The good data behind the obvious conclusion in Miller Zell brief
April 4, 2009 by Dave Haynes
I have read a fair amount of cheeky comments on a story late this week about a report from retail design biggie Miller Zell, which makes the forehead-slappingly obvious assertion that purchasing decisions happen in the store.
Miller Zell, an Atlanta-based retail consultancy, polled 999 consumers online in March shortly after they made shopping trips. The results were compiled in a report titled, “Gone in 2.3 Seconds: Capturing Shoppers With Effective In-Store Triggers.”
The knee-jerk response would be to thank the guys for stating something we all know, and move on. But I have not seen much reporting on what’s actually in the brief, which is pretty interesting.
It’s a free download, and I’d recommend it if you want to sound like a smarty-pants at your next meeting with a retailer.
Among the findings:
- Store planners need to be cognizant not only of their product assortment at various locations around the store, but also of their target shopper segment, shopper need states and the type of messaging vehicle to use in order to maximize effectiveness. As an example, our research discovered that if your store is striving to increase unplanned purchases on the perimeter of your store, then your target shopper segment should be the Millennial /Generation Y segment, and your price point communication should emphasize a price discounting message.
- While much has been made of the importance of price point messaging at shelf, our analysis indicated this is age sensitive. Baby Boomers, as an example, still prefer product messaging (93% rated this very or extremely important) to price point messaging (86%).
- While in-home shopping list creation is substantially up (65% of consumers are making shopping lists prior to the shopping trip), our quantitative shopper research indicated that shoppers are making brand decisions 60% of the time after entering the store.
- In-store digital signage has yet to hit the tipping point in terms of influencing unplanned in-store purchases, but it seems to be gaining some traction as it relates to planned purchases.
- Internet advertising seemed to have minimal impact on planned or unplanned purchases instore.
- Across all age, income, gender and channels evaluated, in-store advertising was considered more effective than out-of-store advertising in raising product awareness and communicating product benefits
It also indicates endcaps are particularly important, as is the overall in-store shopping experience.
There’s some really good stuff here for people interested in how to best do screens in retail. Thanks to the MZ guys for sharing it around.
Curiously, though, I can see nothing in the report that maps back to the “Gone in 2.3 seconds” report title. What’s that about? Attention span?
Leave a comment