Enhance was conceived as an instant hair conditioner targeted towards women 25-45 years old with dry hair, and was formulated to appeal to that audience. Based on the ASSESSOR – “Advertising Recall”, it is noted that, Total unaided recall for Enhance was 76% and among those who recalled the Enhance ad, almost 50% recalled that Enhance was "for dry hair".
The perceptual maps in Exhibit 3 shows that Enhance was positioned
1) Medium/high conditioning; med/low clean,
2) Medium/high conditioning; medium effects on hair.
I believe, this positioning doesn’t make a lot of sense. In looking at the ASSESSOR - “Product Acceptance”, and based on exhibit 7, surprisingly the respondents mentioned manageability is the best-liked feature about enhance and not the conditioning. The manageability was not considered a main copy point. And those who made repeat purchases were more likely than nonrepeaters to mention manageability.
Based on the Blind use Test Results - Exhibit 1, it is clear that women aged 25-45, reported the Dull/Limp problems far more prominent than the Dry/Damage problems. The average for the Dull /limp problem was 63.3% and the Dry/Damage problems was 51.3%. Given these facts, I think Enhance should position itself closer to the dull/limp problems, since its perception of manageability is also closer to that target. The relevant perceptual dimensions outlined in Table A show that the relative importance of Conditioning was 33%, Clean was 27%, Manageability/effects was 23%, and Fragrance was 17%. According to Exhibits 7 and 8, Enhance was liked for Manageability (42%) overall, Conditioning by 11% (overall) and Clean by 5%. However, Conditioning was also disliked by 11% (overall). So conditioning m ...