laddering_a how to do it manual

8/13/2019 Laddering_A How to Do It Manual

1/34

Laddering: A How to Do It

Manual with a Note of Caution

ByAbrafi Saaka

Graduate Student-CIRP Program

Chris SidonGraduate Student-CIRP Program

Brian F. Blake, Ph.D.,Director-CIRP Program

Methodology Series

February 2004Cleveland State University

Brian F. Blake, Ph.D. Jillian M. HughesSenior Editor Co-Editor

Entire Series available:http://academic.csuohio.edu:8080/cbrsch/home.html


2/34

2

RRRRESEARCHESEARCHESEARCHESEARCH RRRREPORTS INEPORTS INEPORTS INEPORTS IN CCCCONSUMERONSUMERONSUMERONSUMER BBBBEHAVIOREHAVIOREHAVIOREHAVIORThese analyses address issues of concern to marketing and advertising professionals and to academic

researchers investigating consumer behavior. The reports present original research and cutting edge

analyses conducted by faculty and graduate students in the Consumer-Industrial Research Program at

Cleveland State University.

Subscribers to the series include those in advertising agencies, market research organizations,

product manufacturing firms, health care institutions, financial institutions and other professional

settings, as well as in university marketing and consumer psychology programs. To ensure quality

and focus of the reports, only a handful of studies will be published each year.

ProfessionalSeries- Brief, bottom line oriented reports for those in marketing and advertising

positions. Included are both B2B and B2C issues.

How To Series - For marketers who deal with research vendors, as well as for professionals in

research positions. Data collection and analysis procedures.

Behavioral Science Series - Testing concepts of consumer behavior. Academically oriented.


3/34

3

AVAILABLEPUBLICATIONS:

Professional Series

Lyttle, B. & Weizenecker, M. Focus groups: A basic introduction, February, 2005. Arab, F., Blake, B.F., & Neuendorf, K.A. Attracting Internet shoppers in the Iranian market,

February, 2003.

Liu, C., Blake, B.F., & Neuendorf , K.A. Internet shopping in Taiwan and U.S., February,2003.

Jurik, R., Blake, B.F., & Neuendorf, K.A. Attracting Internet shoppers in the Austrianmarket, January, 2003.

Blake, B.F., & Smith, L. Marketers, Get More Actionable Results for Your ResearchDollar!, October, 2002.

How To Series

Blake, B.F., Valdiserri, J., Neuendorf, K.A., & Nemeth, J. Validity of the SDS-17 measure

of social desirability in the American context, November, 2005. Blake, B.F., Dostal, J., & Neuendorf, K.A. Identifying constellations of website features:

Documentation of a proposed methodology, February, 2005.

Saaka, A., Sidon , C., & Blake, B.F. Laddering: A How to do it manual with a note ofcaution, February, 2004.

Blake, B.F., Schulze, S., & Hughes, J.M. Perceptual mapping by multidimensional scaling:A step by step primer, July, 2003.

Behavioral Science Series

Shamatta, C., Blake, B.F., Neuendorf, K.A, Dostal, J., &Guo, F. Comparing websiteattribute preferences across nationalities: The case of China, Poland, and the USA, October,2005.

Blake, B.F., Dostal, J., & Neuendorf, K.A. Website feature preference constellations:Conceptualization and measurement, February, 2005.

Blake, B.F., Dostal, J., Neuendorf, K.A., Salamon, C., & Cambria, N.A. Attribute preferencenets: An approach to specifying desired characteristics of an innovation, February, 2005.

Blake, B.F., Neuendorf, K.A., Valdiserri, C.M., & Valdiserri, J. The Online ShoppingProfile in the cross-national context: The roles of innovativeness and perceived newness,February, 2005.

Blake, B.F., & Neuendorf , K.A. Cross-national differences in website appeal: A framework

for assessment, July, 2003. Blake, B.F., Neuendorf , K.A., & Valdiserri , C.M. Appealing to those most likely to shop

new websites, June, 2003. Blake, B.F., Neuendorf , K.A., & Valdiserri , C.M. Innovativeness and variety of

information shopping, April, 2003.


4/34

4

RRRRESEARCHESEARCHESEARCHESEARCH RRRREPORTS INEPORTS INEPORTS INEPORTS IN CCCCONSUMERONSUMERONSUMERONSUMER BBBBEHAVIOREHAVIOREHAVIOREHAVIOREDITORIAL DIRECTOR: DR.BRIAN BLAKE

Dr. Brian Blake has a wide variety of academic and professional experiences.

His early career... academically, rising from Assistant Professor to tenured Professor at Purdue

University, his extensive published research spanned the realms of psychology (especially consumer,

social, and cross-cultural), marketing, regional science, sociology, community development, applied

economics, and even forestry. Professionally, he was a consultant to the U.S. State Department and to

the USDA, as well as to private firms.

Later on...on the professionalfront, he co-founded a marketing research firm, Tactical Decisions Group,

and turned it into a million dollar organization. After merging it with another firm to form Triad

Research Group, it was one of the largest market research organizations based in Ohio. His clients ranged

from large national firms (e.g., Merck and Co., Dupont, Land o Lakes) to locally based organizations

(e.g., MetroHealth System, American Greetings, Progressive Insurance, Liggett Stachower Advertising).

On the academicside, he moved to Cleveland State University and co-founded the Consumer-Industrial

Research Program (CIRP). Some of Clevelands best and brightest young marketing research

professionals are CIRP graduates.

In the last few years...academically, he is actively focusing upon establishing CIRP as a center for cutting

edge consumer research. Professionally, he is market research consultant for a variety of clients.

EDITOR (2003):JILLIAN HUGHES

Currently a CIRP graduate student, she graduated Magna Cum Laude from Mount Union College, where

she majored in Psychology, with a focus on Consumer Behavior, and minored in Sociology. Among her

many research interests; she focuses on the effects of Social Desirability Bias on Innovativeness Scales

and differences between paper and pencil and Internet survey responses. She had the honor of presenting

research concerning age differences in brand labeling at the Ohio Undergraduate Psychology Conference

in April of 2002 at Kenyon College. She also presented original research at the annual Interdisciplinary

Conference for the Behavioral Sciences hosted by Mount Union College in April, 2002 and 2003.


5/34

5

FOREWORD

For over 15 years, researchers have turned to laddering as one of their qualitative tools.

Although a watered down version of the technique is often employed, the systematic application

of the procedure as initially developed by Reynolds and Gutman can be highly informative. But

researchers and managers using the results of a laddering study must keep in mind the limitations

of the procedure. If they do not do so, the technique can come back and bite them.

This report presents a step by step approach to conducting a laddering study, and then

outlines potential problems that may be encountered.

The report is intended for professionals who do not have a long track record in the

technique. It is for researchers who are considering using the technique and for

managers/executives reviewing whether or not to commission a study based on this tool.


6/34

6

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

I. Introduction 7

An Example 7

Basic Perspective 8

Overview 9

II. Laddering Methodology 11

Eliciting Differences Among Brands 11

The Interviewing Environment 12

In-Depth Interviewing Techniques 13

III. Analysis 16

Step 1: Converting the Raw Interview Data into Ladders 16

Step 2: Content Analysis 17

Step 3: Generating the Implication Matrix19

Step 4: Constructing the Hierarchical Value Map 22

Selecting Components of the HVM 22

Determining Dominant Perceptual Pathways 24

IV. Applications 27

V. Problems 29

Expense and Sample Size 29

Subjectivity 30

Lost Data 30

Respondent Lack of Self-Insight 31 Framework for Action 31

VI. Conclusion 31

VII. Additional References 33


7/34

7

I. INTRODUCTION

An effective marketing strategy for a product or service requires an understanding of

consumers purchasing behaviors. If marketing researchers can identify the salient factors that

consumers consider in evaluating alternatives and the personally relevant reasons why those

factors are important to consumers, then successful marketing strategies can be developed to

appeal to those consumers.

Laddering is a technique that has been used, for example, to suggest communication

themes that tug at a persons gut. It has been employed to identify emotional obstacles that

face a political candidate running for elected office. It has revealed product features that can

appeal to buyers at a very deep level. While some researchers have used the technique with great

success, other researchers have been known to find themselves overwhelmed by the subtleties of

the technique and to have felt it necessary to drop it.

An Example

Consider a consumer purchasing a car. That car has various attributes or features, e.g.

leather upholstery, a turbocharged V6 motor, two doors. Each attribute has particular

consequences, as that consumer sees it. The motor lets him out accelerate many other cars on the

highway (a positive consequence in his eyes), but also can cost more to operate (a negative

consequence). These consequences are meaningful in light of that persons values. The

turbocharged V6 helps him achieve his value of feeling strong and powerful, a master of his own

fate. The higher cost of operation with this motor, though, interferes with his value of seeing

himself as a responsible husband and father, a selfless provider for his family.


8/34

8

Basic Perspective

Laddering is based on a means-end theory; it attempts to identify the product attributes

that elicit preference within a particular product class category. The attributes of products and

the consequences (both positive and negative) that are associated with usage are the means.

The ends are the desired outcomes expressed in terms of the consumers personal values.

These values are assumed to be reached through the consequences. (Reynolds & Gutman, 1988;

Myers, 1996). Consumers assumedly choose actions that produce desired and/or minimize

undesired consequences. Therefore, consumers (through their buying behavior) learn to

associate specific consequences with specific product attributes and this knowledge drives them

to choose products that have the relevant attributes to help them achieve their desired goals.

A major assumption of the means-end theory is that consumers product knowledge is

organized in a hierarchy with concrete thoughts linked to more abstract thoughts in a chain

progressing from a means to an end. Thus, the more concrete features or characteristics of a

product, the attributes (A), are connected to the more abstract ideas about psychological and

social consequences of the attributes (C). These psychosocial consequences or benefits (derived

from using the product) are in turn connected to the most abstract element of the three, the values

(V).

attributes

consequences

or benefits

personal

values


9/34


10/34

10

then graphically represented in a tree diagram, termed the hierarchical value map (HVM). The

HVM is structural in nature and is a representation of the linkages across levels of abstraction

without reference to specific brands. The HVM is then used to recommend marketing and/or

communication strategies.


11/34

11

II LADDERING METHODOLOGY

The question that should be answered before a laddering study is launched is: who are the

relevant people to be interviewed? For developing positioning strategies for products, the

relevant people may be customers (brand users) whose beliefs are critical to fully understanding

the competitive set of brands in the market. Since laddering involves detailed probing about

consumers brand beliefs, respondents must be knowledgeable about the specific brands in the

category. One way often found to be useful is to classify brand users by frequency of use and

relative loyalty.

As a general rule of thumb, it has been suggested that a minimum of 20 respondents

should be included in any single subgroup. Because each respondent typically provides about 3

ladders, and ladders usually have an average of 5 elements, ladders from 20 respondents can

produce a minimum of 225 data points (taking into account that one-fourth of respondents

generally do not go beyond one ladder). Hence, a relatively small sample size can provide

considerable detail about consumer choice and brand distinctions.

The laddering procedure involves three stages. 1) Elicitation of differences among

brands, 2) in-depth interviewing and 3) analysis of the data.

Eliciting Differences Among Brands

In the first stage of the laddering methodology, respondents are asked to make

comparisons between brands in a product class. There are three general methods of eliciting

such distinctions between products:

1) Triadic sorting involves presenting the respondent with three products and asking

them to explain how two of the products are the same and therefore different from the

third product. In the case of a diet drinks study, for example, some of the distinctions

could be:


12/34

12

cola versus uncola

coke versus pepsi

plastic bottle versus glass bottle

2) Preference differences is another useful device for eliciting distinctions. Here,

respondents are asked to rank their preferences and explain why one is more desirable

than the other. Queries about instances where less liked brands are used more

frequently than more liked brands enables the respondent to think about other

instances in which an attribute of a less preferred brand may appear attractive. This in

turn helps respondents to make meaningful distinctions among the products.

3) Differences by occasion presents the respondent with a personally meaningful context

within which to make the distinctions. Sometimes the distinctions elicited are such

obvious characteristics of the product that they do not permit advancement to more

personally meaningful areas from this starting point. Thus, helping the respondent

think of some frequent usage occasions provides another way for the respondent to

think about differences among the stimuli.

Once a satisfactory number of distinctions has been elicited for a given product (typically

10 to 15 attributes), the interviewer can select which ones will serve as the basis for building

ladders, or he/she could have the respondent rate the relative importance of each of the attributes

and select those with the highest ratings.

The Interviewing Environment

Naturally, the interviewer should try to build rapport with the respondent even before the

first stage (elicitation of distinctions) of the interview, and one should do ones best to maintain

good rapport throughout the rest of the interview. Letting the respondents know in advance that

there are no right or wrong answers may go a long way in helping them become relaxed. Doing


13/34

13

so would also further reinforce the notion that the purpose of the interview is merely to

understand the ways in which the respondent sees this particular set of products. Also, because

of the personal nature of the later probing process, creating a slight sense of vulnerability on the

part of the interviewer may help the respondent realize that the interviewer is merely a trained

facilitator of this discovery process and not a judge or evaluator of the respondents ideas. This

can be achieved by telling the respondents that many of the questions may seem somewhat

obvious and possibly even stupid, thus, associating this predicament with the interviewing

process, and creating the impression that the interviewer is a mere facilitator following certain

guidelines.

By continually asking, why is that important to you? the interviewer maintains control

of the interview and creates the perception of being genuinely interested. Because it is critical

that the interviewer is perceived as an interested but neutral recorder of the information, the

interviewers reactions (both verbal and non verbal) should be as neutral as possible. It is

essential that an interviewer has a thorough understanding of the means-end theory so that they

are able to identify the A-C-Vs as they are brought forth by the respondents.

In Depth Interviewing Techniques

Two basic problems have been known to arise during the laddering interviews: 1) the

inability of respondents to articulate why a lower level (ie, more concrete) issue is important to

them; 2) the tendency of respondents to try to avoid answering probes that are too personal or

sensitive. In the first instance, asking the respondent to imagine what would happen if the

consequence expected is not delivered may help uncover the nonconscious reasonthis is

known as negative laddering. In the case of stalling or avoidance due to sensitive issues, the

interviewer could try to move the conversation into a third person format, thereby creating a role

playing exercise, or use self disclosure (a delicate procedure) to overcome this obstacle. Self-


14/34

14

disclosure should only be attempted by an experienced interviewer, though, since it involves the

interviewer revealing a relevant personal fact about himself/herself to help the respondent feel

less inhibited in comparison. A frequently more feasible option is for the interviewer to make

note of the problem area and return to it when other relevant information is uncovered later in the

interview.

The following is an excerpt of a hypothetical interview done by Reynolds and Gutman

(1988) in a wine cooler study. It illustrates the technique of unblocking respondents when they

cannot advance beyond a certain level.

Interviewer: You said you prefer a cooler when you get home after work because of the full-

bodied taste. Whats so good about afull-bodied tasteafter work?

Respondent: I just like it. I worked hard and it feels good to drink something satisfying.

Interviewer: Why is a satisfying drink important to you after work?

Respondent: Because it is. I just enjoy it.

Interviewer: What would you drink if you didnt have a cooler available to you

Respondent: Probably a light beer.

Interviewer: Whats better about a wine cooler as opposed to a light beer when you get home

after work?

Respondent: Well, if I start drinking beer, I have a hard time stopping. I just continue on into

the night. But with coolers I getfilled upand its easy to stop. Plus, I tend to not eat as much

dinner.

Interviewer: So why is continuing to drink into the evening something you dont want to do?

Respondent: Well if I keep drinking I generallyfall asleeppretty early and I dont get a chance

to talk to my wifeafter the kids go to bed. She works hard with the house and kids all dayand

its really important that I talk to her so we can keep our good relationship, ourfamily life, going.


15/34

15

Typically, two or three ladders can be obtained from approximately three-fourths of the

respondents interviewed. This means that one-fourth of the respondents cannot go beyond one

ladder. A typical laddering interview takes about 60 to 75 minutes to completefrom eliciting

distinctions to completing an in depth interview that has solicited enough elements to complete a

ladder.


16/34

16

III. ANALYSIS

The basic analysis steps can be summarized as follows:

Step 1: Reducing the raw interview data into the A, C, or Vs ladders. This process

involves a thorough review of the verbatim notes of video/audio tapes of the

interview.

Step 2: Content analysis of the element selected in step 1

Step 3: Summation of relations in content codes, resulting in an implication matrix of

all paired relationships.

Step 4: Construction of a diagram to meaningfully represent the main implications of

the study, the hierarchical value map (HVM).

Now for more detail let us use the wine cooler study with its data and tables from

Reynolds and Gutman (1988).

Step 1: Converting the raw interview data into ladders.

Below is a summary ladder from the interview from the wine cooler study (see Table 1

for the full set of ladders).

(V) good family life

(C) able to talk to my wife

(C) dont fall asleep

(C) consume less alcohol

(A) filled up/easy to stop

(A) full-bodied taste/less alcohol


17/34

Table 1: Set of Ladders for Hypothetical Wine Cooler Study

LADDER 1 LADDER 2

V Sense of belonging (part of the group) V Good family life V

C Socialize C Able to talk to my wife C

C Avoid getting drunk C Dont fall asleep C T

A Less alcohol C Consume less alcohol C

A Filled up/easy to stop C

A Full bodied taste/less alcohol A

LADDER 4 LADDER 5

V Like my coworkers (belonging) V Self-esteem V C

C Sophisticated image C Status symbol C

C More feminine C Impress others C

A Bottle shape C Quality A

A Fancy label A expensive A


18/34

18

Step 2: Content Analysis

The first step in the analysis is to record the entire set of ladders on a separate form and

appropriately label each item that is an A, C, or V. After inspecting them for completeness, a set

of summary codes is developed that reflects all the elements (A-C-Vs) elicited. Table 2 provides

the summary content codes for the Reynolds and Gutman (1988) hypothetical Wine Cooler

study.

Table 2: Summary Content Codes for Wine Cooler Study

Values Consequences Attributes

(20) Accomplishment (8) Quality (1) Carbonation(21) Family (9) Filling (2) Crisp

(22) Belonging (10) Refreshing (3) Expensive

(23) Self-esteem (11) Consume less (4) Label(12) Thirst quenching (5) Bottle shape

(13) More feminine (6) Less alcohol

(14) Avoid negatives (7) Smaller(15) Avoid waste

(16) Reward

(17) Sophisticated(18) Impress others

(19) Socialize

At this level of the analysis, the focus of interest is the relationship between the elements

and not the elements themselves. For example, avoids negatives of alcohol is a summary of

several more detailed elements (e.g. not too drunk, dont say dumb things, etc.). Numbers are

then assigned to the codes, and these numbers are used to label each element in each ladder

producing the matrix in Table 3. The rows in the matrix represent an individual respondents

ladder (a respondent can have multiple ladders, thus multiple rows). Columns represent the

elements in each ladder.


19/34

19

Table 3: Raw Data from Hypothetical Wine Cooler Study

Respondents Content codes

1 1 10 12 16 20 0

2 1 10 16 0 0 03 1 10 12 16 16 234 3 6 20 0 0 0

5 4 17 20 0 0 0

6 2 10 12 16 18 227 1 12 16 20 0 0

8 3 8 20 0 0 0

9 1 12 16 18 23 010 1 10 16 0 0 0

11 3 8 20 0 0 0

12 2 10 12 16 18 22

13 1 12 16 20 0 014 1 12 16 18 23 0

15 1 10 12 16 20 0

16 3 16 20 0 0 017 1 10 12 16 20 0

18 2 10 12 16 18 22

19 1 10 12 16 18 2320 1 10 16 0 0 0

21 2 10 12 16 18 22

22 3 20 0 0 0 023 1 10 12 16 20 0

24 1 10 16 0 0 025 3 6 16 20 0 026 3 6 16 18 23 0

27 3 8 18 20 0 0

28 3 18 23 0 0 029 3 16 23 0 0 0

30 3 8 18 22 0 0

31 3 8 17 18 23 0

32 3 17 18 23 0 033 4 13 17 18 23 0

34 4 13 17 18 22 0

35 5 13 17 23 0 0

Step 3: Generate the Implication Matrix

The Implication Matrix (Table 4) is a square matrix that displays the number of times

each element leads to every other element in the same row (operationally defined as those


20/34

20

elements in a row which precedes other elements in the same row). Two types of relations are

represented, direct and indirect relations. Direct relations are those in which one element leads

to another without any intervening element. For example, in the wine cooler study, less

alcohol (in ladder 1) has a direct link with avoid getting drunk, and an indirect link with

socialize. The numbers in the matrix are expressed in fractional form with direct relations to

the left of the decimal and indirect relations to the right of the decimal. Thus, carbonation

leads to thirst-quenching 4 times directly and 6 times indirectly.


21/34

Table 4: Implication Matrix

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

1 Carbonation 1.00 10.00 4.06 .01 .14 .04

2 Crisp 3.00 4.00 .04 .04 .03 .04 3 Expensive 12.00 2.04 1.01 1.09 4 Label 2.00 2.02 2.04 .02

5 Bottle shape 1.00 1.00 2.02 1.03

6 Less alcohol 1.00 1.00 5.00 .01 .01 7 Smaller 1.00 .01 3.00

8 Quality 3.00 1.00 4.00 4.03 4.04

9 Filling 4.00 .04

10 Refreshing 10.00 1.00 5.10 .01 .06 11 Consume Less 5.00

12 Thirst-quenching 14.00 .08

13 More feminine 7.00 .02 14 Avoid negative 1.00

15 Avoid waste

16 Reward 11.00 17 Sophisticated 4.00

18 Impress others

19 Socialize 20 Accomplishment

21 Family

22 Belonging23 Self-esteem


22/34

22

Step 4: Construct the Hierarchical Value Map

The Implication Matrix may be considered the blueprint for drawing up the hierarchical

value map (HVM). The HVM provides a meaningful way of representing subjective data and

acts as a tool to facilitate decision-making and problem solving. HVMs are created by

reconstructing chains from aggregate data. Chains refer to sequences of elements that emerge

from the aggregate Implication Matrix. Considerable ingenuity is needed for constructing the

HVM, because the only guideline is that one should try at all costs to avoid crossing lines. A

common approach in constructing an HVM is to set a cut off, i.e., a minimum number of links

that must be present before one considers that item. Multiple cutoffs (usually from 3 to 5) should

be used because they permit the researcher the freedom to choose the one that offers the most

information and the most stable set of relations.

Selecting Components of the HVM

The most efficient way to construct the HVM is to start in the first row for which there is

a value at or above the chosen arbitrary cutoff level. Since by this point the reader is familiar

with it, we will use the Reynolds and Gutman hypothetical wine cooler data yet again. Starting

with a cutoff of 4, the first noteworthy value is carbonation-refreshing (Row 1, Column 10)

relationship with a value of 10 signifying 10 direct relations and no indirect relations between the

two elements. Since carbonation is related to refreshing, the next row we look at is 10

refreshing. Thirst-quenching in column 12 appears to be the first significant value. Moving

to row 12 we find the next value in our growing chain is reward in column 16. From row 16

we find our next value to be impress other in column 18, and following that we find our final

value of belonging in column 22, producing a chain of 1-10-12-16-18-22.

After a chain is completed, it is advisable to go back to the beginning and check to see if

there are other important links in the rows of the matrix which were not picked up in the

completed chain. For example, inspecting the rows reveals that accomplishment (20) and


23/34

23

self-esteem (23) are linked to carbonation. A similar pattern is observed when links with

Thirst-quenching, reward and impress others are inspected, producing the chain like the

one below:

self-esteem (23)

Accomplishment (20)

Reward (16)

Thirst-quenching (12)

Refreshing (10)

Carbonation (1)

Moving to row 2, we find that the connections are almost identical to carbonation with one

exception; Crisp has a link with Quality (8). We therefore plot it next to carbonation and

then start a new chain with quality. Looking up quality reveals 12 direct relations with

expensive (3), significant links with reward (16) and with sophisticated image (17).

Scanning row 17 we find significant links with Impress others. This produces a 3-8-16-17-18

chain. Fancy label (4) and Bottle shape (5) both have 4 (2 direct and 2 indirect) relations

with More Feminine (13) and More feminine has seven direct links with Sophisticated

Image (17), yielding 4-5-13-17 chain. Row 6, Less Alcohol has links with Avoid Negatives

of Alcohol, (14), which links up with Socialize (19) which in turns links up with Family

Life (21), making a 6-14-19-21 chain. The next row, Filling (7) links up with Consume

Less which connects with the rest of the Less Alcohol link; producing a 7-11-14-19-21 chain.

The last attribute item Smaller Size (7) links up with Avoid Waste which has a weak link to

Family Life (21). Going back to inspect to see if any important links were left out, we find

Impress others (18)


24/34

24

that Family Life links up several times with Belonging (22), which also links up several

times with Self-esteem (23). Thus, it appears that it is only at the value level, Belonging,

that the right side of the map is connected to the elements of the left side.

The emergent HVM is shown in figure 2.

Determining Dominant Perceptual Pathways:

Having plotted all the elements, it is important to look at the elements in terms of the

number of direct and indirect relations they have with other elements. Table 5 presents the sums

of the direct and indirect relations for each element. Belonging (22), at the value level,

appears to have the most elements leading from it. It may be the core value in terms of

importance to the product class.

Table 5: Summary of Direct (XX) and Indirect(YY) Relations for Each Element (XX.YY)

Code To From

1 15.35 00.00

2 07.23 00.00

3 17.30 00.004 06.14 00.00

5 05.10 00.006 06.60 00.007 04.05 00.00

8 19.23 19.00

9 05.12 00.0010 16.26 16.00

11 05.09 05.00

12 14.22 15.00

13 06.09 06.0414 10.05 10.05

15 02.00 04.01

16 20.11 25.3317 15.05 15.15

18 20.00 21.40

19 08.00 08.1120 00.00 14.25

21 00.00 09.12

22 00.00 20.5623 00.00 15.37


25/34

25

The other three noteworthy elements with a high frequency of elements leading from

them are Impress Others (18), Reward (16), and Quality (8). In fact, the quality

rewardimpress othersbelonging chain appears to have a high number of relations among its

respective elements. Other dominant pathways with considerable direct and indirect links are the

carbonation-self-esteem chain and carbonation-accomplishment chains. While these

dominant pathways provide genuine insight into what consumers consider as important

characteristics of a brand, all the pathways warrant our attention because the weaker pathways

might represent an opportunity for a campaign to strengthen this tie.


26/34

Figure 2: Hierarchical Value Map of Wine Cooler Study.

(Reynolds and Gutman)

Carbonati

on (10)Crisp (2) Less

Alcohol (6)

Bottle (5)

(shape)

Label (4)

(fancy)

Expensive

(3)

Refreshing (10)

Feel alert Alive

Thirst-quenching

(12)

Relieves thirst Not too sour

Reward (16)

Satisfying Compensation

Accomplishment

(20)

Get the mostfrom life

Quality (8)

Superiorproduct

Product ualit

More Feminine (13)

Socially

Sophisticated Image

(17)

Personal status How others view

Impress Others (18)

Successful image

Self-esteem

(23)

Self worth Belonging (22) Security Camaraderie

Socialize (19)

Easier to talk Open up

Avoid negatives of

alcohol (14)

Not too drunk Not too tired

Cons


27/34

27

IV. APPLICATIONS

1. Segmentation

One form of market segmentation is to attempt to put people into groups that have

common needs and will respond in similar ways to marketing initiatives. Information from the

Hierarchical Value Map can be used to help segment populations. Groups of consumers who

have similar personal values in can be identified and segmented. The resulting segments may be

different from the ones that would result from using demographic or socio-economic variables or

even from the ones developed in a benefit segmentation. The value based segmentation, though,

may be particularly useful for specific applications. Advertising based on personal values may

be particularly effective in engendering higher buyer involvement in the brand and long term

loyalty.

2. Market Insight

Laddering can provide a deeper basis for understanding how people make choices

between competing products or brands, according to laddering enthusiast. It can identify

positive and negative associations as well as perceived strengths and weaknesses of the product

or brand in terms of consumer preferences. Unlike large scale surveys based on self-reported

measures, the interviewer is there to help the person uncover the real or underlying motives

behind ones product or brand preference. Enthusiasts of laddering often feel that people are not

always aware enough of their own mental processes to do this by themselves. Suppose a person

were taking a pencil and paper survey, and that persons answer to a question is, I dont know

why I like it. There is no way to get past this answer. In an interview situation however, the

interviewer is trained to help people explore why they like or dont like a product.

3. Advertising

Advertising can also be evaluated at the different levels of abstraction uncovered during

the laddering interview (that is attributes, consequences and values). After the initial laddering


28/34

28

interview is completed, the consumer is more aware of what attributes are more important to

them, what benefits they receive from buying the product and what value they are trying to

reinforce. At this point they are shown several ads and asked to rate them in terms of how well

each ad communicates the attributes, benefits and values of interest to them. Consumers are also

asked to comment on exactly what it is about the ad that does or does not facilitate the

communication process. An ad might communicate just the benefits but not the main attributes

or values or just the attributes but nothing else. A successful ad will communicate at all three

levels according to Reynolds and his colleagues. The laddering approach can help marketers

determine how well their ads do this.

4. Sales Support

It has also been suggested that laddering can be helpful in sales contacts. A variation of

the laddering technique could be used by salespeople to better understand how their customers

make their decisions. The salesperson can then adapt his or her sales approach accordingly.

5. Devise Promotional Strategies

There is interest in the laddering technique as a way to help develop marketing strategies.

The ideas that are uncovered can be used to help reach the consumers in the target areas. For

example, laddering can help position a product or brand by helping to determine its points of

difference with competitors. Points of difference are extremely important because, obviously,

they help determine whether or not a new product will be successful. Laddering taps into the

meanings and associations that can help to determine these differences.

Wansink (2003) gives an example of how laddering insights can be used to develop

specific marketing actions; the illustration relates to Nike shoes and clothing. Some constructs

that were found are:

Gives me a sense of belonging to a certain group

Makes me more a part of the soccer community


29/34

29

I wish I could live the lifestyle of a professional soccer player

Some marketing actions that were developed in response to these are:

Put premier soccer players numbers on shoes

Buy time on the score box shown on the T.V. during games

Offer Nike Soccer newsletters and promotions at the point of purchase

6. Advertising Strategy

Laddering can also be used to develop advertising strategies. The MECCAS Model

(Means-End Conceptualization of the Components of Advertising Model), can help do this. In

this approach the HVM is used to identify elements that would be used in advertising strategy:

Message elements: the specific features of the product to be pictured.

Consumer benefits: the positive consequences of using the product.

Executional framework: the overall tone and style of the ad.

Leverage point: the presentation of the message to that the linkage between ones

values and the specific product attributes will be readily apparent to buyers.

Driving force: the dominant end value on which the advertising will focus

The MECCAS model is beyond the scope of the present report. For an extended review of this

issue consult the sources in the Additional References section of this paper.

V. PROBLEMS

1. Expense and Sample Size

One of the major problems in conducting laddering research (including gathering,

analyzing, and summarizing the data) is that the method is extremely time consuming and

expensive to conduct (Baker, 2002). In order to obtain the insight necessary for useable results

the data must be collected manually through in-person interviews, while the analysis and

summary of the data may typically require days of work by highly trained experts; all of which

can add considerable expense. For this reason it may be of limited value when the research


30/34

30

involves collecting data from large sample of respondents, e.g. when segmenting large

populations. On the other hand, it may be valuable when a fairly small sample is adequate.

Laddering has been effective when used to analyze a specific population with a small

representative sample. In this case the benefits can outweigh the costs. For example, Federal

Express used the laddering technique to interview secretaries of companies they would like to

have as clients. By finding out exactly what the secretaries wanted from a delivery service and

why they wanted it, Federal Express was able to greatly increase its market share.

2. Subjectivity

Another possible problem is the subjectivity involved in analyzing the data. The

decisions about what to include and how to categorize and summarize the data are highly

subjective. For example, it is not always easy to tell the difference between a consequence and a

value. The categorization procedure which uses common meanings to form the categories is also

subjective. Two people looking at the same group of attributes or consequences may not

generate the exact same groupings or names for the groupings. Different people are also likely

to consider different data to be relevant and/or important.

3. Lost Data

Loss of data is also a concern with the laddering technique. When the data are

transformed into a Hierarchical Value Map, it is inevitable that some data will be lost. Lost

in this context means that the responses are not included in the final analysis; they are simply

discarded or considered irrelevant. For example, Baker (2002) reports the loss of 55% of one

data set and 74% of another. She also reports that researchers who lose more than 77% of their

data frequently do not report the percentage in their research findings. This raises a question as

to how well the Hierarchical Value Map truly represents that data. A major reason why a

researcher may attempt to conduct a laddering study rather than to turn to other qualitative


31/34

31

techniques is the richness of the original data generated. Ironically, the richness of the data is

sacrificed through the loss of data.

4. Respondents Lack of Self-Insight

A potential problem with the interview process is that some respondents seem to

genuinely have very little idea as to the reasons they purchase an item. The job of the

interviewer then becomes one of trying to subtly evoke the desired responses. This effort to coax

a person into responding can make the interview seem more like a test to some people, which in

turn may engender an aversive reaction to the interview process.

5. Framework for Action

Finally, even though professionals are familiar with the laddering technique, they still

may experience problems going from a Hierarchical Value Map to execution and implementation

of a marketing strategy. There is no commonly agreed upon framework for translating the

strategies that are developed from the Hierarchical Value Map into creative, useable concepts for

advertisements or other marketing tools. This lack of an action framework makes it more

difficult for the creative staff to use the information from the study.

VI. CONCLUSIONS

In a global economy, consumers are inundated with numerous options from which to

choose. In this consumer-oriented market, consumers can decide which products to buy, when to

buy, in which packaging and of which quality. Thus, not paying attention to consumer

motivations could increase the risk of a mismatch between the characteristics of a product and

the aspects that are sought after by consumers. It is axiomatic that a marketers paying attention

to consumer motivations increases the likelihood for designing products that consumers would

desire improve the effectiveness of marketing strategies. Despite the problems in translating the

laddering data into a coherent HVM, the means-end theory, as implemented in the laddering


32/34

32

technique, offers a useful tool to explore the consumers values in terms of product choice

criteria.

On the other hand, the researcher and the end user of a laddering study must be alert to

the problems often encountered by this technique. These problems can turn out to be a fatal flaw

for a laddering project. CAVEAT EMPTOR!


33/34

33

VII. Additional References

Audenaert, A. & Steenkamp, J. E. M. (1997). Means-end chain theory and laddering in

agricultural marketing research. In B. Wierenga, A. van Tilburg, K. Grunnert, M.

Wedel and J.E. M. Steenkamp (Eds.),Agriculture marketing and consumer

behavior in a changing world(pp. 217-232). Amsterdam: Kluwer.

Bagozzi, R. P., Gurhan-Canli, Z., & Priester, J. R. (2002). The social psychology of

consumer behavior. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.

Baker, S. (2002). Laddering: Making sense of meaning. In D. Partington (Eds.),

Essential skills for management research(pp. 226-253). London, UK: Thousand

Oaks Sage.

Gengler, C. E. & Reynolds, T. J. (2001). Consumer understanding and advertising

strategy: analysis and strategic translation of laddering data. In T.J. Reynolds

and J.C. Olson (Eds.), Understanding consumer decision making(pp. 119-144).

Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Myers, J.M. (1996). Segmentation and positioning for strategic marketing decisions,

(pp. 263-282). Chicago, IL: American Marketing Association.

Olson, J. C. & Reynolds, T. J. (2001). The means-end approach to understanding

consumer decision making. In T.J. Reynolds and J.C. Olson (Eds.),

Understanding consumer decision making(pp. 3-20). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence

Erlbaum Associates, Inc

Reynolds, T.J., Dethloff, C., & Westberg, S.J. (2001). Advancements in laddering. In

T.J. Reynolds and J.C. Olson (Eds.), Understanding consumer decision making

(pp. 91-118). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.


34/34

34

Reynolds, T.J. and Gutman, J. (1988). Laddering theory, method, analysis and

interpretation,Journal of Advertising Research, 28,11-31.

Solomon, M. R.. (2002). Consumer behavior: buying having, and being. Upper Saddle

River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Wansink, B. (2003). Using laddering to understand and leverage a brands equity.

Quantitative Market Research: An International Journal, 6 (2),111-118.

laddering_a how to do it manual

Documents