Advanced Study Design II

Advanced Study Design Introduction

Welcome

BASES is Nielsen Innovation Practice. Go through the module to learn more about your role & responsibilities in Nielsen Innovation.

Advanced Study Design Learning Objectives


During Advanced Study Design I you learned about the processes to prepare for a BASES study and the importance of each component in this process. Within this training you will pair this knowledge with BASES services to determine the recommended BASES solution.

Often, there are multiple correct solutions. This training will provide you with details on considerations to determine which solutions may be best.

Study Design Client Questions

Note

An extended usage spreadsheet is available to use as a custom database for interpreting EUO scores.

Client Case Study 1: Mildew Away

  • Compromise with the client and use 4 Weeks
  • Compromise, obtain initial after-use read at 2 weeks and Extended usage at 6 weeks
  • 2 Weeks, Extended usage results typically are not helpful


Mildew Away is a new mildew prevention cleaning spray advertised with the promise “when used consistently for 6 weeks mildew will not return.” The client believes a 6 week usage period is required to obtain a valid read on product satisfaction, but HH cleaner callback is approximately 2 weeks.


What usage period do you use?

Client Case Study 2: Modern Man Shaving



Modern Man is testing a men’s shaving preparation-product. They would like to exclude men with full beards in the sample, since they will not use the product. Should these users be excluded? 




From the dropdown menu select the correct answer.

  1. No, a GP sample is required with optional target group analysis of men without beards  
  2. No, all we need is a GP sample  
  3. Yes, they make up a small portion of our sample, therefore it will not impact the data  

Client Case Study 3: Nutritional Tax

  • BASES Decision Point
  • BASES Price Advisor
  • Custom Conjoint
What BASES Solution would you recommend?

Client Case Study 4: Sparkling Clean

  • BASES Price Advisor
  • Product Advisor
  • BASES II + Price Advisor


Sparkling Clean would like to introduce a toilet bowl cleaner with the claimed benefit to eliminate limescale residue stains. The brand developed two formulas and must determine which would work best and meet sales goals. The marketing and communication plan would be the same regardless of formula launched. They believe the product benefit is worthy of a premium price, although they suspect this could impact consumer adoption.


If the Client Objectives are to determine which formula is best and determine the ideal price point to attract the most consumers. What is the best solution?

Client Case Study 5: Bubbly Beverages


Situation:

A major US soft drink manufacturer, Bubbly Beverages, is considering introducing a strawberry drink in Brazil, but they are unfamiliar with the market and would like to assess the potential.
They haven’t decided if it would be better to conduct qualitative research to understand the consumer or evaluate the concept directly – and are concerned about testing the product within having the perfect concept.
They don’t know BASES well but are eager to understand what BASES would advise.



MBA or Category Advisor?

  • Within the MBA, a category and brands in the competitive subset must be identified.
  • If multiple categories are desired, then a Category Advisor is a better solution.

    Nielsen Online Qualitative Research (NOQR) or Factors Qual?
  • If qualitative insights from consumers are desired, NOQR should be considered. Among pre-identified targets (teens? Parents?) category usage and perception is assessed to identify levers of interest and understand their preliminary feelings about the product.
  • Factors Qual is an alternative solution. Using Factors for Success framework it identifies how the proposition aligns with factors that determine in-market success to help clients better understand research outcomes and improve.

Client Case Study 6: Best Concept

  • SnapShot + Volume Forecast
  • BASES I
  • 3 Cell SnapShot followed by BASES I on the "winner"



A pharmaceutical company wants to evaluate the potential of a new cholesterol treatment sold over the counter in pharmacies. The brand has 3 concepts available (differing on active ingredient) with different retail prices and positioning. The client needs to understand which concept is best and estimate sales taking into account their marketing plan.


Client Objectives: Evaluate strengths and weaknesses, identify which positioning is most relevant to consumers making the concept easiest to believe, and understand the competition (is it OTC only or also anti-cholesterol products).

What solution would best address the client objectives?

Client Case Study 7: Sweet Treats

  • BASES II Restage
  • Snapshot Restage
  • Both of these solutions


Client Objectives: Evaluate the concept and product to determine if the new flavor range would improve sales potential.

Client Case Study 8: SSS

  • Recall
  • Nielsen Online Qualitative Research (NOQR)
  • Factors Qual
  • Any of these solutions

The Silky Smooth Shampoo (SSS) brand team conducted a BASES II on a shampoo for colored hair. Results identified strong concept potential, although disappointing product performance. Diagnostics indicated product improvement opportunities. During the results presentation, the marketing team raised important new concerns beyond the original study scope. Now, the brand would like to re-contact dissatisfied consumers to ask additional questions.

Which solution is the best solution?

Client Case Study 9: Beachy Tan

  • BASES II with extended usage
  • SnapShot + BASES II w/ Extended Usage on “Winning” concept
  • Any of the above solutions

A new dairy product has been developed (enhanced with beta-carotene) with the claim the product will help skin tan over time, avoiding the impacts of UVA-UVB rays on skin. The drink would have to be consumed daily at least 3 weeks for noticeable effects. Three concept positioning plans are being considered, although the brand is ready to assess performance immediately. The brand wants to evaluate performance to ensure the product meets expectations and must determine which concept is most appealing.

What solution would best address the clients needs?

Client Case Study 10: Thirsty Drinks

  • Custom Packaging Study
  • Product Advisor
  • BASES II with FGA

You are about to meet Claudia, the Thirsty Drinks Ready-to-Drink Beverage Brand Manager. She will provide you an insight into her current situation.

Our brand, Thirsty Beverages is the RTD beverage category leader (in US.) We would like to introduce a new gallon size jug because this size is profitable for our competitors and we would like to steal share. We anticipate our innovative handle design will help do this.
We would like to know:
What it the incremental volume potential to my franchise?
How does the new pack compare to competitive offerings?
Select the solution that addresses Thirsty Drinks needs.

Client Case Study 11: Smelly Deodorant

  • GP Restage
  • Buyer/Non-Buyer Restage
  • A combination of Buyer/Non-Buyer Restage with GP Restage

Smelly brand deodorant line is considering a multi-country package change and possible re-formulation. Smelly’s Form1 has high penetration in France, but low penetration in Mexico. It is available in male and female varieties, with separate advertising.

The client needs to understand:

  • If they proceed with the package and/or formulation change, how will that impact Smelly’s Form1 sales?
  • Is it recommended to proceed with the change?


Design Needed: 
France: Buyer definition-Smelly’s Form1. There is a sufficient penetration of these consumers
Mexico: Buyer definition- *any* Form1 buyer in the category, due to low penetration of Smelly’s
Separate Male (70%M/30%F) and Female (100% F) cells were proposed because of the separate ad campaigns

12 cells required per country, including Female Buyer, Female Non-Buyer, Male Buyer, Male Non-Buyer for below:

  1. Current Smelly Form1 package & formulation – control
  2. New Smelly Form1 package (current formulation) – test #1
  3. New Smelly Form1 package and new formulation – test #2


Select the solution name that addresses client needs.

Client Case Study 12: Best in Show, Honorable Mention

A personal care product has been formulated with two variants. The client has several questions they would like addressed:

  • Which launch strategy should we use? Launch both together? or launch top variety with second variant being added 1 year later?
  • If simultaneous launch, which advertising strategy is best? Feature only one variant? Feature one with 5-second tag for other? advertise both?
  • If simultaneous launch, how should we price these? Line price? “Fancier” variant prices at 15% premium?



Proposed Solution (1st/Best in Show) 

Staggered Launch

  • Cell A: Variant launched 1st
  • Cell B: Variant launched 2nd
  • Cell C: Split cell 1st launch/2nd launch exposure order and ask minimal diagnostics (KM, variety/substitution, attribute list)
  • Cell D: Both variants on board

Simulteneous Launch

  • Cell D: from above
  • Cell E: Message features advertised variant with brief reference to tagged variant and SKU info for both
  • Cell F: Message features advertised variant and SKU info for both

Pricing

  • Cells A-F repeated, using one set with “line” pricing and one set with varied pricing, where applicable




Second Solution (Honorable mention) 

Max 6 cells; Min 4 cells

Staggered Launch

  • Cell C: Split cell 1st launch/2nd launch exposure order and ask minimal diagnostics (KM, variety/substitution, attribute list)
  • Cell D: Both variants on board

Simulteneous Launch

  • Cell D: from above
  • Cell E: Message features advertised variant with brief reference to tagged variant and SKU info for both
  • Cell F: Message features advertised variant and SKU info for both
  • Note: Could also probably omit either Cell E or Cell F and make assumption slight change in interest of 5-sec tag vs. no ad

Pricing

  • Repeat only one cell (D, E, or F) for both pricing options and extrapolate learning to other cells
  • May want to consider repeating cell C for both pricing options given possible launch sequence impact on price perceptions

Client Case Study 13: Multi-Year

Multi-year new product launch sequence for Shaving Category: Razors

  • Year 1: launch Super1 non-refillable razor Support: Solid TV advertising plan
  • Year 2: launch Super2 non-refillable razor AND Super1 refillable Support: Super2 non-refillable will have a modest print ad plan, Super1 refillable will have a small TV ad plan
  • Year 3: launch Vibra non-refillable razor (note: refillable Vibra is already in the marketplace; both products will be priced the same) Support: Print advertising + tag on refillable TV ads

The client's objectives are:

  • How will each new launch affect sales of my existing category products? How will these launches affect each other?
  • Vibra refillable is experiencing significant growth in the marketplace today. If the penetration doubles by Year 3, how might this affect the results? How do we account for this today?



Proposed Solution

  • Cell A: Super non-refillable
  • Cell B: Super2 non-refillable
  • Cell C: Super2 refillable
  • Cell D: Vibra disposable
  • Cell E: The client's brands as of today
  • Cell F: Today's brands + Year 1 launch
  • Cell G: Today's brands + Year 1 launch + Year 2 launches
  • Cell H: Today's brands + Year 1 launch+ Year 2 launches + Year 3 launch




Forecast Approach

  1. Forecast cells A-D in isolation
  2. Use shift in KM, SOVA, variety interest, substitution, and TURF across cells to assess incrementality
           - Impact of Year 1 launch: use cells E&F
           - Impact of Year 2 launches: use cells F&G
           - Impact of Year 3 launch: use cells G&H; note SOVA from cell D should indicate direct impact on Vibra refillable
  3. To address the expected increase in Vibra refillable penetration, we reweighted the sample and compared the difference in interest

Caveat

In this example Step 2 didn’t work as expected and we had to improvise. In the future, we probably would have designed the study differently with more of a split cell 1st exposure/2nd exposure approach (as outlined in Case Study 12). Also, Step 3 didn’t work. Reweighting the data with higher refillable penetration yielded stronger scores, suggesting greater NON-refillable volume. However, by the nature of refillables, this isn’t logical. A refillable user isn’t likely to switch to the non-refillable format because they’ve already invested in the holder, and even moreso when both refillable and non-refillable products are line priced as they were in this study.

Client Case Study 14: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder

  • BASES Concept Constructor
  • Sequential Monadic SnapShot (for cost savings)
  • Custom Conjoint



A Beauty care manufacturer wants to proceed with a new face lotion that makes skin firmer and younger looking. They have done some idea screening and have several ideas on how to communicate the benefit, which ingredients to highlight, and what kind of packaging to use, but need guidance.


Project Considerations

The client needs to understand:

  • What is the best way to communicate the concept, and is the concept viable?
  • Their packaging choice has manufacturing cost implications. Can they choose a cheaper option without a sales impact to the product?
  • They are launching in US and Germany. They need to understand what the best concept in each country is and which concept can be used in both countries without impacting their chances of success.

What is the best solution?

Advanced Study Design Review

Final Review


The Advanced Study Design Training should have provided you with insight into typical client issues and ways to determine the best solutions. Following this training you should talk to managers and peers about new questions you may have.