Razor_Packaging Study

Understanding Consumer Behavior in Shampoo Selection

Objective:

Evaluate consumer preferences for Gillette's new razor packaging designs.

Gain insights into overall razor purchasing behavior within the men's grooming market.

Methodology:

A mixed-method approach was used to gather data from a sample size of 300 over 15 days:

Quantitative survey: Measured general preferences and brand perceptions for razors.

Eye-tracking : Assessed visual attention patterns towards packaging on shelves (for a subset of participants).

In-depth interviews (up to 15 minutes each): Gained deeper understanding of decision-making processes during razor purchases.

A/B testing: Compared consumer preferences for Gillette's new packaging designs.

Client Challenges:

Time Constraints:
Capturing comprehensive customer insights within a limited 45-minute interview window, without compromising on depth or quality of responses.
Selection Bias:
Dependence on walk-in customers during banking hours posed a risk of sampling bias—potentially excluding perspectives of digital-first or less frequent customers.
Social Desirability Bias:
Customers may have shared responses they believed to be favorable or acceptable, rather than their true experiences—impacting data authenticity.
Operational Disruptions:
Coordinating fieldwork during peak banking hours required careful planning to avoid interruptions to branch operations or customer inconvenience.
Comparative Benchmarking:
Establishing consistent service quality benchmarks across diverse private and government bank setups posed analytical complexities.

Insights and Inferences

🔍 1. Eye Tracking Participation & Brand Preference
Total Participants: 600

➡ Insight: Despite enhanced visual cues for ET participants, purchase intention and brand preference remained low across both groups. Visual attention ≠ emotional engagement.

🎁 2. Packaging Design Evaluation (Test vs. Control)

➡ Insight: The new packaging did not outperform the existing design in building premium perception or influencing brand choice.

🧠 3. Purchase Intention & Brand Acceptance

➡ Inference: Eye-tracking exposure or new packaging did not lead to a significant shift in brand acceptance or purchase decisions.

🛍️ 4. Purchase Decision Drivers (Qualitative + Quantitative Insights)

➡ Insight: Consumers still rely on tried-and-tested comfort, usability, and pricing over aesthetic improvements.

📈 5. Usership Segmentation – Sample Distribution

Sample Size: 300 | (ET + Non-ET)

➡ Observation: Guard still holds significant share among budget-conscious users. Trimmers are rising among tech-savvy users.

👤 6. Age & Beard Style Segmentation

➡ Insight: Fusion and Trimmer users skew towards bearded segments, whereas Mach 3/Guard serve clean-shavers better.

✅ Key Takeaways / Client Challenges

🔸 A. Eye Tracking Exposure ≠ Emotional Impact
Enhanced visual cues from ET (40 Test, 40 Control) did not lead to increased purchase intent or brand preference.

🔸 B. Packaging Design Disconnect
The new Test Pack failed to evoke a premium perception compared to the familiar existing design—undermining first-impression impact.

🔸 C. Habit Formation and Usage Consistency
Low daily usage and inconsistent engagement across both groups suggest the brand has yet to become a habitual choice.

🔸 D. Value Proposition Shortfall
Perceived poor value for money and quality signals indicate a need to strengthen the product’s benefit and performance messaging.

🔸 E. Product Differentiation Weakness
The variants lack clear differentiation, which impedes strong consumer recall and reduces the chance of converting trial into repeat purchases.

Unlock Your Data Insights Today!

Whether you're a curious learner or an industrial client, our resources are designed to empower you with actionable data insights. Fill out the form below to instantly access our offerings and book your free consultation:

Razor_Packaging Study

Razor_Packaging Study

Objective:

Methodology:

Client Challenges:

Insights and Inferences

✅ Key Takeaways / Client Challenges