How Do We Affect The Final Decision Of Consumers?

    人類天性厭煩算計，喜歡通過捷徑（更相信直覺）決策判斷。比如，當顧客面對商品、廣告、銷售、定價等種種營銷刺激，如果這些刺激的設計正確，顧客會引發各種各樣的生理反應，會自動避開理性思維，直接進入廠商所設定好的情緒狀態中，從而以最短的時間形成沖動消費。 

More in-depth research, we can often find that when consumers face similar products, they often have difficult choices.

Among them, we need to have the highest probability of making the choice in two things that we all like.

So how can we influence the final decision of consumers in such a dilemma?

In fact, there are some rules which are easy to be manipulated by manufacturers.

    情況一：折中策略 

Your products and competing products are very popular with customers, but the concept of design is very different.

For example, instant noodles, old competitive products emphasize strong elasticity, while the new A products are non fried and high fiber.

Nowadays, consumers' health consciousness is constantly improving, and consumers are hard to choose from the two products on the same shelf.

In this case, how can A products effectively enhance consumers' choice of green healthy non fried noodles?

For the time being, we do not consider the feasibility of technology. The easiest way to deal with this situation is to design third kinds of instant noodle. It is non fried, high fiber and has a certain elasticity at the same time. Besides, in advertising, besides expressing the health characteristics of this product, it will highlight its good elasticity.

Such a strategy is a compromise strategy.

Because the two existing products are extremely extreme in nature, and assume that these two extreme attributes have different attraction to consumers, when customers are faced with these two extreme choices of "almost" preference, their brain will have abnormal brain wave activities such as restlessness and restlessness, that is, the brain is working hard to deliberate rational calculations, trying to make a difficult decision between them.

In fact, human nature is actually escaping from extreme choices. Even if he wants to be independent, he will experience great struggles, and most of them will move closer from the extremes to the middle and make a safer choice.

This is the so-called "compromise effect".

In this case, if a new product of "compromise" appears in a proper middle point, it will relieve the consumers' decision pressure in the dilemma and improve the purchase intention of the new product with the intermediate property.

This not only can be achieved in the new concept of consumption, but also can effectively reduce the consumer preferences for the extreme attributes of the original competing products, which can be described as a fish with two meals.

Of course, this strategy can not effectively enhance consumer preferences for A products.

When China has not yet popularized the concept of green and healthy consumption, when launching a new concept of consumption (such as non fried instant noodles), there will often be higher risks.

But in order to establish the first brand advantage under the new concept, manufacturers often have to introduce this extreme health concept product.

Therefore, the cleverest strategy is perhaps to launch the concept of extreme health products, to stir up new concepts, but only to set up a banner, and then work on the healthy and resilient "compromise" products, making it easier to get the best marketing results.

    情況二：提供一個較次的選擇 

In the last case, assuming that A products are limited by technical problems, they simply can not produce instant noodles that are not fried and springy, and can not be introduced into the "compromise" products. And you want to popularize the new concept of "non fried" healthy consumption. Is there any other way out?

At this time, your main force must be placed on the concept of absolute health products, and the new concept of publicity and fry is also used to attract customers' attention and strengthen trial consumption.

At the same time, a sacrificial product will be introduced, for example, like your original product, strongly emphasizing the concept of non fried health, but intentionally adding some kind of blemish, for example, tastes are more frequent, or are packaged more or even more expensive.

The purpose of this is to let consumers notice that at least two products are emphasizing this new "mainstream" concept of health, but your main product has obvious advantages and is easier to distinguish.

As a result, the dilemma of customers in the two extreme concepts was eliminated. If they were granted amnesty, the abnormal brain waves in the brain subsided in a moment, and the products that you immediately played were immediately highlighted. They also helped consumers forget the other extreme, emphasizing the concept of "elastic".

This is the so-called "attraction effect".

At the appropriate time, the company launches its sub brand to provide consumers with a second best choice, which makes it easier to strengthen and foil the dominant brand.

    情況三：差異化的力量 

If the majority of competitors are emphasizing the concept of "elasticity" and the concept of homogenization is serious (the difference may be only in packaging, additional ingredients and other irrelevant attributes), the best choice for A products is to stick to the concept of "non fried" health, and not to launch the different product lines under the same concept at the same time.

The reason is that the attributes of competitors' products are very similar. Consumers' brains automatically mix these similar products into "one option", so the probability of purchasing elastic surface is divided between these tastes, which is called "similarity effect".

In other words, if competitors launch different products under the same concept, they will not increase overall sales volume, but only increase operating costs in vain.

In my opinion, in the commercial war, the stupidest decision is to introduce the same products (all homogeneous products) to compete with their existing products.

Second the foolish decision is to launch products that are almost homogeneous with the most important competitors and fight in the same market directly.

Through the above three cases, perhaps you have to ask, aside from all the above effects, no matter who has more traditional taste factors, then, is the healthy appeals of non fried food to be sold well, or is it stressed that the elastic surface of the mouthfeel is good to sell?

In fact, on the choice of consumption, consumers often have to choose between the two consumption values of real consumption and pleasure consumption.

Non fried health appeal is a kind of real consumption, mainly in the search for rational and substantive interests, while the elastic surface mainly emphasizes the taste, and what is emphasized is a kind of pleasure consumption.

Only through deliberate rational thinking can we perceive the value of products and increase the mental burden of consumers. Therefore, non fried products with health as the main selling point will reduce consumers' preferences.

Hedonic consumption is mainly through intuition reaction (shortcut) to make decision judgment, and the mental consumption is low, and it is easier to attract the attention of consumers. Therefore, the stress surface of the brand is more global brand network, which is easy to be liked by consumers.

Therefore, the stressed noodle is obviously more natural than the non fried noodle which emphasizes the concept of health.

    情況四：價格錯覺 

The above mentioned "similar effects" will also happen in terms of prices.

If there is the same commodity, two different price promotions should be launched in different stores.

A shop marked the original price of 222 yuan, the current price dropped to 211 yuan, the price of 11 yuan; B shop marked the original price is 199 yuan, now the price dropped to 188 yuan, the same price of 11 yuan.

Which stores are more likely to be attracted by promotional activities?

    表面上看，兩家店都調降了11元，但是仔細計算一下，可以知道其實甲店的實際定價更高（222元），而折扣更小。但由于人類天性厭煩算計，寧愿相信直覺、喜歡通過捷徑來進行決策判斷，加上相似效應，人類通常會自動忽略標價里相同的百位數，從而只關注到了后面十位與個位數上的22/11以及99/88，由于直觀上22/11的降價幅度比99/88更大，結果根據銷量統計，甲店的銷量更突出，也就是說，222/211的降價組合，比199/188的降價組合更為有效，顧客對折扣的感知產生了失真現象，因而誘發了錯誤的購買沖動。