Using focus group research as a means to evaluate product names is a challenging proposition, as there are many potential pitfalls to avoid. Based on our experience, we have found that five critical issues should be considered to help ensure a successful outcome:
1. Confirm that focus groups are an appropriate research method. There are certain instances in which focus groups may not be suitable -- particularly if the names in question are so unique, abstract or disconnected from the product or service that it would prove difficult for consumers to discuss the names on any meaningful level (i.e., connecting to product features/benefits, imagery, emotions). For example, it's hard to imagine having a productive discussion on names such as Yahoo! or (Palm) Treo. On the other hand, one can intuitively sense the merits of talking about names like (Sony) PlayStation or (Canon) PowerShot.
A good rule of thumb: ask yourself if you can instinctively picture consumers having a meaningful conversation about the names and relating them to the product or service. If not, then focus groups are likely not a good outlet. That's not to say the names do not have potential; they simply don't lend themselves to qualitative discussion.
2. Limit the number of names to be evaluated.
Consumers get overwhelmed when given a large number of names to evaluate. Plus, patterns of response become more ambiguous and findings less clear when too many names are exposed. It's best to review no more than eight names in a discussion-based study.
3. Identify the criteria against which the names will be measured. What are the names trying to accomplish? Establishing objective criteria is CRITICAL, as it's not enough to ask consumers how they feel about a name. Naming criteria should be agreed upon prior to conducting the groups so that the qualitative researcher knows what to probe when exploring consumer perceptions. Hopefully there were specific criteria used in the development phase of the names, and this same criteria can be applied to the focus groups. While naming criteria varies from study to study, examples include:
- Communicating a key product feature or benefit
- Being memorable and unique
- Instilling certain feelings and emotions
- Being consistent with the nomenclature of other products from the
brand or category
4. Establish a method for exposing and evaluating the names which will yield maximum insights.
There should be a standardized process used to discuss the names to ensure consistency. Overall, we've found the most productive approach consists of four stages:
A. Unaided Impressions: First, capture each panelist's intuitive, natural
reaction and initial level of emotion/interest in each name, divorced
from aided information on the product/service. It's best to expose
each name in monadic sequential order (on cards), and then to
discuss each panelist's immediate impressions/feelings and initial
expectations for the product/service.
B. Concept Exposure: After unaided impressions, explain the
product/service concept with which the potential names will be
partnered. Depending on the complexity of the product/service
concept, this can either be done verbally or via a hand-out.
C. Aided Impressions: Next, each name should be re-visited and
discussed in the context of its fit with the concept, as well as how
impressions might have changed from pre-concept exposure. During
this dialogue the key criteria should be probed.
D. Overview & Hierarchy: Eventually it's worthwhile to display all of the
names at once and to ask consumers what name best meets each
of the criterion. It's often helpful to administer a written
questionnaire to participants which measures the extent to which
each name delivers on the criteria (using a scale). Near the end of
the group it's also beneficial to have each panelist choose the top
two-to-three names which they find to be most compelling;
however, results of this exercise should be viewed with skepticism,
as all of the group discussions must be evaluated by the qualitative
researcher during the analytical stage before any conclusions are
made.
5. Make sure the focus groups will not be used to choose a "winner." The findings should not be used as the sole determinant in deciding on a name. Focus groups are most valuable as a tool to illuminate the meaning, associations and implications of certain names from a consumer point-of-view -- ultimately providing insight to help refine the names and pare down the list. Consumers should never be used as decision-makers when it comes to naming research; there are other internal and external considerations which should weigh in when choosing a name.
Beyond these broader issues there are probes and exercises which can be helpful during group discussions in order to illuminate underlying strengths and weaknesses of a name; they include:
- When you hear the name, what type of product do you
envision? Describe the product and its expected benefits.
- Imagine that you encountered the product (name) in a store:
what would be your reaction? Would you think it was a natural
fit along side the other products from that brand? What about
along side other products in the category?
- What imagery does the name evoke?
- What feelings/emotions does the name instill?
- What type of person do you envision buying a product with that
name?
- Imagine that you were to tell a friend about the new product by
using the name (e.g, "I just bought ____________"): how would the
conversation go? How natural would it sound? How would your friend
react?
By devising a well-thought-out research plan, a qualitative naming study can yield rich insight. However, even a well-executed study is only one step in development. In the end, the name of a new product/service does not take on its complete, fully developed identity and connotative meaning until all components of its marketing are in place and its cultural context has been established. Factors such as packaging, advertising, user image, word-of-mouth, etc. will eventually help shape consumer impressions. Ultimately it is the marketplace which will confer on a name its definitive and lasting identity.
