These posts will single-handedly blast the bedrock advertising has been built on. This is the first post in a series that marries behavioral economics with marketing science.
I call it 'Buyhaviour'.
In this series we'll disseminate individual decision-making biases, and reinforce them using marketing science. A marriage of psychology and sociology within an advertising framework.
Most clients and agencies are still under the classical-economics illusion that we act rationally when we're making purchase decisions. That we rationally analyse each purchase with something like a cost-benefit analysis.
This antiquated viewpoint has spawned the fantasy that advertising works as a strong persuasive force.
The idea of advertising being a strong persuasive force is wildly fanciful.
Some creatives place far too much import on the 'unique selling proposition'. (Biggest, strongest, longest, blah blah blah). Although the boundaries are incredibly helpful for idea-ation; strategically they're redundant.
Some strategists place too much importance on differentiation and finding a brand position. Category buyers aren't different and don't see brands differently!
And most clients and suits think that the more detail you put into a commercial, the more the audience takes out. Wallpaper!
All of these are based on the misconception that advertising is something like a sales pitch, and the audience, circa Apple's 1984 Superbowl commercial, are being attentive, edge of their seat absorbers of advertising.
In this Buyhaviour series you're going to discover how consumers actually consider brands, and the implication this has on the creative process.
The first post is about the Availability Bias. Hope you like it.
Buyhaviour Series: An Introduction
Buyhaviour 1: Availability Bias
Buyhaviour 2: Status Quo Bias
Buyhaviour 3: Confirmation Bias
Buyhaviour 4: Conjunction Fallacy
Buyhaviour 5: The Spotlight Effect
Buyhaviour 6: The Matthew Effect
Buyhaviour 7: Fight or Flight Heuristic
Buyhaviour 8: Imposter Phenomenon
Buyhaviour 9: Red Queen Hypothesis
Christopher Ott
No comments:
Post a Comment