Tom H. C. Anderson - Next Gen Market Research™

More Than Market Research - Gain The Information Advantage

Tom H. C. Anderson - Next Gen Market Research™ header image 6

Marketing Guru Jack Trout and Tom H. C. Anderson Discuss Marketing Research and Brand Differentiation – Anderson Analytics Round Table Discussion #1

March 1st, 2008 · 6 Comments

Marketing Guru Jack Trout and Tom H. C. Anderson Discuss Marketing Research and Brand Differentiation
[Anderson Analytics Marketing Guru Round Table Discussion #1]


Anderson Analytics Jack Trout

Jack Trout
Marketing Guru

In an effort to bring together multiple perspectives and innovations in market research, Anderson Analytics has started an ongoing “round-table discussion” series. The first of the series is an interview with Jack Trout. Trout has been a pioneer in market theory, making significant contributions to positioning theory and market warfare theory. He is a columnist for and is the author of numerous books, including “Jack Trout on Strategy” and “Positioning: The Battle for Your Mind.”

In a conversation with Anderson Analytics’ Founder and Managing Partner Tom H. C. Anderson, Jack discusses several important issues and trends in market research, including Text Analytics, Segmentation, Knowledge Process Outsourcing (KPO), and Differentiation versus Commoditization.

Much of Trout’s theoretical foundation shares similar ground with text analytics in that both operate on the basis that consumer mentality, including potential consumers’ perceptions and attitudes, is central to any strategy or research effort.

The below is a summary of the discussion:

Jack Trout: My point of view has always been the fact that very simply all marketing takes place in the mind of your prospect. It’s where the battle is and any research that develops, to me, gives me a sense of the perception that exists in the mind of a customer about a given product or a category of products and the assurance of that perception. In other words, who owns what idea is really what it comes down to…

In this regard, Trout agrees with Anderson in much of market research’s aims should be to use techniques that will delve into customers’ perceptions to understand how people view a brand product or service as different or similar to other available choices.

Jack Trout: What had happens in terms of categories, in terms of brands? How much are they perceived as being different versus how much are they perceived as being commodities, again, back to strength of perceptions about a given product or category. I find that very very useful… If your assignment is to differentiate your product, make it more attractive than your competitors’ products, and suddenly, you look at a large intensive bank of research that says that your category is heading into commodity country; you are not doing your job.

Tom H. C. Anderson: Can you give us an example of a company that used perceptions and attitudes to effectively differentiate themselves from everyone else?

Jack Trout: Well, I would say in the automotive category that’s starting with the ones that all have differentiated themselves very effectively, I would say that you are looking at of course BMW the ultimate driving machine, the drive ability, you’re looking at Volvo it has done a reasonable job with safety, although they haven’t been as consistent with that as they should be. I think Toyota with the concept of reliability, that perception has been very very powerful. I think Mercedes’ is engineering, in terms of that attribute and perception. Of course Ferrari is all about speed. And I say that that’s the highlight of the category, once you get away from those brands, you find a lot of GMs’ cars, and a lot of Fords’ cars and Chrysler’s cars are not well differentiated. And I think that’s part of the problem. You know. In the land of toothpaste, you obviously see well differentiated, you know, Crest with cavity prevention for a number of years, Colgate also in that category, now Colgate with the perception of not only cavity prevention but tartar control and the germ killing. So they kind of own three ideas. So in other words, what you’re after is owning something, owning a concept. Now is making that the essence of what the product is about, that’s the point of difference.

Anderson and Trout discuss how segmentation can be used to a) understand the effectiveness of branding; and b) re-formulate strategies to increase differentiation.

Tom H. C. Anderson: Well, it seems that segmentation can help choose a concept to pursue or own, right?

Jack Trout: Let’s just think of Volvo, if you’re going to be selling the concept of safety, the segment that you would appeal to would be more of your family oriented segment. Not necessarily your hot shot that wants to drive fast. So certain things line up with certain segments, but you can get nutty over trying to break this market place into too many pieces and I think what you find out is that the leading products tend to cover most of the market because they own the biggest attribute. And after you get by that, you’re going to have to find a niche or segment of the market that perhaps you can appeal to, it’s not as big as the overall market, but at least it’s a piece. So that to me is what I think is segmentation: what is the best group or segment that this product is going to appeal to.

Tom H. C. Anderson: What do you think about the idea of one-to-one marketing?

Jack Trout: It is essentially very powerful. Well let me tell you where people get confused. One-to-one marketing is about customer retention. It’s hanging on to your customers. You see, it’s a lot more efficient to hang on to your customers than it is to generate more; you know have to constantly generate new ones, which is more costly. Positioning and strategy are about attracting new customers. One-to-one marketing is about hanging on to the existing customer base. It’s all about keeping in touch with your customer base. So I see that as a terrific follow on to attracting customers. It’s a two-part problem. You part one attract them, and then part two hang on to them.

In advising marketing research executives in strategizing within their company, Trout provides some insight while also reiterating one of the fundamental challenges of market research.

Tom H. C. Anderson: Do you have any tips for new heads of research within Fortune 500 companies on how they should position themselves within the company?

Jack Trout: Well, my tip for them is essentially they should become the measurer and qualifier of perception. What’s in people’s mind? But you can’t get too crazy with it. The biggest problem with marketing research is it gets too complicated. They have more variations especially with the internet and new numbers and they slice and they dice and I think if you’re not careful, you’re going to generate nothing but confusion. You’re going to generate too much information. It’s the more you have the less clarity you’re going to have. I’d be very careful about developing research to figure out what people want; going into peoples’ minds and figuring out what they want. People tend to not know what they want. Mark Twain once said “you can’t get the truth out of people until they’re dead and dead a long time”. People tell you might what they think you might want to hear or people might say to you what they think, they’re going say what they think will make them look smarter or good, so truth is an elusive commodity. So you’ve got to be very careful with research that is aimed at trying to find out what people think or want, very careful about that. Look at the recent New Hampshire primary. They went in there and said, ‘wow looks like Obama’s going to win’, well guess what? You know, a lot of people weren’t telling him the truth, or, they weren’t talking to the right people. You’ve got to be careful about research.

Anderson and Trout also talked about KPO in terms of how other cultures may not be adept to conducting market research within the United States since cultural factors are inherently imbedded in what and how research is conducted.

Tom H. C. Anderson: I mentioned KPO last time we spoke and how a lot of companies’ call centers are being outsourced. A new thing off shoot to this is knowledge process outsourcing where, in our field anyway, everything from survey design, programming, and even actual analysis is done overseas to cut cost by a third, etc. Is this something that you have an opinion on? Do you think that’s a wise move to save cost and stay competitive or do you think…?

Jack Trout: Well, again it depends on the kind of research you’re doing. You know, can somebody in India research what’s happening in the United States? (Laughs) I mean, I don’t know, I tend to find it a weird idea that somebody in India is conducting research in the United States. It doesn’t make a lot of sense to me unless it’s really basic stuff. You’re in a different culture. Granted people are just asking questions, but I just don’t know. It’s a hard call for me to make, unless you show me exactly what they are trying to accomplish.

Anderson and Trout also discuss text analytics and how this approach might further strategy, branding, and competitiveness.

Tom H. C. Anderson: Jack, one of the things we’ve been doing is, text mining, and web/screen-scraping. Obviously a lot of people are giving their opinions freely on the internet, not just blogs, but discussion boards. There used to be just video games and computers being discussed on the internet, but now you can find at least one person providing statements on anything from buying guitars to washing machines to whatever. These statements also include opinions and customer ratings. We’ve been focusing on screen/web-scraping this data. We can scrape down a hundred thousand posts by consumers whom we know are heavy users of the product category.

Jack Trout: That’s good! What you’ve just described… it sounds to me to be quite useful, and why is it? Because what are you scraping up for me? Perceptions. You are, now the trouble is, you’ve got to scrape that all up and turn it into simpler stuff. Here’s what people perceive in this category. And now that to me sounds exceptionally valuable. Because what you’re telling me is what’s in people’s mind, and that is what I talk about when you start a program on anything, you have to find out what’s in people’s mind. Not what they want, but what’s in their minds already about a category or about products. Because you remember, there was a classic Xerox research where they [researchers] went out and they asked the question ‘would you spend $.10 a copy for a plain paper copy and everybody said ‘no’. That’s your problem, see. It was researched and they had hundreds of thousands of people in that research who said no, they would not pay .10 a copy. And based on that, you would never have seen the birth of the flying paper copier, never. And so, that’s the tricky part about research. I want to know what’s in their minds; I don’t necessarily want to know what they think they may or may not do.

Tom H. C. Anderson: So you agree that gaining information on what’s in peoples mind before you create a strategy would be very important?

Jack Trout: Absolutely, absolutely. You remember when I said at the very beginning, it’s the battle for the mind. So in a way, what you’re saying is I’m going to give you a clearer picture of the battlefield, what’s already there: in the mind and about this category. That would be very very helpful. That would be useful information, if you can try to distill it down and not let it get much too complicated.

Tags: Advertising · Anderson Analytics · Branding · Business Guru · CMO · Interview · Jack Trout · Loyalty Marketing · Marketing · Methods · Off-Shoring · Price · Segmentation · Strategy · Text Analytics · Tom H. C. Anderson

6 responses so far ↓

  • 1 John A. Fallone // Nov 28, 2008 at 3:23 pm

    I have been a fan of Jack Trout and Al Ries since “Positioning” was first published…I’ve read all of their books (as a team and solo/in collaboration with others efforts). Trout’s perspective relative to distinguishing between “what’s in people’s mind” vs. “what they claim they want” needs to be underscored.

    It is commonly understood that specifically “how a survey question is asked” will impact the response.

    The question is: Are there effective research methods in place today that can probe deeply and trigger a response that truly reflects what is “in the mind” of a prospect, client or survey participant…as opposed to merely “what they want?

  • 2 edmond hawkeye hennessy // Jan 3, 2009 at 8:35 pm

    Have two topics to comment on:
    1) Your interview with Jack Trout
    2) John Fallone’s question

    On the Trout interview - it is refreshing to see, after many years that Jack Trout is sticking to his guns and consistent in his viewpoint. Impressive!
    He and Ries are cornerstones and have instilled an almost cult phenonmenon.
    In the early ’80s, I had a chance to attend a Trout & Ries workshop - hosted by my employer, a major computer maker - that caused me to be bitten and take the Marketing Warfare fundamentals and apply them for the last 3 decades.
    This has been instrumental to the Clients of a Market Programs and Services firm that I head-up and also stimulated me to author a book titled “Market Warfare: Leadership & Domination Over Competitiors” that is making waves worldwide.
    Not sure of Mr. Anderson’s interests, however if you will send an e-mail with your mailing address to, we will send you a complimentary Market Warfare book.
    We promise that the book will provide breakthrough techniques and a practical, how to approach that is not redundant or available anywhere else.
    For Mr. Trout’s interview with you and his Industry contributions - hats off to him.

    For Mr. Fallone - we have found in doing general market research and specific segment projects that attempting to seek the Holy Grail - clear definition of customer needs and requirements or (worse yet) future considerations to be crap shoot.
    We believe the key is taking the prospect input to a certain stage and then allowing “bright lights” that have an appreciation of the Market (Segment), application, product fit, competitive influences, and other external factors to interpret and translate the data into something meaningful that can be decisioned and actioned.
    With all of the vehicles that have been administerd from Delphi Research Methods to Focus Groups, etc., we have found that there is no substitute for interpretation, prediction and action.
    Our firm has also introduced a powerful system called TAP that has been influential in helping clients bridge the gap from Research - Strategy - to Tactical implementation.
    If you are interested in continuing the dialog - just send an e-mail to and we will provide additional input.

    Thanks for allowing us to comment on this useful and informative blog.

    Edmond Hawkeye Hennessy

  • 3 Tom H C Anderson // Jan 4, 2009 at 2:10 am

    Edmond, I interviewed Laura Ries a few months ago and will interview Al Ries in a couple of weeks. Thanks for stopping by, I’ll be in touch

  • 4 John A. Fallone // Mar 9, 2009 at 5:08 pm

    Yesterday I had the opportunity to take a peak at Jack Trout’s most recently published book, “In Search of the Obvious: The Antidote for Today’s Marketing Mess.”

    Not surprisingly, he manages to sift through all of the clutter and uses a combination of “common sense” and the unique perspective that he and Jack Trout made famous, to explain why most of today’s marketers are missing the mark…tending to complicate instead of simplify the landscape.

    The genius of Positioning and all of the subsequent books authored by Trout, Al & Laura Ries is that the principles, (such as “The 22 Immutable Laws of marketing”) correctly applied, can predict which marketing strategies will succeed…and which will fail.

    Over the last 20 years I’ve worked with several firms…the ones that differentiated themselves and had a simple value proposition were the most successful.

    I certainly will follow up with Mr. Hennessy to learn more about “Market Warfare: Leadership & Domination Over Competitors.”

    Also, I thoroughly enjoy Tom H C Anderson’s interviews and blog. Tom…please keep up the great work.

    Kind regards,
    John A. Fallone
    President & CEO
    Office: 1-203-274-6098
    Mobile: 1-203-536-1093

  • 5 edmond hawkeye hennessy // Mar 15, 2009 at 11:19 am

    Well, John Fallone is a man of his word - he did follow-up and requested clarification and a more detailed response. Prefer not to write a Library of Congress type of response, however his request touches several areas and it is hard to economize.
    For openers - the book titled “Market Warfare: Leadership & Domination Over Competititors” is a how to Marketing Cookbook - on the front-end, it does outline a Mindset, Framework for doing business and a baseline approach for defining, structuring and implementing Program Initiatives that any reader can master. At that point, each chapter focuses on key business areas and demonstrates how to implement/execute Programs that generate tangible results, complete with relevant, real-world client examples. The emphasis is on outpointing/outmaneuvering competition and providing the reader with breakthrough approaches and techniques that allow them to better cope with the financial meltdown and this tough Market Economy.
    Although research and investigative work is the backbone of everything that we do, our focus is on Market Programs and Campaigns.
    The research is the vital fuel.
    With that in mind, we can discuss our findings and outline some research approaches and techniques being employed.
    We have done this for several decades and been tapped by major Research Studies and participated in conventional research methods (questionnaire/survey), Focus Groups, Delphi Cooperative Projects and the like.
    Rule of thumb: No substitute for face-to-face, live interaction and make sure the experience is geared for the Target Audience not for your self-interests.
    Things evolve - and with the advent of the Internet - many of today’s approaches are outgrowths, which include:
    -On-Line Surveys (some with animation and other techniques to keep the respondent engaged and to add a dimension of fun)
    -Sharing the research results with the Target Audience for refinement and reinforcement
    -Leverging cell phone proliferation, as the vehicle to conduct short-burst surveys
    -On-Line Webinars and Interactive Consumer Roundtables (plays off the traditional User Group approach)
    -On-Line Focus Groups and Topical Chat Sessions
    -Leverage a Lead Customer to organize and conduct targeted work sessions (take yourself out of the loop and see how unbiased and objective the results will be - customers talk differently, between themselves)
    -Leverage Industry Trade Groups, Associations and noted Industry Leaders to host/sponsor your Research events (they have more credibility and bigger draw than your firm and can attract the right audience)
    -E-Mail Marketing - has its place, although there must be something of value provided to the respondent - key Industry articles, some form of Incentive (and, not a dollar (buckeroo) to reward them - that is insulting, depending on the make-up of the Target Audience).
    -There are many other approaches that are effective and work - it varies depending on the Research Objectives, the make-up of the Target Audience (look at the variation from reaching the Boomers vs. generation X,Y & Z or Small Business Entrepreneurs vs. Large, Multi-Nationals) and the focus area (we would approach a pricing/packaging exercise differently than one for Competitive Analysis, Product feature set or Technology Roadmap).
    -Best approach - select and utilize a mixed multi-mode approach to fully work the Target Audience. That will provide a cross-section of customer insights that you can put greater confidence on than utilizing a singular approach.
    One last point - this also corresponds to John Fallone’s follow-on question:
    We utilize a basic approach called IIAP = Information, Interpretation, Action & Prediction.
    Our point in the first blog response suggests that phase one research results be handed-off to “bright lights” - people conversant in your business - whether they be captive employees, outside consultants, or enlightened third parties (even key customers or prospects) to assist in the interpretation and translation process.
    Without this, the translation may be flawed or misunderstood, which will surely bias the outcome and cause you to miss the mark.
    Research and Investigative work is critical and continuous.
    It is not simply a phase in-the-process, as most organizations think.
    Every interaction allows us to continue capturing input to keep pace with business in constant transition and if put to practice smartly will be one factor contributing to Leadership, Domination and outpacing competition.
    Again - appreciate participating in Tom Anderson’s Blog and hope this is useful to John Fallone and others in your member community.

    Edmond Hawkeye Hennessy

  • 6 Jack Trout - Tom Anderson Interview - I | Marketing Bones // Nov 13, 2010 at 5:27 pm

    [...] Last week we received a few follow-up emails and calls about the roundtable discussion with Jack Trout. The piece was a summary of a couple calls and emails Tom and Jack exchanged on marketing and consumer insights . However most of the content came from the call below. We decided to post a rough but more detailed transcript since so many seem interested. For those who prefer to listen, the audio is available here. Hope you will find it useful. [...]

Leave a Comment