Careerbuilder.

com Advertisement Pre -testing

SCOPE : ACCEPT THE ADVERTISEMENT To p 5 R e a s o n s a s w h y w e s h o u l d g o f o r i t The product is better understood (90.6%) Respondents feel the product is Imaginative and attention seeker (87.5% and 96.9%) Original (89%) Different (87.5%) The ad is Unforgettable (84.4%) Wo rs e 5 Re a s o n s o n w h at re - wo r k i s n e c es sa r y The ad is irritating (75%) The ad is worn out and dull ( 67%) The ad did not induce watch again feel (65.5%) The ad is not informative (59.4%) The ad failed to create Immediate feel of buying (45%)

RECALL Recall Respondents generate it from memory The Ad received fairly good recall with 63 out of 64 people recalling it 25% of the respondents find no specific reason for disliking it

To p 5 r e a s o n s t h a t m a d e t h e m r e c a l l Originality, animation and Follow of Heart concept (44.64%) Boss and Employee concept (21.08%) Unrealistic job and I quit concept (19.61%) Career builder (9.31%) Building being crushed (4.9%) Try to break trend (0.49%)

RECOGNITION Recognition Respondents able to recognize the ad at their first recall 20.3% of the respondents able to recollect the ad at first instinct It also depends on frequency of the ad played

To p 5 r e a s o n s f o r r e c o g n i t i o n

Originality, animation and Follow of Heart concept (45.2%) Unrealistic job and I quit concept (21.2%) Boss and Employee concept (19%) Building being crushed (9.5%) Career builder (2.4%) Try to break trend (2.4%)

Recalled at first Instinct (in %)

25.0
20.3%

20.0 15.0 10.0 5.0 0.0

14.1% 12.5% 9.4% 7.8% 6.3% 4.7% 3.1% 1.6%

Recall (in %)

Reasons for likes (in %)

50.0 45.0 40.0 35.0 30.0 25.0 20.0 15.0 10.0 5.0 0.0

45.2%

21.4%

19.0%
Reasons for likes (in %)

9.5% 2.4% Originality, animation and Follow of Heart concept I quit and Unrealistic job concept Boss and Employee Concept Building being crushed Career Builder 2.4% Try to break trend

INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES,PERSPECTIVES & AREAS TO RE -WORK

Sample : 13 respondents (20.3% of the respondents) Perspectives: 5 respondents are marketing oriented, 5 respondents are Finance oriented, 2 respondents are IT oriented, 1 for manufacturing oriented.

INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES,PERSPECTIVES & AREAS TO RE -WORK

Marketing perspective Respondents feel :

The ad is not lively The ad is not informative The ad did not induce Watch Again fe e l The ad is not warm and sensitive

Manufacturing perspective Respondent feel :

The ad is not informative The ad did not induce Watch Again fe e l

INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES,PERSPECTIVES & AREAS TO RE -WORK

Finance perspective Respondents feel : The ad did not induce Immediate buying feel The ad is not informative

The ad did not induce Watch Again fe e l

IT perspective Respondents feel : Claims are not believable The ad lacks originality The ad is not appealing The ad did not induce Watch Again fe e l

REFERENCES

Krishnan Shankar, Chakravarti Dipankar (1999) Memory measures for pre-testing advertisements: An Integrative conceptual framework and a diagonostic template, Journal of Consumer Psychology, 8(1), 1-37. Kent. R.J., Machleit . K.A. (1990) The differential effects of within-brand and between-brand processing on recall and recognition of television commercials, Journals of Advertising, 19, 4-14.

THANK YOU! Advertising reflects the mores of society, but it does not influence them. - David Ogilvy

Abbas Mithaiwala Abdul Rahim Shah Baleshwar Srivatsava Vidhyalakshmi K Vinay Patil