Adding fuel to the fire, Logic+Emotion reports on a research project from Bain:
- Nearly 6 in 10 executives are concerned that their products and services are viewed as commodities, i.e., that their value is easily replaceable by cheaper competitors
- Just over half of executives believe that insufficient consumer insight is hindering their performance
As Gareth Kay points out:
This, frankly, scares me. It scares me because the word insight here is almost guaranteed to mean information. And when you walk into any company the last thing any of them really needs is more information. They've got literally tons of it locked up in cabinets and boxes in corridors, basements and storage facilities. And for the most part, it's the same raw information and observation masquerading as consumer insight that sits somewhere in their competitors.
I've said it before: 'consumer insight' is probably the most frequently abused notion in the whole of our profession. In a range from simple observations or common knowledge to excuse of why a certain execution does not work, it can mean everything and nothing at the same time. As was pointed out in earlier discussions: if it doesn't put people in motion, it's not an insight...
It might be a fair stretch but Richard's 'generosity' concept probably works along the same lines.
Alvin and Heidi Toffler made a good point in their most recent book, Revolutionary Wealth, where they pointed out to the difference between data, information and knowledge. Data are just separate items which become information when put in context. Knowledge on the other hand consists of combining several broader patterns of a higher level of information.
It is this definition of knowledge I think that makes for an insight. It makes your conversation with the consumer having an authentic and natural feel to it. It's not just there, it resonates with its environment on different broader levels.
Posted by: Bram De Maesschalck | 14 April 2007 at 14:38