Applied Brand Science

Think about the last time you bought a computer. Did you meticulously compare every single brand on the market?

Probably not. McKinsey data shows the average buyer only considers 1.7 brands for computers. Even for massive purchases like cars, it's under 4.

We love to think our customers are out there deeply researching our category. But the truth is, we are mental misers. Our brains burn a lot of energy, so we take the easiest shortcut to a decision. If most brands are decent, we pick what's "good enough" and move on.

Realizing that buyers aren't ignoring your features takes a lot of the pressure off. You don't have to win a debate. You just have to be easy to remember.

You floss regularly, right? Sure you do.

Your buyers have the same relationship with the truth about their own behavior that you do. It's called wishful recall, and it's completely normal.

Keep that in mind when you look at your survey data. It's useful — just not the whole story.

Think about the last time you watched a gorgeous, funny TV ad... and then completely forgot what it was selling.

We’ve all done it. As marketers, we sometimes treat our own brand name like a rude interruption. We whisper it at the very end, hoping people will just figure it out. But buyers aren't calculating machines—they're just busy humans conserving energy.

A fascinating study out of the Netherlands showed that subtlety doesn't build memory. To actually get people to remember your brand, you need to say it out loud and show it at the same time. Doing that just three times in an ad spiked brand recall by 56%.

It's a relief, honestly. You don't have to be endlessly clever. You just have to make it easy for people to remember you.

Your consumer journey makes sense on paper. Your buyers' brains just don't work that way.

Neurologically, they're mental misers — taking shortcuts, grabbing what comes to mind first, skipping most of your funnel entirely.

Worth knowing before you rebuild it again. Stay tuned for the Laws and Levers intro webinar, launching in June.

Think about the grocery store loyalty cards in your own wallet or phone. Did you start shopping there because you got the card, or did you get the card because it was already on your route home?

We love to assume our loyalty programs are changing buyer behavior. But the data shows we usually just have the causality backwards. People sign up for perks at places they already frequent.

Even then, your heaviest buyers are still spending over half their budget at your competitors. Loyalty programs can still make you money—they usually deliver a modest 4% bump—but they won’t cure a leaky brand. It’s a relief, honestly, to stop expecting a points system to do the heavy lifting of brand growth.

Tired of your own ad? Your prospects probably haven't seen it yet.

99% of them haven't even seen the ad you're already done with. The wear-out is yours, not theirs.

Run it again.
Learn more at appliedbrandscience.com.

Have you ever noticed how much we argue over picking the "right" influencer? We usually assume we either need a micro-creator who is super niche, or a massive celebrity if we have the budget.

But the data on how attention actually works tells a different story. An analysis of over 800 campaigns showed that engagement forms an inverted U-curve. The sweet spot for cost-effective engagement actually sits right around the 1-million follower mark.

We spend so much energy trying to hack the system at the extreme ends of the spectrum, but the most efficient lever is usually sitting right in the middle.

It makes you wonder how many other "best practices" we blindly follow that are just based on gut feelings instead of reality.