In some of the tests we do, results show that the new product or design upgrade meant to replace the current proposition has poor performance. In most cases, the behavioral data behind them are conclusive, pointing out that the brand would suffer a loss in market share in the new tested scenario. As in every project, on the client side, the team has worked intensively on this design upgrade or innovation, and it is often difficult for them to accept the results initially.

Typical human behavior is to blame the messenger instead of trying to understand the reasons behind it and what could be done differently (Cassandra's syndrome). And such a reaction from a client's side at first is understandable. There are hours of work behind any new project and multiple approval levels, so once there is an alignment on a new product or packaging, there is little room for failure. The entire team is only waiting for a green light, and if results are not positive, like in some instances, there is often no plan B.

In these situations, the agency's job, our job, becomes even more difficult, as we need to find the right way to deliver the message with solid arguments that would prevent a first spontaneous reaction to dismiss them. In essence, if we do this job, it is because we want to provide valuable help and have an impact.

What can we do differently, then? As an agency, we always make sure to come up with a clear explanation of what is happening and factual data to back it up; many agencies stop their work at this point. But we firmly believe that we cannot stop here and will go further; based on our extensive experience with consumer testing, we always come up with a recommendation, and in most cases, we try to make it concrete. For example, if we test a packaging, we will draft what the new packaging should look like. If we test an eCommerce hero image, we will prepare what the new hero image should look like. Most clients accept and appreciate this, but some are surprised. "Why would a research agency draft a design?" It is just about taking our jobs seriously, being practical, and having an impact.

What can the client do differently? It is almost impossible to be right from the very start. Getting better is an iterative process, a test-and-learn, so trying out different angles and options is essential. In an ideal world, doing this early in the innovation funnel ensures that there will be enough time to go back to the drawing board in case the results are not as per expectations. Also, testing different options would help, so if one fails, the other one might work. Or, if both fail, they will probably reveal valuable insights into why they failed and offer the occasion to develop a hybrid option mixing different elements. This is not a guarantee of success, but it will make it more likely.

So, facing the truth early in the process might be painful in the short term but will positively impact you in the longer term.

What's next? In the next post, we will discuss how our methodology accurately predicted brand and segment share with less than a 1% margin of error.