Comments on: Neuromarketing – time for the revenge of the consumer? http://futurismic.com/2009/06/26/neuromarketing-time-for-the-revenge-of-the-consumer/ Presenting the fact and fiction of tomorrow since 2001 Fri, 10 Feb 2012 22:03:44 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Dale Paulson, Ph.D. http://futurismic.com/2009/06/26/neuromarketing-time-for-the-revenge-of-the-consumer/comment-page-1/#comment-35718 Dale Paulson, Ph.D. Sat, 27 Jun 2009 17:32:34 +0000 http://futurismic.com/?p=7974#comment-35718 Paul, This is a very interesting article. It is true that neurological research is the cutting edge of the field and it would appear to be quite powerful. You quote Ian Armstrong, Manager of Customer Communications for Honda UK, who says “Conventional research only gets you so far because it’s rationalization after the event and most decision-making is done subconsciously. We set out to measure physical changes people cannot consciously control.” This would make it appear that potential customers are sitting ducks. If customers are “sitting ducks” they are still not very well understood. I’m not sure that brain scans are that much better than observing a smile and a nod of the head. Admittedly, people are emotional first and rational second and they will occasionally buy something that they don’t need. As you say “all the crafty persuasion techniques in the world won’t do you any good in an empty showroom.” Marketers still don’t know that much to be that manipulative. My own research using Context-Driven Qualitative Research which uses pictographs, and solves the problem of rationalization after the event, results in so many surprises that I am quite sure that purchasing behavior is less a matter of manipulation and more a matter of ensuring that the customer gets what they want. Note, I said want, not need. To learn more you might want to visit my blog, http://beyondfocusgroups.blogspot.com. Thanks, Dale Paul,
This is a very interesting article. It is true that neurological research is the cutting edge of the field and it would appear to be quite powerful. You quote Ian Armstrong, Manager of Customer Communications for Honda UK, who says “Conventional research only gets you so far because it’s rationalization after the event and most decision-making is done subconsciously. We set out to measure physical changes people cannot consciously control.” This would make it appear that potential customers are sitting ducks.

If customers are “sitting ducks” they are still not very well understood. I’m not sure that brain scans are that much better than observing a smile and a nod of the head. Admittedly, people are emotional first and rational second and they will occasionally buy something that they don’t need. As you say “all the crafty persuasion techniques in the world won’t do you any good in an empty showroom.”

Marketers still don’t know that much to be that manipulative. My own research using Context-Driven Qualitative Research which uses pictographs, and solves the problem of rationalization after the event, results in so many surprises that I am quite sure that purchasing behavior is less a matter of manipulation and more a matter of ensuring that the customer gets what they want. Note, I said want, not need. To learn more you might want to visit my blog, http://beyondfocusgroups.blogspot.com.

Thanks,

Dale

]]>