I think I figured out why I am so disappointed in Miller’s Vortex Bottle and Coors’ Cold-Activated Bottle commercials. It is that I have a hard time imagining that these items were the result of consumer research. Keep it mind, I could be wrong. These new innovations could be the result of surveys, trend watching, and focus groups. I am sure that these companies employ wonderfully skilled market researchers, and this isn’t a swipe at them. But I just can’t picture a focus group that would have the following results:
Coors: Tell me, what is your biggest issue when consuming beer?
Average Customer: I have difficulty telling when my beer is cold. I wish there were a way to prevent me from opening a bottle while it’s still warm.
Coors: You mean, like your hands?
Customer: Yes! But could you find a way to utilize a sense other than touch?
Coors: We will see what we can do.
(After failed attempts at the bottle that makes a noise when it is cold and a bottle that smells like lilacs when it is cold, Coors creates a bottle that turns blue instead, thus allowing a person to use both touch and sight.)
My guess is that what happened was a product designer stumbled across these two new features. Everyone in both companies were sold on the benefits, as presentation upon presentation explained how these were what consumer would want; if we told them they wanted it. And there lies the true dangers of some innovations. Much like the stories of New Coke, group think from within can cause the ordinary to seem extraordinary. Instead of telling consumers that they will love this new idea, find out what benefits they need and move accordingly. New ideas and innovations are great, but they are even better when they are meant to fix a problem or better a process. Otherwise, you might as well tell customers that they want your stuff because you said so.
