My dad would say “Picture this…” as he described his idea for remodeling a bedroom in the house. He’d get the family imagining what the room would be like after he repainted, replaced all the furniture, and displaced his children for Polish immigrants willing to pay.
How an idea is presented impacts its appeal. Right?
There have been times when I’ve verbally described an idea. Times when I’ve used visual aids. And times when I have shown a little skin.
In my work, I present new product ideas to people who may use the product. I understand what they say about the product. And then I predict which product ideas will excite a large population of people to happily use the product. I call this activity concept value testing.
Why was it done?
I was curious to know whether I could gather any evidence that would demonstrate that how I present an idea will impact its appeal. If I had 100’s of ideas and wanted to present them to 1000’s of people, then it’s very time consuming and expensive to present an idea with visual aids. If I can get reliable judgments about an idea by presenting people with only a written description then maybe I don’t need visual aids. There are several other possible implications. Read on for the results.
The results
I presented a product idea to my colleagues at work. I’m not able to tell you the idea. It’s not important to my point in this blog post. Most of my colleagues thought the idea was good. A solid majority (55%) were excited by the idea. They’d be highly satisfied. The idea hadn’t occurred to them. Others (18%) wanted it. If they had it then their satisfaction would increase. Some people (9%) expected to have it. It wasn’t going to boost their satisfaction because they expected it. Their response is equivalent to having a toilet seat on a toilet. It’s expected to be there. And some (18%) didn’t like the idea at all.
How was it done?
What you don’t know is that I presented the idea differently. I presented it 3 different ways. I presented the idea as a
1. written sentence
2. written sentence + mad libs
3. written sentence + image
The written sentence group read one sentence that described the idea. The mad-lib group was told to imagine how the product idea might be satisfying to them. They filled in the sentence blanks (mad lib) that were provided to them. The purpose was to engage people deeper in imagining themselves use it.
The image group saw a hand sketch of the idea. It illustrated how the idea might look and work in the product.
More results
As it turns out, the Mad Libs group responded most positively to the idea. They were all excited or at least wanted the idea. The next best group only read the sentence. They were mostly excited while some expected it. The people that were shown an image of the idea were the least excited. Most in the group didn’t want the idea.
Results by Idea format (sentence, mad libs, image):
What was learned?
A few possible conclusions:
1. People weren’t influenced by the way the idea was presented. We’re not looking at any real differences. The sample was too small to have the power necessary to make any sensible claims.
2. A written description leaves a lot open to interpretation by those judging the idea. Maybe people imagined their own ideal experience about the idea.
3. Imagining your own examples of how the product would be satisfying, like the mad libs group, results in greater satisfaction. However, maybe I just primed them to be excited about the idea, when in fact, they’re not that excited. Would there be a priming effect if I asked people to imagine and give examples of how this feature might dissatisfy them?
4. An illustration of the idea makes the implementation of the idea more concrete. It’s more real. There is less interpretation. People judging the idea don’t use their imagination of the product. It’s not their examples of using the product. It is someone else’s idea, implementation, and examples.
I’m not making any generalizations about the merit of the idea based on my small sample. I won’t make any bold claims about the presentation of the idea but there could be an effect.
What are the implications?
I’m not sure what the implications are just yet. I don’t have enough data to say much. In the near future, I’m going to continue to present ideas consistently to people. It controls at least one possible variable that could impact the results. Or, I’ll deliberately present ideas differently to groups of people. I’m interested in understanding the effects of presenting an idea that allows for lots of imagination versus a format that requires very little imagination. If an idea is loved in the imagination group but then hated in the no imagination group then something has gone awry in the execution of the core idea. It could be a useful diagnostic that can be used to keep the idea but shape it better to fit what people will enjoy.
I’ll chew on it some more. In the mean time, I still believe that how an idea is presented impacts its appeal.
Let me know your thoughts.