Presentation on theme: "Taste Seminar Jerry Thomas 14 th June 2006 Taste – THE ultimate test?"— Presentation transcript:
Taste Seminar Jerry Thomas 14 th June 2006 Taste – THE ultimate test?
MSTS background >Established over 20 years ago >Specialise in product development in the food and drink sector >Leading sensory research company >Offer both sensory and consumer research >Guide manufacturers and retailers in product improvement >Work both in UK and Internationally
The Product Development Lifecycle INTRODUCTION GROWTH MATURITY DECLINE Concept/ product development Market map (portfolio opportunities) Product screening THE NPD PHASE Product optimisation Brand stretch/line extensions/ pack formats Quality control/bench- marking/product testing/ competitive tracking Cost reduction
MSTS background >We “bridge the gap” to enable our clients to really use the results and recommendations Research ConsumerMarketing Product development/ Production
Top 10 clients of MSTS
Is TASTE making a comeback?
>More discerning and sophisticated consumers – wanting something new and different >More fragmentation and segmentation of markets >Need for differentiation and innovation - me too’s, own label and shelf space pressure
Is TASTE making a comeback? >More discerning and sophisticated consumers – wanting something new and different >More fragmentation and segmentation of markets >Need for differentiation and innovation - me too’s, own label and shelf space pressure >Keeping one step ahead of the competition >Following the trends – “healthy” is driving a reduction in some ingredients and the addition of others
How to improve taste >Important for trial, and vital for repeat >Need to be careful not to change too much/too rapidly >Fit time and cost objectives (i.e. keep the accountants and retailers happy) >Use external means to guide and assess changes (e.g. consumers/sensory panel)
Why do sensory testing?
Sensitivity of 3000 Consumers
Why do sensory testing? >To identify and profile the attributes in a product, covering: –Taste/flavour –Appearance –Aroma –Mouthfeel/texture –Aftertaste –Tactile properties >To establish the key attributes and measure differences between products >Tracking over time – competitors and/or QA >Shelf life testing
Sensory Research >We have approx. 80 sensory panel members and, for each project, we select of them to assess a set of products using the industry standard method of QDA (Quantitative Descriptive Analysis) >Each project consists of: 1.Vocabulary generation to list all of the sensory sensations identified in the products (usually attributes). We encourage our clients to attend these sessions to fully understand the terms used by our panel. 1.Vocabulary rationalisation to determine a list of core characteristics with definitions 1.Scoring of the products assessed in controlled conditions. Products are assessed blind and rotated. Each panelist assesses the products three time to ensure robustness of scoring
Mean score profiles – Cereal product Brand A Brand B Brand C Brand DBrand EBrand F Brand G Brand H Brand I Brand JNPD 1NPD 2Brand K lsd95Significance Flavour Strength * Bran * Wheat * Oat * Corn * Rice * Malty * Toasted * Treacle * Banana * Coconut * Figs/Dates * Apple * Dried Fruit * Sweet * Strawberry * Raspberry * Sharp/Sour * Vanilla * Blackberry * Red Fruit Gum * Nutty * Walnut * Tropical Fruit * Salty * Warm Spices *
Sensory flavour profiles – Cereal Product Brand A Brand B Brand C Brand D Brand E Brand F Brand G Brand H Brand I Brand J NPD 1 NPD 2 Brand K Lsd 95 Sig nific anc e Flavour Strength * Bran * Wheat * Oat * Corn * Rice * Malty * Toasted * Dried Fruit * Sweet * Sharp/Sour * Tropical Fruit * Salty *
Sensory profile showing key significant sensory differences between Brand X (client brand) and Brand Y (market leader) Brand X has a stronger treacle flavour note. Brand Y has a more crunchy texture.
Sensory research Pros >Provides a very detailed “blueprint” of products >Shows importance of attributes >Measures significant differences >Can explain reasons for consumer liking
Sensory research Pros >Provides a very detailed “blueprint” of products >Shows importance of attributes >Measures significant differences >Can explain reasons for consumer liking Cons >Does not reflect consumer liking >Does not give real guidance alone
Consumer Research >A sample of appropriate respondents are recruited (often to a central location) >Each respondent tries/sniffs, sequentially monadically, all of the products in the test under controlled conditions >Order of trial is rotated to avoid bias >All products are scored on overall opinion, taste, aroma and appearance on a 9 point scale >This data is used to determine the relative appeal of each of the products tried
Consumer research Pros >Shows consumer liking >Scores basic attributes >Measures significant differences >Can show preference
Consumer research Pros >Shows consumer liking >Scores basic attributes >Measures significant differences >Can show preference Cons >Cannot give real product development guidance alone >“Don’t know/don’t care” issue
Product Optimisation >Designed to give firm guidance on product improvement >Identifies “best in class” and what attributes drive consumer liking (from combining with sensory data) >Can easily be used by NPD/Product Developers
Product Optimisation >Designed to give firm guidance on product improvement >Identifies “best in class” and what attributes drive consumer liking (from combining with sensory data) >Can easily be used by NPD/Product Developers >Offers an iterative process to reach your target product >Will guide further development for up to 3 years >Highly cost effective and reliable
Position of Respondents Taste & Ov. Opinion Appearance Brand C Brand N Brand D s Brand E Brand J Brand H Brand M Brand L Brand B Brand A Brand I Brand F Brand K NPD 2 NPD 1 Brand G
Product Optimisation Sheet Attribute Description Sensory Group Sign of CorrelationCorrelation CoefficientSignificance of Correlation Target for a Better Product Brand ABrand B Brand C Brand D Brand E Brand F Brand G Brand H Brand I Brand J Brand KNPD 1 Brand L NPD 2 Brand M Brand N lsd95Significance Overall Opinion * SweetAT *> * SweetFl *> * TreacleFl *> * SweetAr *> * CrunchyMf *> * TreacleAr+0.464(*)> * Oat FlakesAr+0.435(*)> * Oat FlakesAp+0.433(*)> * Rice PuffsAp+0.431(*)> * Oat FlakesFl+0.428(*)> * DryingAT (*)< *
Taste-based cluster groups - Mayonnaise Group A = 41% respondents Like a certain level of egg aftertaste and sweet flavour Dislike sweet aftertaste Group B = 21% respondents Like oily flavour Group C = 22% respondents Like certain level of rancid flavour and aftertaste Like lemon and sweet favours Dislike salty flavour and aftertaste/ smoked cheese and lasting aftertaste Group D = 15% respondents Indiscriminate – no strong likes or dislikes Brand A Brand B Brand E Brand D Brand C Brand H Brand F Brand G
Some new techniques >Product Development Workshop – using a sensory panel as consumers to give real guidance to developers
Product Development Workshop
Some new techniques >Product Development Workshop – using a sensory panel as consumers to give real guidance to developers >KidSpeak – as above but using 8-12 year olds with better than average sensory acuity >Expert panel – getting robust consumer feedback, but from a group who can really help the development process (i.e. more discerning than “normal” consumers)
Which group can help you best? >Sensory panel for real insight into product attributes and differences >Expert panel for consumer liking and feedback on improvements >Included in broad consumer sample for liking amongst real target market (pre-launch) Sensory/PDW Expert/Kids “Normal”
Summary >Taste will always be a key driver of liking >It can always be improved >Art and science can combine to deliver great tasting products (cf. Heston Blumenthal) >You can all do it too!