GfK, has released findings showing which vehicle features, from a given list, people see as being ‘very important’ in a vehicle.
Which features come top as ‘very important’ for a vehicle to have, according to consumers? What about latest vehicle technology? Download our global study and get the answer!
In our global study, 1 in 3 people across 17 countries say that latest driver technology is `very important´ to them. Download our infographics and explore the top 3 by country.
Consumers are more connected than ever. New technologies and the benefits they bring have a significant impact on people’s behavior and their relationships with brands. Find out what that means for your business!
Those aged 30-40 are most likely to share data for rewards. China, Mexico and Russia lead for people willing to share data. Germany, France and Brazil have the most people not willing to share data.
Did you watch the most recent episode of Homeland last night? Maybe you caught up on the new BBC drama Taboo, watched some YouTube clips or just had an evening of chilling in front of Netflix. Whether you viewed any video content or not last night, there is no denying that the way in which we watch video has changed drastically over the last 5-10 years. Long gone are my uni days of watching Neighbours at 5.35pm on a small TV screen in my or a classmate’s bedsit. If I were still watching it now, I could access it on demand and view it on my smartphone during my commute.
But how is all of this media change affecting kids in the UK? How have their habits and behaviors changed with the advent of smartphones, tablets and catch-up services? Our ViewScape data from 2015, which provides a snapshot in time of viewing behavior, includes the viewing habits of children aged 1-17. Parents and guardians were asked to fill in the survey for young children. The survey requested information about the device that content was viewed on and whether viewing was linear or non-linear. The aim? To measure total video viewing across all devices, channels and platforms.
When analyzing BARB data relating to 4-11 year olds, we can clearly see the change in traditional linear viewing on the TV set when we compare the figures for January to June 2006 with the same period in 2016. In 2016, people spent half an hour less viewing linear content per day than they did in 2006. Does this mean our kids are becoming more bookish or spending more time outside? According to our ViewScape data, even more video content is being consumed, just in different ways.
Next time you are out shopping or eating at a restaurant, take a look around you at any nearby families with young children. My bet is that a device of some sort will be out to keep the kids quiet – is that Peppa Pig I see? Our ViewScape data shows that kids aged 1-11 consume 2 hours 37 minutes of video daily. This includes any viewing occasion, whether it’s using free online services such as BBC iPlayer and YouTube, or SVOD services Netflix and Amazon Prime Instant Video. With BARB showing that viewing on a TV set for kids aged 4-11 is 1 hour 47 minutes per day on average, we can see that new methods of viewing have significantly increased viewing time.
Ofcom’s ‘Children and Parents: Media Use and Attitudes’ report, published on the November 16, 2016, revealed that children’s internet usage had usurped that of viewing on the TV set for the first time. The capability that mobile devices offer has brought the internet age beyond the household and into the outside world, and not just for those of us who are over the age of 18.
For this to happen, of course, access to a device is needed. While a number of young children use a device belonging to their parents or guardians, many now have their own. Tablets are the device of choice for kids aged 1-11, with more than 60% of all those who have access to a tablet possessing their own. On average, kids with access to a tablet device spend 24 minutes per day watching content, compared to 19 minutes and 13 minutes on PC/laptops and smartphones respectively. Brands such as Amazon and Kurio have facilitated this trend with kid-friendly tablets designed to keep children safe and secure from the vagaries of the World Wide Web.
Will kids continue to embrace these new, emergent behaviors as they move into adult life, or will they revert to a more traditional method of viewing on a TV set? Either way, it is clear that video viewing is increasing because of the media proliferation that has occurred. While it would be easy to conclude with the notion that watching more video content will cause kids to fry their minds, who’s to say that this trend won’t increase their intelligence? If it weren’t for YouTube, I would not have a clue how to install a washing machine! Let’s just remember to keep a balance in our lives and those of following generations. Too much of anything is bad for you, apparently.
Nigel James is a Senior Research Executive at GfK. To share your thoughts, email firstname.lastname@example.org.
Get our latest insights here
Explore our global study "Willingness to share personal data" and find out which countries lead for people willing to share data.
Over a quarter of internet users across 17 countries strongly agree that they are willing to share their personal data in exchange for benefits or rewards like lower costs or personalized service. Find out more in our global study!
Many products go through a series of consumer tests before they hit the market. This is to measure how consumers will respond to them, allow for optimization and sift the wheat from the chaff. In the past this has led to some improvement of market reception but the number of product failures still remains really high. We have seen that traditional approaches to concept testing simply aren’t the best fit for purpose today. Businesses need an innovative approach that embraces people’s emotion and subconscious response and connection to a brand or product rather than only a rational and articulated response. We have seen that bringing in this emotional connection allows for a better prediction of success.
Voice analytics in market research is opening up many avenues to better understand the consumer. It is now possible to measure Emotional Impact by simply asking respondents what they think of the new idea or experience. By listening to what (words) people say and how (tone, pitch, rhythm) they say it, both the implicit thinking (System 1) and explicit thinking (System 2) can be captured. This provides an authentic way to understand the emotional and rational impact of new products and experiences. Using voice analytics can shorten questionnaires and increase the amount of data gathered from consumers whilst increasing the engagement – a good thing for the industry!
An application of this is to use the volume of unstructured data to capture these Voiced Thought Streams in response to key topics – like purchase journeys or in-store experience. We can now use this non-rational component of the response to understand the emotional reflection of the experience and to ask new and evolving questions. We are able to dig deeper into the in-the-moment journeys of consumers and understand how their day-to-day lives are working towards or hindering the short-term sales and long term Brand Equity.
Recently we tested popular ads in the UK market and the findings were quite profound. We combined the rational thought-out response and sentiment, along with the non-rational passion. This combination allowed us to understand a full 360 degree view of how the ads are being received by the market and the impact – emotional and rational – on the consumer.
As expected, the flashy and quirky ads did well in engaging the audience. However, when we dug deeper, the brand mentions and associations for these ads were quite low and although people were engaged in the creative ads, the “boring” ads scored better on brand mentions and associations.
The solution is not one or the other, but rather both – clearly the goal is engagement and brand association. Market research now has compelling and scale-able tools to measure both of these consumer parts to better measure ads and concepts to predict success.
Bradley Taylor is the Country Manager of Consumer Experiences at GfK. Please email Bradley.Taylor@GfK.com to share your thoughts.
Download our latest whitepaper
I must admit that I find the term “mobile wallet” a little silly. After all, wallets have always been mobile, right? At the same time, I am not at all averse to the idea of making transactions with my phone. I’m getting the hang of accessing coupons in stores, and I felt pretty cool the first time I got into the movies by having the ticket-taker scan my phone. I’m sure I will continue to move in this direction, although I consider myself mainstream rather than an early adopter in the area of financial technology (aka FinTech).
Pundits have been talking about the pros and cons of mobile wallets for several years now. Overall, these payment systems still face obstacles and adoption has been slow. Only 22 percent of American mobile phone users regularly pay for products by scanning, tapping, or passing their devices in stores, according to recent research conducted by GfK Consumer Life 2016.
At the same time, other types of digital payment are entering the playing field, such as the UPI system introduced in India last year, which moves funds directly from the consumer’s financial account to the merchant’s without a middleman. India will be an important market to watch in terms of the shakeout among digital payment systems following demonetization. Indeed, developing markets such as India and Nigeria will be testing grounds for FinTech in general, as indicated by the growing use of biometric identification ranging from fingerprints to facial recognition and palm veins.
The AmazonGo concept, currently in test mode in Seattle (where else?) goes beyond the financial transaction itself to tackle other deterrents of in-store shopping. The idea is this: You scan your phone as you enter the store and go along your merry way grabbing the items you want. Then you walk out of the store, and your Amazon account is automatically charged for your purchase.
Some may like the idea of avoiding checkout lines or the need to swipe/insert/tap/scan their payment device of choice and wait for approval. But what tickles my fancy is the prospect of cutting a couple of steps out of the usual tedious process of putting things in a cart, taking them out of the cart, putting them back in the cart, putting them in the car and taking them out of the car.
If this idea catches on, I will be on board with it much faster than I am with self-checkout, which I personally find no improvement over regular checkout aisles. In the case of AmazonGo, the potential is not merely a streamlined financial transaction, but a streamlined shopping experience.
Ultimately, consumers will adopt FinTech to the extent that it makes their lives easier. Being different for novelty’s sake will only draw in the earliest adopters; the rest of us need to be sold on more practical benefits.
The household appliance industry has been particularly impacted by rapid-evolving technology and Connected Consumer innovations. Our user experience (UX) researchers and designers are fortunate to see and test many cool-looking prototypes that integrate these innovations before they hit the market. While we draw some of our insights from UX best practices and years of experience in UX design of appliances, having a set of benchmarks in our arsenal makes recommendations that much more powerful.
We have integrated a UX measurement tool in household appliance research over several years resulting in a robust benchmark database. A scientifically-validated tool, the UX Score offers holistic insight by combining pragmatic usability aspects (learnability, operability) with hedonic qualities such as usefulness (identification, stimulation) and look and feel; this results in a score that can be compared to competitor products, different versions of the product, or, in the case of household appliances, benchmarked for the category. Our database includes years of global research covering diverse product categories from cooktops to freezers.
While the overall benchmark UX Score for household appliances indicates a good user experience through its relatively high value (about 5 on a scale from 1=low to 6=high), researchers are likely familiar with the following situation: A consumer is excited about a new idea and design, but once they attempt to use it, the disappointment surfaces. So we must dive deeper into the individual dimensions of the UX Score.
Here we see the mean benchmark values by dimension for the UX Score of household appliances.
Mean benchmark values of each dimension including overall benchmark (orange line) for household appliances
In the “inspiration” and “look and feel” dimensions, we see high benchmark values compared to the overall benchmark line. This is fostered by continuous innovations through new functionalities that show a stimulating effect on the product experience as well as the high-quality impression.
The more pragmatic “operability” dimension represents the lowest value by comparison. The location of features and information do not conform to consumer expectations. The “learnability” dimension value is also reduced – a catchy and intuitive usage of household appliances is limited.
Based on this benchmark data and UX best practices, we have established three tips for household appliance manufacturers to improve the user experience of their products:
As household appliance innovations continue to evolve, the strengths (hedonic qualities) seem to be well-considered. To address the category weaknesses like operability and learnability, appliance manufacturers should apply a holistic user experience design process to keep classic usability aspects top of mind.
Lena Tetzlaff is a User Experience Consultant at GfK. Please email email@example.com to share your thoughts.
Released in its entirety on November 4, 2016 and reported to have cost around £100m to produce, The Crown is one of the most ambitious projects that Netflix has taken on to date.
A 10 part original series (essentially a biopic) about Queen Elizabeth II, recounting her life from the royal wedding in 1947, right up to the present day, the show has been celebrated by all sides of the media, frequently being described as “faultless”, “magnificent”, “engaging” and “gripping”.
So what do we know so far about The Crown’s first few weeks on the service? Firstly, amongst our sample of Netflix users, The Crown was the top streamed title on Netflix in November 2016, showing that the release has been heavily streamed amongst users. But what was driving users to the show? Sheer curiosity or perhaps something else?
30% of Netflix users said they watched The Crown because it was recommended to them by someone, or simply because it looked and sounded interesting. However, a third of users also said that they had watched the series because it featured in the ‘recently added’ section of the service, and half also claimed that external advertising had influenced their viewing choice.
It is clear that Netflix were determined for this to succeed – not only was the show expensive to produce, but campaign spend across all media for The Crown was one of the highest of 2016 ensuring that the investment would not be appreciated by just users, but also reach and appeal to a wider audience.
Finally, in November, compared with the rest of 2016, a higher proportion of respondents say they signed up to Netflix in order to watch exclusive content not available elsewhere. However, the jury is still out as to whether The Crown itself was driving this. Early indications are that it attracted existing users to view rather than acted as a drive to sign up new ones.
In its first month of release, the demographic profile of those watching The Crown has shown some interesting results. Firstly, a fifth of the show’s viewers are aged 55+. This is a slightly higher proportion of older users watching than for Netflix content overall and also in contrast to new releases such as Stranger Things, which primarily attracted a younger audience within its first few weeks of release. It does highlight the strength of Netflix’s commissioning policy, allowing them to target different types of viewers by commissioning shows with differing demographic appeal.
When asked why they started watching the title in the first place, respondents mostly indicated that it was because they had a general interest in the Queen or the Monarchy or because they wanted to find out more about this period of time in British history. But what is remarkable is how few people said they started watching the title because of the A-list cast that has been employed (Claire Foy and Matt Smith both star), or because of the quality of the production for the title, further demonstrating that this title was perhaps designed to target an audience of lighter viewers less engaged by marquee names and more by the program content.
Defining a success when talking about Netflix titles can be difficult. If we look at overall content ratings, The Crown performed well. When asked to rate the show on a scale of 1 to 10, The Crown achieved an average score of 9.0 which is higher than all Netflix titles that score an average of 8.7. Compared to other recent celebrated titles, such as Stranger Things, Making a Murderer and Narcos, The Crown achieves relatively similar levels of satisfaction.
Furthermore, when we look at whether viewers are likely to recommend this title to others (again on a scale of 1 to 10), it scores in line with Netflix Originals on average, but slightly lower when compared to recent releases. So in terms of satisfaction and recommendation, The Crown can be called a success, but perhaps more was expected from this title, given the scale of investment into the show.
Overall though, The Crown can be considered a success. Critics and viewers have both celebrated the show, and early data is indicating that the title is both driving viewing as well as appealing to a lighter viewing audience demographic for Netflix. Furthermore, exposure for the SVOD service has also increased due to positive press attention and increased marketing activity. Content producers like the BBC and ITV must have taken notice at the bigger financial bets Netflix are prepared to make to increase their audience shares, which must ultimately leave them slightly nervous about the future, and fortifying Netflix’s position as a serious threat to such traditional players in the media landscape.