JOHN WAX: ENHANCE(A)

Product Line

House hold Viz, Brite, Klear Floor Wax, Rain Barrel Fabric

softner etc

Personal care products Hair conditioner and shampoos

SC Johnson & Company

Standard established procedures for New Product development

◦ Product Feasibility study

◦ Performance test against competitive product

◦ Test market before national introduction

New Product Development

Hair Conditioning Market

[(202-116)/116)]x 100=74%Increase in Instant hair conditioner market size

Company launched Agree hair instant conditioner in 1977

ASSESSOR Test was conducted on Agree product – performed fairly well

1978 Market share Agree conditioner – 15.2%

Agree Hair Conditioner

Enhance Hair Conditioner With success of Agree conditioner Company

decided to launch Enhance- Sequel of Agree in 1979

Target Market Dry Hair 25-45 Yr Old Women

Existing Competitors Brands: Ravlon’s Flex, Brek Clean, Tame, Loreal, Sassoon, W Balsam and AGREE

Blind Test was conducted to establish preference levels on specific and overall attributes against competitor products Viz Revalon Flex

Test was conducted on 400 hair conditioner users for six weeks usage period

Users were given Enhance and Flex condiioners in blind labeled, identical non-identifiable packages form

The Key preference attribute to be tested was ‘women with specific hair care’ problem relevant to Enhance strategy and positioning

Enhance Blind Test

Blind Test – Overall Prefrence

The ASSESSOR Pre-Test Market was resorted to estimate the ongoing market share of Enhance and determine the consumer reaction to the product

2 Independent techniques were used namely◦ Trail and Repeat Level method- for Market Share

prediction of new product◦ Preference Level method – for Measurement of Brand

Preference

ASSESSOR Pre Test market

Over view of ASSERSOR Modeling Sequence

Test Phases Laboratory PhasePre Use

Call Back Phase Post Use

initial Questionnaire – Evoke Set The preference questionnaire – Pairing of brand Advertising recallLaboratory Purchasing Brand Ratings

Information Collection – After use preferences, repeat purchase rate, and diagnostics concerning product performance Call back test was conducted 4 weeks after the Lab test

ASSESSOR Pre Test market

ASSESSOR provided 08 major result ◦ Market Structure – for segmentation of market ◦ Advertising recall – to estimate impact of

advertisement ◦ Trial Estimation- to simulate anticipated

competitive environment ◦ Repeat Purchase Estimation◦ Product Acceptance- Like and dislike of product ◦ Market Share Prediction

Trial and repeat model Preference model

◦ Cannibalization◦ Incremental Share from Sampling

ASSESSOR Pretest results

ASSESSOR -MARKET STRUCTURE

Product Map- Enhance Vs Othre Product

Provided a measure of how well an ad broke through the clutter of competitive advertising

Ad recall reasons (Exhibit-4) ◦ For dry hair – 47 %◦ Conditioning – 20%◦ Penetrates - 20 %◦ Manageability – 11%◦ Texture of hair – 6%

ASSESSOR –ADVERTISMENT RECALL

Ad Point Recall

Is designed to reflect local conditions and simulate the anticipated competitive environment

The test product is showcased like a real market condition

Enhance was offered in 8 and 16 ounce sizes at $1.31 and $ 1.94

Agree was offered in 8 and 12 ounce sizes at $1.31 and $ 1.67

Flex was offered in 16 ounce size at $ 1.67 Out Come

◦ Enhance trial rate 23% where as Agree had achieved trial rate of 33% in the past

TRIAL ESTIMATION

Administered by telephone call back – 04 weeks after Laboratory Interviews.

Out of 215 respondents, 42 did not use Enhance because it is specifically formulated for DRY HAIR

The performance on PRODUCT MAP post sample usage by the respondents.(Exhibit-3)◦ Condition Vs Clean – improved on clean and declined on

conditioning

◦ Condition Vs Effects – Declined on conditioning as well as effects

ASSESSOR – Repeat Purchase Estimation

The respondents feedback was obtained about ‘what she liked best about Enhance’

The response was for Manageability rather than conditioning which was the main copy point of market structure

Even repeat purchasers voted for Manageability

ASSESSOR –Product Acceptance

ASSESSOR –Product Acceptance

Market Share was estimated with two convergent methods

◦ Trial and Repeat

◦ Preference Model

ASSESSOR –Market Share Prediction

Trial and Repeat: Model was based on the purchase information gathered during laboratory shopping and follow up telephone calls

The Formula used wasM=TS

Where M= Market ShareT= the ultimate cumulative trial rate (Penetration or

Trial)S = the ultimate repeat purchase rate among those

buyers who have made a trail purchase

Retention (S) was a function of the initial repeat purchase rate and the rate at which previous tiers returned to Enhance after buying another product (called switch back)

ASSESSOR –Market Share Prediction

Preference Model Estimates of Share – Model market share predictions was based on the respondents answers to questions about product attributes and the degree to which they perceived these attributes to be present in competing brand.

The preference model predicted that Enhance would attain 27.5% share of those consumers (in evoked sets) Penetration rate – 14% Base Market Share Estimate – 3.8%

ASSESSOR –Market Share Prediction

ASSESSOR –Market Share Prediction

It was estimated that the launch of Enhance will lead to 2.4% cannibalization among Agree users

The analysis shows to draw more than proportionate share of cannibalization from competitive products Viz. Wella, Balsam etc

The analysis also shows to draw less than proportionate share of cannibalization from competitive product Viz Loreal, Clirol Condition

ASSESSOR –Canibalisation

The analysis shows to draw more than proportionate share of cannibalization from competitive product Viz, Wella Balsam.

The analysis also shows to draw less than proportionate share of cannibalization from competitive product Viz, Loreal, Clirol Condition.

ASSESSOR- Incremental Share from sampling