RESEARCHING RADICALLY DIFFERENT ADVERTISING

Devangana Bhat, MARG

The Researcher’s Dilemma

The researcher, armed with the standard advertising testing techniques is faced with the problem
of how exactly to evaluate such advertisements. For instance, how does one evaluate an
advertisement which on the surface does not have any link with the brand ? Is it essential for
consumers to identify some link with the brand, or is their liking the advertisement enough ?

And what about an advertisement that has not one or two, but multiple messages? (Only too
often, the research results of such standard advertisement testing satisfy no one.) When the
advertisement fails to perform, the advertising agency accuses research of killing creativity and
believes more than ever that certain advertisements just cannot be researched.

The findings of this paper are based on a qualitative research study conducted among the target
consumers for the brands (i.e. men, aged 20-40 years, MHI 4000 +). The research was conducted
in Bombay.

The Experiment

In order to develop a methodology better suited to evaluate creative advertisements, an

experimental qualitative study was conducted. We used three different methods of evaluating
each advertisement. The standard testing method was felt to be possibly too rigid in testing such
advertisements. Testing the advertisements among creative respondents was likely to be too
lenient an approach. Thus an in-between approach was developed.

The following were two ways in which the creative advertisements were tested:
(i) With ordinary consumers, using the standard testing method i.e.
- Spontaneous reactions
- Message comprehension
- Relevance and Credibility
- User Imagery

(ii) With ordinary consumers, using a different testing method and a

different emphasis across techniques i.e.

- Emphasis on spontaneous reactions with a minimal role

played by the moderator, allowing respondents to discuss the
advertisement with each other.
- Questioning on the likes/dislikes regarding the advertisement
per se, with no forced attempt to link the visuals/voice over
with the brand in question.

(iii) With creative consumers using the standard testing method.

A total of four advertisements were tested. Of these, two (i.e., Onida –

“Earthquake” and Red Eveready – “Give Me Red”) were those which were
acknowledged as successful, these advertisements provided the

1
 barometer by which the researcher evaluated the ability of each of the
three methodologies to identify a successful advertisement.
The other two advertisements tested (i.e., Modernism – “What is
Modernism” and Royal Challenge beer “Daringly different”) were selected
since they were significantly different from other advertisements in their
product categories, and did not overtly specify the brands’ features and
qualities. Also, there was no information on the success or failure of these
advertisements.

The Scope of this Paper

As already mentioned, this paper will draw upon known successes among
creative advertisements to help determine which method is best suited to
evaluate these types of advertisements.

It aims to provide researchers and marketers with guidelines to be followed in

selecting a methodology to evaluate such radically “different” advertisements.

The findings are discussed under the following sections.

A. How each advertisement fared – methodology

- Onida
- Royal Challenge
- Red Eveready
- Modernism

B. An analysis of the findings.

C. Deciding on the evaluation methodology

- The issue of “differentness ”

- Selecting the evaluation methodology

A. How Each Advertisement Fared

Depending on the methodology used, the results of the testing varied. Results
for each brand, under each methodology have been outlined below:

I. The Onida Commercial

(i) When tested with ordinary consumers using the standard

techniques:

At a spontaneous level, the commercial was positively received, since it was

perceived to be “different”. The message played back was “Neighbour’s envy,
owner’s pride” i.e. a superior quality television.

2
However, the situation changed when respondents were asked to explain
what the advertisement said about the television. Being unable to say
anything concrete, respondents expressed the desire “to be told how it is
superior – what is hi-tech about it”.

Further, the advertisement was found irrelevant, not credible and appealing
“only to children”.

Researcher’s reading:
Advertisement not comprehended, not liked, found not credible and irrelevant.

(ii) When tested with ordinary consumers using different

techniques: As already mentioned, the method followed
was

- Emphasis on spontaneous reactions with a minimal role played

by the moderator, allowing respondents to discuss the
advertisement with each other.

- Questioning on the likes/dislikes regarding the advertisement

per se, with no forced attempt to link the visuals/voice over
with the television brand.

In this case, the positive spontaneous reactions were the same as the earlier
method, with “differentness” being the main attraction.

When asked about likes/dislikes regarding the advertisement per se, likes that
emerged were the devil itself, the advertisement production, the visuals – “it’s
like a horror film !” Respondents said that they did not need to know any
details about the TV- they could always ask for these at the dealers. The
advertisement was found impactful enough to make sure they asked about
the brand, and the basic message that it was a hi-tech television was
comprehended.

Researcher’s reading:
Advertisement liked, linked with the brand, and impactful.

(iii) When tested with creative consumers:

The spontaneous reactions here were less positive, with

respondents saying they were “bored of the devil” and wanted to
see something different.

When asked about what the commercial said about the TV, a
number of meanings were deciphered i.e. “ its sound would be so
strong that it will shatter windows and shake the earth … (like an
earthquake)” “the aerial has fallen, but it can still receive the
picture … its reception is so strong”, etc.

Though the advertisement was not found very credible or relevant,

this was not a problem – respondents felt it was meant only to make
an impact and didn’t have to be believed.

3
 Researcher’s reading :
Advertisement acceptable, many associations with TV set, not
credible – but not expected to be taken at face value.

II. The Royal Challenge Commercial

(i) When listed with ordinary consumers using the standard

techniques:

This was received negatively at the spontaneous level – “don’t

understand”, “very boring”, “no one will listen”. The only take out
was that it was an advertisement for Royal Challenge beer.
Consumers were unable to link the voice over with the beer,
leading to their saying “Could have just said the name instead of
wasting so much time !”

The story itself was found irrelevant, incredible and boring.

Researcher’s reading:
Advertisement not a success; voice over difficult to understand
leading to a loss of interest, story (even when explained) not linked
to the brand.

(ii) When tested with ordinary consumers using different

techniques:

Not liked at a spontaneous level; consumers unable to understand the voice-

over, therefore loss of interest – “a boring” advertisement.

When the story was explained, respondents saw the link with the brand as
being “he’s drunk the beer and become daring enough to fight a vampire” or
“he’s relaxing with the beer after his bold actions.”

This link was not appreciated, since the humour in the advertisement was
completely missed by respondents. The advertisement was found boring
(“should show some action not just the bottle !“), irrelevant and completely
incredible.

Researcher’s reading :
Not comprehended, incredible and not relevant, not liked.

(iii) When tested with Creative consumers :

The advertisement was liked at a spontaneous level. Although the entire story
was not comprehended, the gist of the story was understood. The consumers
found the link with the product “It’s not meant to be believed … he’s had a few
drinks – now he’s telling a tall story!” Further, they appreciated the contrasts
depicted in the advertisement – the stormy, dangerous, violent story and the
warm, relaxed, safe surroundings in which it is told, as well as its
metaphorical content “like blood is to a vampire … so is beer to a man … “

4
Credibility was a non-issue, since the humorous nature of the advertisement
was understood.

Researcher’s reading:
Humour appreciated, advertisement liked and comprehended, linked with
product category.

III . The Red Eveready Commercial

(i) When tested with ordinary consumers using standard testing

methods.

Consumers liked the commercial at a spontaneous level calling it “fast” with

“catchy music”.

Although respondents were unable to link all the visuals with the brand of
battery, the basic message taken out was that Eveready was a powerful
battery with a long life. The advertisement was liked, found “nice to watch”
and even the visuals that could not be linked with the brand were perceived to
add to the attractive, eye catching nature of the advertisement.

Researcher’s reading:
Positively received, message clear, no negatives.

(ii) When tested with ordinary consumers using different methods:

Essentially, the results were the same as earlier.

(iii) When tested with creative consumers :

The advertisement was liked at a spontaneous level being found “powerful

and impactful”. The message take out was multifaceted; apart from power
and long life, the battery was perceived to be multisized (since the
advertisement showed a transistor, motorcycle), smooth (like the
movement of the glass along the table), leak proof (As the liquid moves
inside, but does not spill out of the glass), etc.

The music and execution (“slick, fast paced, MTV – like) highlighting the
“glamorous uses of a battery” was greatly liked and the sheer differentness”
set it apart from other battery advertisements.

Researcher’s reading:
Excellently received, message comprehended, found relevant and very
“watchable”.

IV . The Modernism Commercial

(i) When tested with ordinary consumers using standard testing

techniques :

At the spontaneous level, this advertisement generated no comment. The

message received was that it was for all age groups and for “modern “
people. The fast paced action was not appreciated, since respondents
could not understand the connection between what was said and what

5
 was shown. It was found disconnected and confusing “What is the child
doing” ? “What has the dancer got to do – she’s not wearing modern
suitings “!

Though considered “different” the advertisement was found largely

irrelevant (“they say modernism – but that’s implied for any suitings !”) and
not interesting enough to hold one’s attention.

Researcher’s reading:
Too fast, difficult to understand, low comprehension of the concept and
therefore, no appreciation of the advertisement.

(ii) When tested with ordinary consumers using different techniques:

Reactions were essentially the same as above, with respondents saying

“We’d switch it off … or change the channel …”

“Too fast … but does not hold attention …“

“There’s no connection (between the visuals) … no continuity “

(iii) When tested among Creative consumers :

At a spontaneous level, respondents were indifferent towards the

advertisement – on the plus side it was found to initially attract attention
because it was different. On the negative side, it was found progressively
boring with even the fast music unable to hold interest in the advertisement.

When exposed to the advertisement frame by frame, a number of

associations with modernism/the suiting were arrived at. “It’s very strong –
won’t tear even if you dance like that”, “ The dancer represents the timeless
part of modernism – the dance is forever modern”, “the bottle is modern itself
– made of a new plastic material”.

Researcher’s reading:
Comprehended, but has low appeal, does not hold interest.

B. An Analysis of the Findings

(i) The issue of “differentness” : Across all respondent types,

newness or uniqueness of an advertisement gave it a
headstart over other commercials. Respondents stated that
they liked advertisements that “made them think”.

In this respect, it would be relevant to understand consumer attitude to MTV

advertisements. What with MTVs alleged system of evaluating their
advertisements .. “If understood on first viewing it’s bad, if understood after
the 10th viewing it’s good, if never understood, it’s excellent”, how did these
respondents feel about the MTV advertisements ?

6
Though not always understood, they were found interesting enough to hold
one’s attention – the computer graphics, the slickness and speed of the
advertisement held one enthralled throughout the duration of the commercial.
Importantly, respondents were not looking for any message when it came to
MTV advertisements.

So perhaps such advertisements may not work for a brand which does have
a message, and not merely a zany image to communicate.

(ii) The table given below represents the research results for
each on the particular testing technique used.

In the case of the Onida commercial (under the standard testing method), the
positive spontaneous reactions were negated by the questioning by the
moderator regarding the link between the visuals and voice over with the
television set. It seems that respondents were initially able to accept the
advertisement at face value. However, when forced to think rationally and
drew some link with the television brand, their inability to explain the visuals
and voice over has lead to their subsequent rejection of the advertisement
altogether.

When such a rational approach was not forced on them (Method 2),
respondents' were satisfied with a single line take out “Neighbour’s envy –
owner’s pride” or ”Taking envy to the 21st century”.

Ordinary Ordinary Creative

Consumers consumers, respondents
different
techniques
Onida X √ √
Royal X X √
Challenge
Red √ √ √
Eveready
Modernism X X X√

The situation was different for the Eveready commercial. Even ordinary
consumers were able to get some product related cues from the
advertisement and more importantly, were willing to live with the ambiguity in
certain visuals, since they could rationalize their presence as “adding
attraction and glamour”.

This stems from the fact that the Red Eveready commercial (like the Modernism
commercial) has some cognitive element that can be inferred from the
visuals/voice over, although no brand values are overtly stated.

Thus, when consumers are unable (under traditional advertisement testing

methodologies) to infer any brand values, it leads to their criticizing the
commercial as irrelevant, uninformative, illogical and incredible. This does not
happen when consumer are able to infer at least some brand value from the
commercial.

7
In all cases, creative respondents were able to read far more into the commercials
and therefore, appreciate them to a greater extent than ordinary consumers.
Since, the power of such commercials lies in the respondents’ ability to “get the
point” of the advertisement, as well as read more into it with subsequent viewings,
the readings from testing creative advertising with such consumers were far more
positive as compared to ordinary consumers.

C. Learning’s in Evaluating Creative Advertising

(i) The effect of differentness: It is evident that mere differentness or

the uniqueness of a commercial, far from detracting from, adds to
the impact of an advertisement and helps create an initial
favourable impression.

It is only when the commercial is different in a way that has some

“shock-value”, that consumers may take some time to get used to
the idea or for the shock to wear off. For instance, had the Onida
advertising been tested when initially launched, consumer
reactions may have been different.

However, we believe that with increased exposure to foreign

advertising, specially of the radically different type, consumers
would get more used to these “shock-value” advertisements.

(ii) Selecting the evaluation methodology: As our experiment has

proved, choice of the evaluation methodology is critical in
researching creative commercials, since the results vary greatly
under each methodology.

Testing an advertisement with creative respondents is not

recommended, since these respondents appreciate to a far greater
extent the “newness” or differentness in an advertisement. Also,
they see and interpret various nuances in the advertisement that
ordinary consumers would never appreciate.

(iii) To decide which particular method is best suited to evaluate a

creative commercial, it is essential to determine which category the
commercial falls into.

a.) Commercials with some cognitive content : i.e. certain brand

values are meant to be inferred from the visuals/voice over. In this
case, the commercial should be tested using standard advertising
testing methods (i.e. with ordinary consumers using normal testing
techniques).
b.) Commercials with no cognitive content at all: i.e. no brand values
are meant to be decoded from the visuals/voice over and the
advertisement is only meant to register the brand name/slogan
among consumers. In this case, subjecting the commercial to
standard testing techniques would be an unsuitable methodology,
since it forces a rational evaluation of what is essentially not a
rational execution. In this case, the advertisement should be tested
among ordinary consumers using different testing techniques (i.e.

8
 greater focus on respondent’s spontaneous reactions and on
likes/dislikes regarding the commercial and no forced linkage
between the advertisement and the brand values).

In fact, since the idea is to generate an open discussion on the commercial,

another option would be to do a group discussion among friends. This would not
only ensure an informal, relaxed environment that encourages debate, but also
help in creating an atmosphere where respondents feel comfortable in verbalizing
even seemingly ‘silly’ or way out associations with the brand.

Limitations

This paper has not been able to explore the shock – value of certain types of
creative commercials (for example, the use of the devil in Onida).

Ideally, in identifying the best methodology to evaluate such “shocking”

advertisements, the Onida commercial should have been tested when first
launched, before consumers had become inured to the use of the devil.