Who is the consumer?

Battle of the Fruit Drinks

                               

            VS

Innocent Smoothie for Kids Advert

                 



Robinson's Fruit Shoot Advert 'The Chase'















 

Introduction

Within the Retail Product Category ‘Foodstuff and Consumables’ (Hemming Information Services, 2006), there are numerous brands and products to choose from regarding the soft drinks segment. When advertising a drink product, there is the need to communicate to consumers a unique message which would ultimately appeal to specific segment and differentiate one brand from another (Chen et al, 2012). Market segmentation which enables to “discern and define meaningful differences between groups of consumers to form a more focused marketing effort” (Brassington and Pettitt, 2006, p.193) plays an important role in turning the advertising effort more effective. For the purpose of this coursework, the ads of two distinct products, Innocent Smoothies for Kids (Advert shown above), and Robinson’s Fruit Shoot (Advert shown above) will be analysed and discussed.

Analysis

The selected products are both soft drinks aimed at children between the ages of 4-12. Firstly, the message in the ad for Innocent Smoothies for Kids is aimed mainly at parents who are concerned about the product’s health and environmental attributes. Innocent’s brand value and product proposition as well as having health benefits, also comprise of recyclable packaging and containers. The target market for Innocent smoothies is understood to be parents with children under the age of 10, characteristic of the ACORN demographic Classification B1, who are Upper Middle Class, health conscious, and favour a pro-environmental behaviour. Parents exhibiting pro-environmental behaviour consciously seek to minimize the negative impact of ‘one’s actions on the natural and built world’ (Kollmus, Agyeman 2002). Despite the end consumers of the smoothies being the children, the advertising needs to “pack plenty of appeal to parents, who ultimately make purchasing decisions” (Dannelke, 2009, p.59).  As such, Innocent is considered to be more of a premium brand as the product’s pricing will not appeal to a mass market audience. Secondly, Robinson’s Fruit Shoot ad is aimed at children who pursue an active lifestyle and seek to quench their thirst and get hydrated.  However, the message in the ads is aimed at two different types of buyers.

In a competitive drinks market such as the UK, it is important to better understand the consumers’ motivations behind the demand of these products. The literature on consumer behaviour which deals with how and why consumers purchase (or don’t purchase) products and services (Neal et al, 2007) will be helpful here. Consumer behaviourist theories and models such as Classical Conditioning, Operant Conditioning and the Elaboration Likelihood Model might aid in the elucidating what is behind such motivations. Firstly, Classical Conditioning occurs through associating and the pairing of stimulus (Solomon, 2010). In the Innocent Smoothies for Kids example, a visual cue is paired with a stimulus such as brand name which, in turn, satisfies a need: to quench thirst. The ad in question helps consumers associate the thirst need to a specific drink product which also has high health and environmental credentials.

Secondly, Operant conditioning (also known as instrumental conditioning) from the works of B.F. Skinner, occurs as the “individual learns to perform behaviours that reproduce positive outcomes (rewards) and those that yield negative outcomes” (Solomon, 2010, p.249). When consuming a product, consumers will be rewarded thus increasing the chances to return for more. Thirdly, the Elaboration Likelihood Model (Petty and Cacioppo, 1984) focuses on two routes: the central which provides straightforward information about a product through a rational approach, or the peripheral route which uses more emotive cues (Belch and Belch, 2009).

As seen from the Innocent Smoothies for Kids TV ad video clip, strong visual cues are used. A pile of fruit (the ingredients) turns into a smoothie which is consumed by a child. The stimulus relates to the parents’ problem recognition (provide the children with sufficient good nutrition) via the daily intake of fruit both conveniently and effectively. In this case, Classical Conditioning can explain the parents’ behaviour who whilst searching for healthier drink alternatives for their children when exposed to the Innocent advertisement will respond positively. The Innocent brand will stand out from all the alternatives. According to Sweldens (2010), pairing a brand is a popular technique to use in advertising resulting in positive effective stimuli. It creates favourable brand attitudes and brand recall. Behavioural response from the parent (purchaser) is expected to be high as the smoothie directly caters for their needs of providing easily consumable fruit portions. By applying the ELM Model to the Innocent Smoothies case, it is clear that the advert exploits the Central Route as it is highly informative as it provides a rational appeal about its ingredients and health benefits.

Research from Mintel shows parents wishing to meet the Government recommendation of five portions of fruit and vegetables a day have boosted the consumption of pure fruit drinks. These have benefitted from increased consumer awareness and purchase intent to (Mintel, 2011).

Operant Conditioning can be applied to Robinson’s Fruit shoot as the message appeal in the advert is that of an active, socially popular and adventurous child’s lifestyle. In the TV ad as shown in the video clip, this is evident by the involvement of the product being thrown around different persons in a skating park. The drink is consumed by a fellow skater who reinforces the base line message emphasising rehydration, having fun and a sporty lifestyle. Thus, by consuming the Robinson’s Fruit shoot, one will be rewarded by the taste, the quenching to thirst, being accepted by active and sportive peers. Operant Conditioning, along with the peripheral route in ELM, focus on emotional appeals, through heuristic processing (Petty and Cacioppo, 1984), which makes the product desirable amongst mainly the children but also parents.

The target market for Robinson’s fruit shoot is households profiled according to ACORN demographic classification as C1 lower-middle class, price sensitive. The parent (purchaser) and child (consumer) will both benefit by consuming the product as the parents seeks a product which hydrates and promotes an active lifestyle.

Conclusion

Effective understanding of market segmentation has enabled marketers to use two different types of appeals: cognitive and conative. Marketers are able to accurately advertise products which are in the same product category, however cater for two different types of consumers. Yet, the theories and models discussed above, cannot accurately determine whether the Innocent and Robinson’s adverts are likely to trigger an internal change in consumer behaviour. External influences such as information processing, group influences and personality traits (Neal et al, 2007)  were not explored here but would also impact on how Advertising is consumed.

References

Aitken, R, Gray, B and Lawson, R (2008) Advertising effectiveness from a consumer perspective. International Journal of Advertising. [e-journal] Available from: Ebscohost.  [Last accessed 12/11/12]

Brassington, F and Pettitt, S (2006) Principles of Marketing. 4^th Edition. London/GB: Prentice Hall.


Sweldens, S (2010) Evaluative conditioning procedures and the resilience of conditioned brand attitudes. The Journal of consumer research. [e-journal]  Volume 37. Available through: Ebscohost. [Last accessed 12/11/12]

Britvic (2012) Our Brands: Fruit Shoot. [online] Available from: http://www.britvic.co.uk/en/Our-brands/Fruit-Shoot.aspx. [Last accessed 12/11/12]

Chen, C, Chen, P, Huang, C (2012) Brands and Consumer Behaviour. Social Behaviour and Personality. [e-journal] Volume 40, Issue 1. Available from: Ebscohost [Last accessed 13/11/12]

Dannelke L. (2009) Kid stuff: health-conscious parents steer tiny taste buds toward First Juice. Beverage world. [e-journal] Volume 10, Issue 15. Available from: Ebscohost. [Last accessed 13/11/12]

Innocent Drinks (2012) Innocent Drinks our story. [online] Available from: http://www.innocentdrinks.co.uk/us/our-story [Last accessed 13/11/12]

Innocent Smoothies for Kids Advert. [online] Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pmc5jKvYwwM [Last accessed 13/11/12]

Kollmus, A and Agyeman, J (2002) Mind the Gap: why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behaviour? Environmental Education Research. [e-journal] Vol. 8, Issue 3. Available from: http://www.ecocreditz.com.au/downloads/379819/Mind+Gap+Kollmuis+and+Agyeman.pdf [Last accessed 12^th November 2012]

Mintel (2010) Fruit Juice and Juice Drinks - UK - November 2011 [online]. Available from: http://academic.mintel.com.atlas.worc.ac.uk/display/545335/?highlight=true [Last accessed 13/11/12]

Neal, C, Quester, P, Pettigrew, S, Grimmer, M, Davis, T (2007) Consumer Behaviour: Implications for Marketing Strategy. 5^th Edition. AU: McGraw Hill

Petty, R.E. and Cacioppo, J.T. (1984) Source factors and the elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in Consumer Research. Volume 11, pp. 668-72. [Last accessed 13/11/12]
Robinson’s Fruit Shoot ‘The Chase’ Advert [online] Available from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYspIAph_Zk [Last accessed 13/11/12]

Smith, P (1998) An examination of classical conditioning principles in an ecologically valid advertising context. Journal of marketing theory and practice. [e-journal] Volume 6. Available from: Ebscohost.[Last accessed 12/11/12] 

Solomon, M, Bamossy, G, Askegaard, S and Hogg, M (2010) Consumer Behaviour: A European Perspective. 4^th Edition. Harlow/GB: Pearson Education