Interview with Bastian Verdel, StraightONE

"The decisive factor is how 'the scales in the head' tip at the time of the decision."

When making decisions about buying sustainable products, on the one hand there is the positive feeling of doing something good. On the other hand, there is the negative feeling of spending more money than on products that are not sustainable. Moreover, the actual attitude often does not match the actual action. Bastian Verdel from StraightONE gives tips on how to deal with these aspects.
 

"Said and done? No way! How to close the attitude behavior gap when it comes to sustainability" is the title of your WoM web seminar on May 11th. What problem do you address in your web seminar?

Bastian Verdel: The problem with sustainability is that there is a disconnect between what is important to us as humans and what we do. This phenomenon also occurs elsewhere. For example, on the subject of “data protection”. The protection of our data is very important to us, jet we share them quite freely, for example on social networks. This discrepancy is known as the “Attitude Behavior Gap”. For us as market researchers, this is a particular challenge, as this gap manifests itself as a discrepancy between the survey results and the subsequent actions of the target group. Therefore, it can become a problem for our clients. This can be observed, for example, when people show great interest in a new sustainable product in the concept test, the customer is happy and launches the product – but then nobody wants it.

Sign up for Bastian Verdel's session at Week of Market Research – May 11, at 12h CET (in German)
Gesagt, getan? Von wegen! Wie wir den Attitude Behavior Gap beim Thema Nachhaltigkeit schließen
 

How do you define "sustainability" in the context of your projects? In your view, is there now a shared understanding of this rather abstract term?

Bastian Verdel:  In the context of our projects, we tend to see the psychological dimensions of sustainability. The main problem for us is that it's about doing things whose benefit (at least it seems so) lies in the future. It's about things or benefits that have an effect in the future. However, we humans cannot sense benefits in the future because we are shaped by the “present bias”. For our brain, these benefits are in the future, i.e. they have a lower priority. That is why it is so difficult for us to make compromises in the „Now“ so that our environment will be better in the future or at least as worthwhile living in as it is today. Actually there is no future benefit for the individual when it comes to the “environment”. Because the lifetime of today's adults is not long enough to experience, for instance, the stopping of global warming. In this sense, there is also a big gap between the benefits that we talk about every day in an environmental context and what the actual drivers of sustainability are.

After all, sustainability in terms of preserving the environment is primarily about a social dimension. As "social beings" we have a basic need to belong, but also to care for and protect our community. This community now seems threatened by impending environmental disasters. If we now behave in a sustainable manner, the benefit for us as individuals is not that we will have a better environment or life in the future, but that we will fulfill our need for caring and belonging.

That means: The moment we make a sustainable decision, it gives us a good feeling because we feel as if we belong and because we perceive ourselves as a "good person" working towards the greater good of the community.

To get back to your question: Sustainability is still primarily about the environment. However, we are increasingly seeing companies using this term more broadly. Banks for example support their customers in the "sustainable" handling of their finances. Simply said, they want to help people achieve their long-term (financial) goals.

 

Why is it that test persons do not answer truthfully, especially when it comes to the topic of sustainability?

Bastian Verdel: People answer truthfully when they are asked a question that they can answer or if it has the same meaning for the respondent and the researcher. So if you ask a question about attitudes towards sustainability, you get a true answer. However, if one asks for a behavioral prediction, it is a question that the respondent cannot answer. This is because no respondent can anticipate their own decision-making processes. Because many factors play a role that are unknown to them, that work unconsciously or factors that you as an individual do not want to see in the first place. If we ignore this problem as researchers, only asking about willingness to buy in concept tests and then understanding this as a prognosis, we will fall into the "Attitude Behavior Gap".

So we have to look at the decision moment. This means that we need to understand which influencing factors are at work at the moment and thus in the context of the decision. In the case of "sustainability decisions," these are the "social benefit" which, however, is in competition with the "pain of paying," which describes the need for simplicity and minimization of effort. And also our routines or the "Status Quo Bias" play a significant role here. In a very simplified way, this can be seen as a "scale for perceived benefit".

What this means for our research is that we need to look more at the perceived benefits at the moment of decision. We can't simply ask whether someone buys a product, but we need to understand why they buy it in order to evaluate whether they will buy it. Because the decisive factor is - how "the scales in the head" tip at the time of the decision. Here it needs another additional benefit, which can be imagined very strongly "in the now" and can therefore be felt at the moment of the decision. We must be able to measure this, or at least the "trade-off" in which it manifests itself.

Even if the concern for our environment has meanwhile become a consensus in society and is also playing an increasingly important role in consciousness - and thus the "social benefit" for sustainable actions increases - in most cases we are still far away from having this benefit be perceived as emotionally engaging as the benefit of saving money or forgoing the convenience of the car, etc.

So the first thing we need to do in order to solve this dilemma is that we, as researchers, develop a clear understanding of human decision-making. Only if we know which mechanisms are at work, we can reflect them in our study designs. For this purpose we have developed the "Customer Thinking Model". This is not a new decision theory. But what is new, that is the connection of already existing theories, which we connect with each other.

 

The gap between attitude and behavior also exists in many other areas of life. Can your approach to bridging the gap also be applied to other areas of life than sustainability?

Bastian Verdel: Definitely. Before we got into the topic of "sustainability", we were also concerned with the topic of "data protection & privacy", which has similar issues. In principle, it is about developing a research design with the background of knowledge of how people make fundamental decisions and the specific context of the respective topic. The basis for this is actually always a combination of qualitative research, which uncovers mechanics, and quantitative research, which better reflects target group contexts and allows experiments. This means that the prerequisite for the quantitative test is the prior experience of what a decision looks like in a specific area and context. However, we see that very few companies have examined purchase decision mechanisms, but mostly only look at how certain marketing measures affect the decision. This can usually be made up for in the context of an ongoing project (e.g. a new product launch).

 

Reducing social desirability in response behavior is important to every market researcher. Why does your “Customer Thinking” approach solve the Attitude Behavior Gap?

Bastian Verdel: Actually it's not just about social desirability, but about understanding how people make decisions in specific contexts. I have to look at it holistically. So I should not ask what I want to know, I have to ask what the interviewee can answer. It's about the question, "How do I have to ask“ or "design" my experiment so that I measure what I want to measure. Sure, it´s not a new invention - it's all about the consistent application of knowledge that already exists in science. And a very clear perspective on how I use qualitative and quantitative research in combination.

 

A few years ago, "sustainable fashion" was still considered a niche market and sustainability a USP. To what extent has this changed due to emerging sustainability trends?

Bastian Verdel: Since there is now a consensus in large parts of society that the environment and thus the quality of life, at least of our children and grandchildren, is under threat, sustainability is taking on a whole new role for companies. Our research clearly shows that companies are seen as particularly strong players in the "community". Accordingly, large companies are expected to make their contribution to solving the problem. If they don't, they show (in the eyes of the customers) that one doesn't care about the "community" and the people, that is, the customers. Which means "sustainable behavior" is increasingly becoming a hygiene factor for companies in order to maintain and, if necessary, expand trust in the brand. The differentiation or the USP only arises here if sustainability can be combined with the solution of essential emotional or functional problems of the customer.

 

In your experience, what do consumers expect from sustainable brands? What do they value most?

Bastian Verdel: This depends very much on the category and is characterized by “availability bias” what means:
What one associates with the category “environmentally harmful” defines what people value most. When buying a heater, the first priority is the enery cost and secondarily people think about what type of energy is used for production or even later disposal. Hardly anyone thinks about energy expenditure in marketing, sales and administration. Just as with banks, very few realize that banks can influence sustainable developments with their investment activities. Nevertheless, it is also important that companies get involved in order to be able to maintain their reputation in the long term. After all, no company should only do things for sustainability that help them sell more.

 

Who should not miss your event?

Bastian Verdel: Anyone who is currently working on the development or marketing of products and services that include "sustainability" as a key pillar of their concept. And in particular every company researcher who supports these people in finding a suitable research path. Because in the end it's not about building your decisions “on the sand” of what people say what is important to them, but on the ground that actually determines their behavior.

 

 

ABOUT

Bastian Verdel is co-founder and Managing Partner of StraightONE GmbH. Experts in human behaviour, he and his team research and advise companies that want to use customer focus as a key competitive advantage. With his background in market research, he is not only concerned with understanding customer behaviour. Much more important to him is what these findings mean for practical implementation and how he can thereby help his client and their customers to achieve a better result.

 

Interview originally published in German on marktforschung.de - here