Claims Combination Test

Single Claims Test vs. Claims Combination Test

Claims Test produces lists of the top combinations of claims through TURF analysis that “reach” the largest number of customers. This can be problematic when testing combinations as TURF may recommend several claims that serve a similar purpose which can be detrimental to the effectiveness of the messaging.

Claims Combination Test ranks claims combinations on simulated preference share, which given a direct answer to the question of which claims combinations will get the most people interested in your product.

Case study example: BrandCo

We illustrate the Combinations Test illustration methodology with an example of BrandCo, a producer of feminine hygienic products.

• BrandCo is looking to launch a new line of night time hygienic pads, a product they have not produced before.


• The marketing team have short-listed 15 claims to be added to the packaging. They wish to test claims to find the best claims combinations.


• As BrandCo does not have an offering on the market currently, they’re seeking the optimal combination of price and claims that will maximise their profitability.

Inputs

A list of competitor products provided by BrandCo to test their claims against, including product images, current claims, and prices.

BrandCo also provided 15 claims to be tested organised into two topics: Benefits and Reasons to Believe (RTBs).

Survey flow

Unlike standard conjoint testing, a Combination Test allows claims to be arranged flexibly in various combinations, and more rules can be used to sort claims.

Commonly, this test is done in two stages:

Stage 1: BrandCo claims were tested against competitors’ claims to find the claims most effective at taking market share.

Stage 2: BrandCo claims were tested against each other to “sort” claims and refine combinations.

Outputs

The study created a number of outputs:

Ranking of singular claims by preference showed that whilst Benefits tend to out perform RTBs, the top five claims are a mixture of both.

Examining claims correlation suggested that RTBs are interchangeable, but different bbenefits can be used to appeal to a different sections of the audience.

Simulating preference share of the product with different claims combinations identified the top claims combinations.

Analysing the top ten claims combinations showed that using claims combinations across both topics take the highest preference share.

Simulating volume/preference shares indicated that market share and revenue is maximised at $3.00 whilst profitability is maximised at $3.50.

Analysis of source of business showed which competitors BrandCo would take the most preference share from.

---

Here are also some suggestions for further reading:

• Understanding Claims Testing: Why your product needs it
• Conjoint.ly Claims Test, the automated tool for testing single claims (not combinations)

Would you like to discuss how Claims Combination Test can help in your case? Book a call to discuss your project.