PRODUCT TESTING IN THE SPHERE OF PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT 33 producing a few hundred packs of a new product for such a test would normally be prohibitive. Regarding extended usage tests one should distinguish between new products and existing products. If one tests a completely new product, it is advisable to employ some form of extended usage test, ahnost in the same way as a test to destruction with an airframe or a submarine. One wants to see where the breaking point comes, possibly by making people use the product more often than they would ever do in real life. You may then force them to the point where they are antagonised. Such reactions do not necessarily mean that the product would not sell, because in reality they would rarely use it exclusively for months they may only use it once every three months, possibly buying some other brand as well, so that they never get to the point where they dislike it. Chocolate manufacturers, for example, allow employees when they first join, to eat as much chocolate as they like, free of charge. After a time they grow to dislike the chocolate, not because the chocolate is not a good product because they have become sated with it. For this reason one must use extreme care in interpreting extended usage tests. Also, in testing new products a measure of novelty appeal is often found. The degree of this is difficult to measure precisely, but it nearly always exists. MR. F. D. GRAINGER: What do you consider the value of a study of consumer com- plaints in product development? Do you consider this an extension of a testing panel, and do you think that technical evaluation of letters of commendation for a product should also be carried out? In my experience the technical people see all the complaints, and the marketing people see only the letters o[ commendation. THE LECTURER: Strictly speaking, this question is not really within the sphere of product testing. In consumer testing, complaints or commendations as such are not sought, merely reasons for preference. These may in fact danm the product, but I would not regard them as complaints. A complaint normally comes from someone who has bought the product. When the product is on sale great attention should be paid to any complaints. Even if there is some real deficiency in the product, only a small number of complaints may arise, but these may represent only the tip of the iceberg. Complaints should be referred to marketing, production or product research as appropriate for thorough investigation. MR. F. D. GRAINGER: I was really referring to the actual complaint against the pro- duct as such, not the presentation or anything which concerns marketing. I am thinking about complaints on flavour which recur on most flavoured products. A certain set of people dislike that flavour but the technical people whose job it is to develop the product, only hear about the complaints and they do not know, unless they make it their task to try and find out, how many people have commended the taste of the product or whatever facet it is they are considering. Without this co-ordination of knowledge about customer reaction once it is on the market, it is very difficult to assess whether the complaints are outweighed by commendations or how they fit in. THE L•CTURE•: This is a question for management. If a research report is correctly written, and it lists the reasons that people have given in fayour of the product, as well as their dislikes, indicating the proportions of people involved in each, and if that report is seen by everyone concerned, the technical people may well then realise the true situation. Regarding flavours with a minority appeal - if, for instance, you were dealing with passion fruit - a lot of people may say they dislike it, but if your

34 JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF COSMETIC CHEMISTS aim is to sell a passion fruit drink, you would examine the reactions of the small section of the population who do like it. It thus depends on the objectives of the test and the interpretation of the results, but these results must be available to everyone concerned, so that they may be aware of the reasons both for and against, and what the test objectives were in precise terms. DR. M. N. RODaER: How important do you consider the actual final preference score in product tests? TI•E L•CTUR•R: One must define the objectives very precisely at the outset. If you have basic market in[ormation, you will know what kind of people the market is composed of, where they are, what and how often they buy, how they use the product, etc. Your survey will also provide a picture of brand usage and how this differs from brand to brand you will also have the brand images of the main brands in the market. If, in the light of this information, you have to develop a product to compete directly with the market leader, then you would test against the market leader. But if there was a gap in the market for a product with certain qualities which the market leader lacks and no other brand appears to provide and you make a product to fill that gap, you would test it amongst those people a product of that kind might satisfy. They might not be easy to locate, but this would be your objec- tive. You might still decide to test your product against the market leader, and although you would not then expect it to be preferred overall, you would wish to ascertain its performance with those people you think might like that kind of product. In this case if the product did not beat the market leader, you should not necessarily scrap it. One must interpret the results in the light of the objectives. Mi•. R. CnARK: How in fact do you identify these minority or target groups in the context of consumer evaluation? TI•I• L•CTUR•R: Usually by interview, but it depends on your aim. If one is seeking people with a particular personal characteristic they may prove difficult to isolate. It may be necessary to undertake the tests in two stages, first a test using a representative sample of the population to pinpoint the people who like your product and dislike the market leader, and second to find out what kind of people they are. MR. N. F. E. BLACI(•O•E: Speaking as a product development chemist, I am concerned about the comparative insensitivity of the typical user panel. With the competitive situation that exists at the moment in the toiletries and cosmetic fields it has become increasingly difficult to make a significant improvement to our existing product types. Such improvements when made, however, can be demonstrated by laboratory test methods and supported by tests on expert panels. When it comes to trying out the improvements on a larger consumer panel the difference is reduced virtually to nil due to the inability of the panel members to discriminate. I feel that in such a case, should the improvement (enhanced holding power in a hairspray, for instance) be pointed out to the user - as would be done by advertising if the product were marketed - then the panel might be more able to notice the improvement. Can anything be done to modify consumer panels along these lines? •I'•E L•c'ruR•R: Frankly, I do not think •ve xvant to. In developing this product, you are very close to it you think it is important. The average consumer who is using a large number of products every day and bombarded with advertisements for many more, does not accord it the s•m• imp)r•nz•'. Th ' attribute xvhich you think vital