proposal for cosmetics, perfumery and personal care...
TRANSCRIPT
PROPOSAL FOR COSMETICS, PERFUMERY AND PERSONAL CARE ITEMS SHOPPER STUDY
Co
pyr
igh
t ©
2012
Th
e N
iels
en C
om
pan
y. C
on
fid
enti
al a
nd
pro
pri
etar
y.
2
NIELSEN IN THE BALTICS
• Started operations in 1994 – 20 years of experience in local markets
• Coverage: all country – both urban and rural
• Nielsen in the Baltic’s is a member of European Society for Opinion and Marketing Research (ESOMAR)
• Member of Lithuanian Market Research Association (RITA)
• Operating in consumer research, retail measurement, retail and merchandising services
• Dedicated team of client service and field resources present in all countries, data production in Lithuania
• Field operates with dedicated staff and supervisors; up to 20% of interviewers’ work is back-checked
COSMETICS, PERFUMERY AND PERSONAL CARE SHOPPER STUDY
Co
pyr
igh
t ©
2012
Th
e N
iels
en C
om
pan
y. C
on
fid
enti
al a
nd
pro
pri
etar
y.
4
METHODOLOGY
• Data collection method:
• CAPI – Computer Assisted Personal Interviewing
• Sample:
• 1000 interviews in each country
• Soft quotas per age and gender
• Questionnaire length:
• 1 interview up to 40 min. length
• Target group:
• 18-65 year old country residents, who have bought any cosmetics, perfumery or personal care items in past 3 months.
• Syndicated study – united data acquisition, data analysis and reporting all concerned participants of study.
Co
pyr
igh
t ©
2012
Th
e N
iels
en C
om
pan
y. C
on
fid
enti
al a
nd
pro
pri
etar
y.
5
MAIN OUTPUTS
• Overall purchase frequency of cosmetics, perfumery, and personal care products
• Deep analysis of Key specialized cosmetics, perfumery, and personal care chains:
– Awareness & Usage (Top-of-mind awareness; total awareness; trial; regularly and most often
visited chains; consideration for future shopping)
– Leverage analysis
– Key chains images
– Overall level of appreciation of Key chains
– Buying of main cosmetics, perfumery, personal care categories
– Online buying of main cosmetics, perfumery, personal care categories
• Shopper Profiles:
– Chain shopper profiles – Trade channel shopper profiles – Category buyer profiles
Co
pyr
igh
t ©
2012
Th
e N
iels
en C
om
pan
y. C
on
fid
enti
al a
nd
pro
pri
etar
y.
6
EXPLORED COSMETICS, PERFUMERY, PERSONAL CARE CATEGORIES
Shampoos Decorative cosmetic for eyes Hair Conditioners, masks, oils, serums etc. Decorative cosmetic for lips
Hair coloration Other decorative cosmetic for face ( e.g. foundation, face powders, etc.)
Hair styling Decorative cosmetic for nails Bar Soap and liquid soap Perfumery Shower gel Exclusive / famous brands Bath products (foam, salt, oil) Antiperspirants and deodorants Body creams, milks and lotions Sun protection Hand creams Depilatories Foot creams Women shaving accessories Face creams (incl. eye cream) Men shaving accessories Face cleansing products (lotions, wash, scrubs, gels)
Female hygiene products (tampons, liners)
Face masks Cotton wool, napkins Tooth paste Baby diapers Mouth rinse Other baby hygiene and cosmetics Tooth brushes Food supplements and vitamins Other oral care Organic goods
Co
pyr
igh
t ©
2012
Th
e N
iels
en C
om
pan
y. C
on
fid
enti
al a
nd
pro
pri
etar
y.
7
EXPLORED CHAINS
LITHUANIA 2014 LATVIA 2014 Cascada Douglas Douglas Drogas Drogas Dzintars Eurokos Kolonna Kosmada Kristiana Kristiana Madara Ecocosmetics L'Occitane Multilukss Martina Stockmann Parfum Express The Body Shop Sarma The Body Shop
The study also covers retailer chains RIMI, Maxima cosmetics departments, pharmacies and other places (cosmetics spreaders, etc.)
Co
pyr
igh
t ©
2012
Th
e N
iels
en C
om
pan
y. C
on
fid
enti
al a
nd
pro
pri
etar
y.
8
COVERAGE & SAMPLE SIZE
• Town selection criteria:
• Population
• Presents of more then one of key specialized cosmetics / perfumery chain
LITHUANIA Interview number
Main cities 865
Vilnius 350
Kaunas 230
Klaipeda 120
Siauliai 85
Panevezys 80
Other region centers 135
Alytus 45
Marijampole 30
Utena 20
Telsiai 20
Taurage 20
Total 1000
LATVIA Interview number
Main cities 800
Riga 630
Daugavpils 95
Liepaja 75
Other region centers 200
Jelgava 60
Jurmala 50
Ventspils 40
Valmiera 25
Jekabpils 25
Total 1000
OUTCOME EXAMPLES
Co
pyr
igh
t ©
2012
Th
e N
iels
en C
om
pan
y. C
on
fid
enti
al a
nd
pro
pri
etar
y.
10
1
2
1
1
4
8
8
11
7
14
27
24
21
16
28
21
17
16
22
18
36
43
46
46
33
7
7
6
8
3
Wave 1
Wave 2
Wave 3
Wave 4
Wave 5
Several times per week Once per week Once in 2 weeks
Once in 3 weeks Once a month Once in 2-3 months
FREQUENCY OF CONSUMPTION
%
Base: All respondents (n=1000), Ref:S3
Co
pyr
igh
t ©
2012
Th
e N
iels
en C
om
pan
y. C
on
fid
enti
al a
nd
pro
pri
etar
y.
11
BRAND AWARENESS
Base: All respondents (n=1000), Ref:Q.1, Q.2, Q.5
29 21
9 4 5 2 2 2 1 1
45
44
36
23 20
8 6 8 5 3 3
23
29
38
50 45
29 32 29 31 31
18 14
97
94
84
77
70
39 39 38 36 34
21
14
93
88 83
74
63
35 37
30
42
31
20
10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Bra
nd
A
Bra
nd
T
Bra
nd
G
Bra
nd
D
Bra
nd
M
Bra
nd
F
Bra
nd
C
Bra
nd
R
Bra
nd
I
Bra
nd
Z
Bra
nd
U
Bra
nd
P
Top-of-Mind Brand Awareness Other Spontaneous Brand Awareess Prompted Brand Awareness
Total Brand Awareness 2013 Total Brand Awareness 2012
Co
pyr
igh
t ©
2012
Th
e N
iels
en C
om
pan
y. C
on
fid
enti
al a
nd
pro
pri
etar
y.
12
48
1
22
11
3 1
6
41
8
24
44
1
18
14
2 2 5
44
8
28
53
2
21
17
3 1
3
38
6
28
56
2
24
16
3 1
4
37
6
26
Bra
nd
A
Bra
nd
T
Bra
nd
G
Bra
nd
D
Bra
nd
M
Bra
nd
F
Bra
nd
C
Bra
nd
Z
Bra
nd
U
Bra
nd
P
Wave 1 Wave 2 Wave 3 Wave 4
Base: All respondents (n=1000), Ref:Q.10
REGULAR SHOPPERS OF PARTICULAR BRAND
Co
pyr
igh
t ©
2012
Th
e N
iels
en C
om
pan
y. C
on
fid
enti
al a
nd
pro
pri
etar
y.
13
Recommenders
Preferrers
Dependables
Regulars
Trialists
Considerers
Aware
Non-Considerers
achieving brand
saliency
providing brand
relevance
ensuring behavioural
commitment
ensuring emotive
loyalty
High
commitment
Low
commitment
(recommend the store to others)
(prefer the store over competitors)
(buy most often)
(regularly shop at)
(will consider for shopping in future)
(have tried it)
(store awareness)
(will not consider for future shopping)
TOM Other Spont. Prompted
Aware Not Aware
WHERE IN THE BRAND RELATIONSHIP HIERARCHY IS YOUR BRAND LOSING ITS FRANCHISE?
Marketing attention needs to be focused on the stage where the brand is losing its consumers.
11
12
13
33
55
77
23
35
22 44
Co
pyr
igh
t ©
2012
Th
e N
iels
en C
om
pan
y. C
on
fid
enti
al a
nd
pro
pri
etar
y.
14
CONSUMERS RELATIONSHIP TIERS
Recommenders
Prefferers
Dependables
Regulars
Considerers
Trialists
Aware
Non-considerers
Brand A Brand B Brand C Brand D
4
5
6
18
65
94
4
35
87 8 99
6
7
11
21
68
95
8
32
84 8 100
35
38
36
66
90
99
34
10
66 1 100
55
50
46
69
89
99
54
11
44 2 100
Q1, Q2, Q3, Q8, Q9, Q10, Q12 bazė: visi respondentai n=500
Co
pyr
igh
t ©
2012
Th
e N
iels
en C
om
pan
y. C
on
fid
enti
al a
nd
pro
pri
etar
y.
15
Base: All respondents (n=1000)
BRAND POSITIONING QUADRANT
High Low
High
LOYALTY
NICHE UNDEVELOPED
REPERTOIRE LEADERS
Co
pyr
igh
t ©
2012
Th
e N
iels
en C
om
pan
y. C
on
fid
enti
al a
nd
pro
pri
etar
y.
16
OVERALL LIKEABILITY OF BRANDS
66 52
12 9
31 43
54 54
2 4
27 31
1 1 7 6 97 95
66 63
Brand A Brand B Brand C Brand C
Dislike at all
Dislike somehow
Like somehow
Like very much
LIKE
%
Base: n=500 n=500 n=499 n=494
Co
pyr
igh
t ©
2012
Th
e N
iels
en C
om
pan
y. C
on
fid
enti
al a
nd
pro
pri
etar
y.
17
IMAGE ATTRIBUTES: STATED AND DERIVED IMPORTANCE Stated Importance
(5-point scale) Derived Importance
It always has what I need / want
Good service / performance of the staff
Convenient / easy to find departaments/products
High quality goods
Cosy, pleasant environment
Low prices for most of the items
Easy to reach / good location of a store
Wide choice for people with diff. taste and income
Lots of attractive and useful promotions and spec. offers
Attractive loyalty program / loyalty cards system
Time-tested chain
Modern & stylish
The 1s to present novelties
It runs intensive advertising campaign, is well known
Wide choice of exclusive, famous brands
Shop for the youth
Prestigious / VIP chain
Co
pyr
igh
t ©
2012
Th
e N
iels
en C
om
pan
y. C
on
fid
enti
al a
nd
pro
pri
etar
y.
18
RATIONAL AND EMOTIONAL STATEMENT IMPORTANCE D
ER
IVE
D I
MP
OR
TA
NC
E
High
Low STATED IMPORTANCE High
SUBLIMINAL
LOW DIFFERENTIATORS SAY IT, DO NOT MEAN IT
SAY IT, MEAN IT
Co
pyr
igh
t ©
2012
Th
e N
iels
en C
om
pan
y. C
on
fid
enti
al a
nd
pro
pri
etar
y.
19
0 20 40 60 80 100
BRAND A - female n=298
BRAND A - male n=202
BRAND A IMAGE - BY GENDER To
p2
Bo
xes
The most needed services
Cozy, pleasant environment
Good place for meeting with friends
Prestigious / VIP
It always has what I need
The best entertainment
Wide choice for diff. taste and income
Lots of promos, special offers
Offers well known brands
Active advertisement
Modern and stylish
Easy to reach/good location of the mall
Well planned /easy to locate
Comfortable for families with children
The best non-food stores
It has exclusive items
The best food store
Good service
Low prices for items
0.57
0.57
0.57
0.56
0.56
0.56
0.56
0.53
0.52
0.52
0.52
0.49
0.47
0.45
0.45
0.44
0.42
0.40
0.30
Co
pyr
igh
t ©
2012
Th
e N
iels
en C
om
pan
y. C
on
fid
enti
al a
nd
pro
pri
etar
y.
20
ASSOCIATION MAP
PRICE & ASSORTMENT
LOYALTY PROGRAM
