A Chicken-Or-The-Egg Question
I’m a huge fan of Mad Men. I wait for it all week with anticipation. Usually there’s some exchange during the show that sticks with me and I end up thinking about it for the rest of the week.
In this last episode, there’s a series of scenes revolving around a focus group of about 6 women to discuss Ponds Cold Cream; scenes unfold around this central event revealing characters and motivations and drama of course. But what really stuck with me was the resultant argument later in the show– a philosophical argument between Don Draper, lead creative at the agency, and the woman running the focus group.
Don, in a nutshell, states that the focus group is ridiculous, none of it matters. That women gave the responses about life (and cold cream) that they gave because that’s all they know. He contends that he can change their minds, make them think new things, want new things, things they’ve never dreamed– all with his powers of persuasion and marketing. All he has to do is build the campaign, and the women will change how they think. And, buy the product.
She (the focus group leader whose character name I don’t recall) states that the data collected in casual conversation with the focus group is in fact important, because its who you are that shapes what you buy. She contends that the data collected about the women gave the marketing team a better picture of the women to whom they’re selling. At the end of the day, the creative agency can make a better, more informed pitch to the consumer, and get them to buy the product.
The characters agree to disagree and the scene is over.
However in my mind, the debate continues, and will continue until the next episode. For me, it’s a chicken-or-the-egg question; Do we buy things because we’re told we want them? Or do we buy things because we want, and the product speaks to us? Or, is it both? is it neither?
I had the opportunity to participate in some training at Cooper University in San Francisco in 2006. In a classroom setting, we learned techniques to mine the experiences and minds of consumers. Our goal was to gather data to create (hypothetical) products that would actually sell– presumably because the products would be designed to respond directly to the consumers’ problems, wants and needs. It was a class of exercises, meant to build our ability to question correctly, and apply methods of research. I am oversimplifying, but the method revolves around a very open-ended interview style. Imagine a conversation with co-workers about their life and habits, as opposed to an attorney’s cross-examination. This is how we were taught to gather data. I found it absolutely fascinating that there was a method for designing a product that could be defended– with data– when the CEO or other stakeholder says ‘but I want to do it my way’ and derails the project.
So many times in product design we just create something that makes us, the developers feel good, or makes our bosses happy, yet it doesn’t sell. But learning techniques to delve into the mind of someone else, and learn what they’d like to have and use taught me that we don’t hold all the answers. We do need to know what our audience is thinking, wanting. Sometimes we are correct, and we stumble upon the right solution and it’s a magical experience that the product is successful. Sometimes the client or the boss is correct too, and that is also magical. But ultimately, it’s the audience, the consumer, the end-user who we really want to talk to, if we want to consistently make magic.
But, then again, there’s Apple. Who, like Don Draper, seems to get out in front of everyone and says “you want this” and then magically, we all do want that shiny thing. over and over and over.
Thus, the chicken-and-the-egg.
