t some women prefer the children. W e a l so f ind t h a t she has used and i s s a t i s f i e d with Armour hot dogs as well as Oscar Mayer and S w i f t , e t c . Armour, while others prefer Oscar Mayer or Swift. Why? Because sometimes

women prefer a hot dog f o r t a s t e and f l avor reasons. A t any r a t e , we begin t o see who buys hot dogs and why. This we've determined not only by looking a t use and demography, but a t t i t udes . And, through a new and popular term, psychographics or l i f e s t y l e . From these some common denom- ina tors begin t o surface. The most common i s mothers of s m a l l children. That i s the group of women i n the marketplace who tend t o buy them most often. These, then, are the women I'll be wanting t o t a l k t o from now on.

I n t h i s m a i l survey, I ' v e learned a grea t deal. One thing i n pa r t i cu la r i s t h a t a woman may have t r i e d and l i ked Oscar Mayer but she may prefer Armour or Swift, or v i s a versa. That s e t s me t o wondering. What would happen if I took t h e outer wrappings off of a l l three packages and ask women t o taste them. Would they be able t o t e l l a difference even though they say t h a t a pa r t i cu la r brand t a s t e s b e t t e r than mother?

And, most importantly, would t h e i r chi ldren be able t o t e l l t he difference?

I could determine t h i s very quickly by se t t i ng up a l i t t l e stand i n a shopping center . Or, what we c a l l cen t r a l loca t ion t e s t ing , and conduct personal interviews with mothers of small children. And, use what we ca l l a blind taste test . W e c a l l it bl ind because the woman or respondent has no way of knowing which brand she i s tasting. Therefore, her answers are not biased by brands. And we can f a i r l y well determine i f there are i n fact any taste differences. Although t h i s type of t e s t might s a t i s f y our question, we'd r e a l l y l i k e t o know if she and her chi ldren would be able t o t e l l any differences i n the products when they were used i n t h e home. The way she norma-lly heats, cooks or eats them. That would give us a b e t t e r f ix on the real world.

I n t h i s instance, w e send several interviewers out w i t h t he unmarked packages of hot dogs. These interviewers then t a l k w i t h 300 or so women and ask them t o t r y two or more of the packages of these unmarked products. The respondent w i l l be asked t o use them the way she normally uses hot dogs. A t t he end of a ce r t a in period of time, the respondents are re-contacted. They me asked: Was there any difference between the two packages of hot dogs? If so, what were the differences? How would t h i s woman rate them? Why? What did t h e i r chi ldren say? And, so on, the results t e l l us t h a t although there may be differences between the hot dogs, these differences are minor. So, w e must come t o t h e conclusion t h a t because a woman trusts a ce r t a in brand, even though there are no r e a l taste differences between t h a t brand and another, she perceives a d i f f e r - ence. She bui lds an image of t he brand, it i s bktter i n her mind than other brands. So, although Armour, Oscar Mayer and Swift may not be d i f f e r - en t i n terms of t a s t e , women perceive them as having a difference.

We continue and t a l k t o women about other aspects of the product

She l i k e s them the way they me.. .for the including these t h a t I've mentioned. s a t i s f i e d w i t h Armour hot dogs. time being.

And, we f i nd t h a t she i s bas ica l ly

But every day the world changes. The poor o ld hot dog has got ten bat tered and bruised out there l a t e l y . If you ' l l reca.l.1, Ralph N d e r and

16.

Virginia Knauer have figured i n very heavily l a t e l y with hot dogs. t he result t h a t t h e Department of Agriculture wrote two new amendments t o the meat and poul t ry regulat ions. They are: The f a t content of hot dogs must not exceed 30%. composed of poultry. ingredient statement. Over t h i s leve l , it must be s ta ted i n the ingredi- en t statement AND c l ea r ly show i t s presence on the package. For example, "Hot dogs with Chicken".

With

And, up t o 15% of the hot dog can now be A t t h i s leve l , it need only be mentioned i n the

- Armour, of course, w a s qui te in te res ted i n how women would

reac t t o these two amendments. To f ind out, w e d idn ' t have t o go t o a grea t number of women. We f e l t we could accomplish t h i s t a sk by ta lk ing t o s m a l l groups of women. The result of these groups would t e l l us whether we should go t o l a rge r numbers of women. These groups indicate which d i rec- t i o n we should take. The fun thing about a group session i s t h a t w e can do with it as we wish. Plus, w e ge t t he opportunity t o t a l k d i r e c t l y with the consumers. I can lead the conversation or I can l e t t h e l ad ie s lead it. The s i z e of t he group i s s m a l l , and I can do it i n Chicago, or i n Omaha or i n Kansas City. Now, how did the ladies respond? I discovered t h a t these mothers of s m a l l children, although they are good mothers and take a tremendous i n t e r e s t i n t he welfare of t h e i r famil ies , have very l i t t l e knowledge of nu t r i t i on . Oh, they know t h a t too many potato chips are bad f o r you. O r , too much i ce cream w i l l make you fa t or give you cav i t i e s . But, they don't r e a l l y know what nu t r i t i on they are ge t t ing from ... l e t ' s say meat. Whether it be a hot dog or tenderloin, they think t h a t it has about 60% plus protein. And, they give very l i t t l e consideration t o the f a t content of meat or any other food. So, we, as w e l l as other manufacturers, are a t the 30% l e v e l f o r hot dogs. dogs t h a t t h e f lavor i s not as good, but they are going t o have t o accustom themselves t o it! And, then we may reduce the l e v e l again, because w e must concern ourselves with the heal th and well-being of the consumer. nu t r i t i on is. And, it w i l l be d i f f i c u l t because she i s not t h a t concerned. We w i l l have t o f ind a way.

To them, - a l l meat i s protein. Regardless of what t he meat i s .

We know from ta lk ing t o women who buy hot

And, we must undertake the d i f f i c u l t t a sk of teaching her what

Now, t o the other point - the inclusion of chicken i n a hot dog. In addition t o f inding out t h a t women are l imited i n t h e i r knowledge of nu t r i t ion , w e a l s o discovered t h a t ra re ly , if ever, do they read the ingredient statement. Therefore, if we wished, we could put chicken i n our hot dog and women would never know it. But, again, we f ind t h a t grea t t r u s t t h a t a woman places i n the product and the manufacturer. A s one woman put it: "I put trust i n Armour and t h e i r products. And, if 611 of a sudden, I happened t o see chicken as an ingredient, I ' d f e e l they were t ry ing t o p u l l the wool over my eyes by s l ipping something i n t h a t I don ' t want . ' I That answer i l l u s t r a t e s women's a t t i t udes toward the inclusion of chicken i n hot dogs whether it be on the l a b e l or i n t he ingredient s t a t e - ment. Although they l i k e chicken, they don't want it i n t h e i r hot dogs. So, although t h e government allows us t h i s , w e w i l l not do it because the consumer does not des i re it. So, as of today, w e ' r e f a i r l y w e l l s e t on our hot dog. Tomorrow may be something e l se . W e ' l l j u s t have t o w a i t and see.

Now, l e t me proceed t o the package. D o e s it keep the product f r e sh a f t e r she's opened it?

How do women reac t t o our Can she package?

17.

open it eas i ly? Can she close it? Again, we may put several types of packages i n the home f o r her t o t es t . I n short , we f i nd out t h a t a pa r t i cu la r package seems t o be l iked bes t f o r all the things t h a t she wants a package t o be. It i s easy t o open, she can close it and it w i l l keep the hot dogs f r e sh i n her r e f r ige ra to r u n t i l she i s ready t o use them again. This i s the package we use because we know t h a t if a package does not ful- f i l l these needs, t h a t it may very well be enough of an i r r i t a n t t h a t she may never buy Amour again, even though she l i k e s the product.

Now t o another aspect of t he package. It has been only i n recent years t h a t we've begun t o ser iously explore the e f f e c t t h a t the design of a package and all i t s component pa r t s may have on the consumer and her buying habi t s .

Walk down the a i s l e of a supermarket and look a t all the packages t h a t are vying f o r your a t t e n t i m . For example, a detergent section. The bold and br ight ones almost grab you by the shoulder and say, "I 've got t r i p l e X cleaning strength!" The colors and designs communicate t h i s s t rength nonverbally t o the consumer. If she were looking f o r a softener, we wouldn't expect such bold colors, we'd look f o r a sof t , quiet package. Something t h a t says, " I ' m so f t and I'll treat your c lothes gently." course, detergents are an exaggeration. But the point is , a package - can and does communicate t o the consumer. There i s something t h a t passes between a woman and a package. I t ' s a f ee l ing and an emotion of which she may not even be a w a r e . I t ' s an emotional, non-verbal transference.

O f

-

The package I S important! If you've got a good product, put it i n a package t h a t v i s u a y manifests t h e brand and the product.

I wonder how many of you would be in te res ted i n buying a package

But what s o r t of decision of Armour hot dogs t h a t looked l i k e th i s? A s compared t o th i s? Most of you would opt f o r t h e l a t te r f o r obvious reasons. would you make if you s a w these two? They're both good designs. You could pick e i t h e r one of them up. But, which one a t t rac ted your a t ten t ion f i r s t ? How do we determine t h i s ?

By looking a t the eye. Even i n ancient times, the eye or ac tua l ly the pupi l w a s a communicator. and displeasure. looking i n everybody's eyes.

I t ' s involuntary. It indica tes our pleasure O f course, we c a n ' t go around O u r happiness and sadness.

So we use the next best thing, a camera. We ask a consumer t o look through t h i s eye camera machine. She i s shown various degrees of l i g h t s and darks. picture of her pupi l every 1/16 of a second. we c a l l a control . We know t o what degree her eyes d i l a t e and cons t r i c t . Then, we can measure her i n t e r e s t or d i s in t e re s t i n each package as well as t h e i r component par t s . A t t he same time, we can show her competitive packages and see what her eye react ion i s t o them. What the camera doesn' t t e l l , though, i s whether she w i l l buy our product i n t h a t package. her eyes t e l l may be d i f f e ren t than what she ac tua l ly w i l l do. question her. s h e ' l l buy and why? Put t ing together the results of t he eye camera and what t he consumer has said gives us an idea of which of the t w o packages would be

A s she i s looking at each of these, a camera takes a I n t h i s way, we e s t ab l i sh what

What So, w e

Which package did she prefer? Which one does she think

18.

best f o r our hot dogs. We work with the package and i t s design more than t h i s but most importantly, the consumer i s again involved. And, we l ea rn j u s t a l i t t l e b i t more about her.

Now, I suppose you'd l i k e t o know how the consumer i s involved i n the advertising. If you w i l l r eca l l , throughout t h i s t a lk , we've t r i e d t o uncover common denominators. One denominator i s t r u s t . Others are fun, kids, convenience, n u t r i t i o n and f lavor . These are reasons t h a t women have given f o r buying Armour hot dogs. It would be an impossibi l i ty t o put a l l of those denominators i n t o a commercial. So, we've got t o f ind some way of narrowing them down. Which i s the most common denominator? One of t he ways w e have i s by taking each of these denominators or reasons and making a statement or a posi t ion about it. Such as: Convenience. We might write a statement thusly:

Women believe t h a t most hot dog manufacturers have forgot ten the basic appeal of hot dogs, convenience, ease of buying and storing, ease of heating and serving. Although t h e customer has l o s t her or ig ina l awareness of t h i s f a c t , t h i s i s s t i l l t he main reason she buys hot dogs.

Goodtimes. Nearly everybody l i k e s hot dogs. In f a c t , they've become an American way of i i f e . They bring fun t o picnics, cookouts, holidays and weekends.

And, we continue u n t i l all of t he reasons are i n a statement form. We t r y t o f i n d out which pos i t ion appeals t o women the most. t he technique, a series of group sessions. I n these sessions, w e see how women reac t t o each of these posi t ions. What they have t o say about each posi t ion. And, w e f i nd some in t e re s t ing things. The women who t a l k about t r u s t are s t i l l in te res ted about trust i n the company, but they are not nearly as in te res ted i n a statement on t r u s t , or qua l i t y as they are i n a statement about good times or fun with the kids. The same goes f o r the women who have ta lked most about f lavor or convenience. They all seem t o reac t most pos i t ive ly towards fun, good times and kids. Why? Because the emotional associat ion with hot dogs (Kids) i s more pleasurable t o women than a f lavor , t r u s t or convenience association which i s non-emotional. So, THE common denominator seems t o be fun and kids. t o t he reason why these women buy hot dogs.

Again,

Or, perhaps the key c_

Now, our c rea t ive fo lks are brought i n to the picture . We t e l l them what w e have learned and they l i s t e n t o tape recordings of the groups. What they hear gives them several ideas about t he kind of t e l ev i s ion com- mercial they w a n t t o make. After a couple of weeks, they come back t o us with several storyboards t h a t speak t o the subject of kids and fun times. A storyboard i s a board t h a t shows what w i l l happen i n the commercial frame by frame. What it does i s give the women an idea of what the art ists are t ry ing t o communicate. Now, w e show each of t h e storyboards t o more groups of women. We see how they react and respond t o each. And, t h e i r i n t e r e s t i n purchasing A r m o u r hot dogs as a result. Based upon what the women said, we chose t h i s commercial. Now, we're not through ye t . We want t o have one more chance a t t h e consumer t o see if we were r i g h t i n fi lming t h a t pa r t i cu la r commercial. So, we go t o a machine again. There are several

19.

companies i n the business of testing commercials. They gather together 300 or so women i n an auditorium and show them a t e l ev i s ion program and several commercials interspersed. One, which i s ours. I n f ron t of half of these women i s a d i a l which they can move according t o t h e i r i n t e r e s t o r d i s i n t e r e s t i n t he commercial or program. A control i s s e t up here j u s t as it w a s i n t he eye camera. A s t he women move the d i a l s , they feed i n t o a computer t h a t t e l l s us what they are all doing simultaneously. You can see i n t h i s pa r t i cu la r c o m r c i a l , "ZOO", what the in t e re s t l e v e l was. The dark l i n e i s an average. And, we can t e l l second by second how in te res ted women were i n t h e commercial.. A s you can see they were very in te res ted .

I wish I had had the time t o cover these s teps i n more d e t a i l . But, I do hope t h a t i n t h i s short period of time, I ' ve given you some idea of t h e understanding and knowledge t h a t i s needed t o form the c i r c l e of communication between the consumer, myself (Young & Rubicam) and Armour.

R. B. SLEETH: Thank you very much Mary Paul. I guess you know who manufactures the most hot dogs now. You have of ten heard t h a t t he success of any company i s d i r e c t l y dependent upon the number of new products t h a t are successfully introduced i n t o the market place. A s many of you know, the r a t i o of successes t o f a i l u r e s i s about 1-10. incorporating new techniques and product developments, specif i c d l y i n the area of sensory and f lavor p ro f i l e evaluation, which insures the product when it reaches t h e market place more near ly r e f l e c t s the consumers' qua l i t y conception. To share with us some of these techniques we have asked M r s . Barbara E l l i s , who i s an independent consultant, special iz ing i n the appl icat ion and in t e rp re t a t ion of techniques u t i l i z i n g panels of human beings f o r t he measurement of sensory properties, t o discuss our next top ic i n Methodology f o r Product Development. B a r b a r a .

Sorry about t h a t Harry.

Over t h e past several years t h i s r a t i o has been improved by

# # # # # # # # # # # i f