Indiantelevision dot com's Interview with Vitamin S Research MD Prashant Sanwal

Interview with Vitamin S Research MD Prashant Sanwal

"TV research in India hasn't really taken off"

Posted on 6 August 2003

He has this uncanny knack of driving home key messages and provoking introspection by interspersing the message delivery with the right doses of wit and humour. Meet Prashant Sanwal who has recently promoted his own research and marketing consultancy company called Vitamin S.

After his graduation with Honours in Sociology, Sanwal did his MBA from FMS, Delhi. His 19-year career stint includes advertising, marketing and research. An insightful strategist, he has worked on brands like Lever, Nestle, Gillette, J&J, Britannia, Fosters, ITC and Sony to name a few.

Some significant milestones in his career are :-
# Started and headed the Strategic Planning Function at Lintas
# VP - programming and marketing at Sony Entertainment TV
# Director, with profit centre responsibility, for all the regional channels at Zee Telefilms
# Head of Pathfinders Research

When queried about the name of his firm, Sanwal says that like vitamins he intends to use research as a process to both prevent and cure marketing problems. He says that he is not willing to restrict himself only to media or entertainment but will take on projects from other companies too. Sanwal spoke to indiantelevision.com's Ashwin Kotian while puffing through several cigarettes in the course of a one-hour interview. Excerpts:

What is the current state of 'TV research' in the country?
The television industry in India itself has been in a nascent phase and TV research hasn't really taken off. Most of the decision makers in Indian broadcasting have resorted to instincts or gut feel.

More so, because there are no norms as TV research is a continuous and painstaking process; developing the norms takes years. Most of the top FMCG companies use norms, practices and knowledge banks that have been developed over decades. In the case of the Indian TV industry, some of the recently developed tools such as OTS Update are merely two years old.

Also, considering the mortality rate within the TV industry - the rate at which executives are replaced - the 'trial and error' method gets repeated with alarming frequency every time a new executive joins. The TV industry cannot continue to operate in this haphazard way.

"An ad for an expensive lifestyle product might be received well by status conscious people who want to make a statement; might be lost on those that have already reached a certain position in life"

What are the solutions that media planners and buyers need to look at?
Media planners and buyers have to look at more insightful data and more focused information. For instance, it is not necessary that CEOs watch channels such as CNBC, CNN or BBC all the time. They could be watching a magazine show on a Discovery or a serial on Sony or even Mandira on MAX! In the past, such assumptions have been made due to lack of adequate information.

We also need to understand the relevance of psychographics. An ad for an expensive lifestyle product might be received well by status conscious people who want to make a statement; might be lost on those that have already reached a certain position in life. For instance, an upwardly mobile automobile driver could aspire to buy a high-end watch whereas his employer might consider watches to be purely functional.

Syndicated studies on psychographics are a costly proposition. A syndicated study used to cost in excess of Rs 200,000 some years back. More importantly, there aren't many takers for this kind of a research.

However, psychographic studies have to be undertaken regularly as consumers and viewer preferences are changing on a week to week basis. And each TV company needs to do it to understand their viewer and non-viewer profile. Regularly.

How different are tools and techniques needed to get the above data?
The tools and methodologies to be used are not really different from what is used in the case of other routine research. More importantly, the research specialist has to ensure that relevant questions are asked in order to get the requisite insights. The skill of the moderator and the interviewer is very important.

The research must be reliable and actionable - those who commission the research must be able to draw concrete conclusions. The 'research specialist' has to step in and convince broadcasters to undertake this kind of research. Broadcasters must be convinced that they must participate in the process of conducting more research that is done on an ongoing basis.

Honestly, do you feel that the currently available research systems are sufficient?
I guess that the currently available system is okay as no one is really complaining loud enough to be heard. (smiles).

But, honestly speaking, I feel that the data available currently is not sufficient. There is a gap and merely commissioning one-offs is not the answer. For any kind of crystal ball gazing, one needs to have a sufficient bank of data.

Distribution data is all about people who receive channels but doesn't provide any information on viewership patterns - channels, or programmes or time bands. Studies such as OTS don't use sampling but provide data on the entire universe by tapping all the cable control rooms in the universe.

In the case of viewership, there is this controversy whether the number/placement of samples is appropriate. But, the fact of the matter is that it is an expensive proposition. The largest chunk of TAM's revenues comes from broadcasters. But, none of them is willing to come forward and sponsor additional sampling units.

"I feel that the data provided by MSOs and cable operators in a post CAS situation will have credibility issues. Any involved party cannot be used as a source to gather information or data"

Give us an example of a study that could have yielded different results if the right questions had been asked by the right persons?
A case in point is the recent controversy about the adoption of set top boxes in the post conditional access system (CAS) scenario. The findings indicate several drawbacks - typical of a situation where the right kind of research hasn't been done.

There are crucial issues that need to be considered while working on projects such as the above mentioned one - for instance the timing of the research wasn't appropriate. Indians always tend to cross a bridge only when they come to it.

Consumers had no clue about CAS; didn't know why a set top box would suddenly gain so much of importance in their life; and there was so much of confusion created by the constituents including the media.

One must remember that every product has an adoptive cycle. When MP3 gadgets were launched, consumers were initially hesitant but now consumers are more receptive to MP3 gadgets. In fact, the need of the hour was what we call 'The Challenge Theory'. The interviewer 'provokes' the consumer - to actually arrive at a conclusion.

The questions should be combative "How can you not buy the STB if you want to watch pay channels?" "How can you refuse to buy the STB when all the others in your building buy it?"

I feel that the data provided by MSOs and cable operators in a post CAS situation will have credibility issues. Any involved party cannot be used as a source to gather information or data. The questionnaires given by the MSOs and cable operators could be faulty or inadequate. Remember, the most essential feature of research is to remove the element of bias.

Click for more Perspectives

Email this page

Print This Page

Home