The Scottish Question

It was once said that the Schleswig Holstein question, a great 19^th century diplomatic puzzle, was only understood by three people-one who was dead, one who was mad, and the third who had forgotten it.

Now we have the Scottish question and as a marketer with the odd bit of Scottish blood in me I find it fascinating. Hopefully I am not the mad one.

I am of course referring to the stramash over the wording of the Scottish Referendum question.

For those less interested in the ins and outs of Scottish politics, the original question to be asked was ‘do you agree that Scotland should be an independent country?’  After a bit of a row this was changed to ‘should Scotland be an independent country?’ 

Not much difference you might agree.

However the way the original question was asked is yet another interesting example of a nudge which might have left people free to choose whatever answer they like but the choice architecture in the wording of the question provided a wee nudge in a certain direction. And not surprisingly might have nudged a small number of people to vote for independence. And in the world of nudges small incremental gains count.

But in this instance the choice architecture was spotted and stopped but this is going on all around this and this thinking can benefit marketers, if not Scottish politicians.

Many of the decisions we make as we go about our daily lives are intuitive requiring little or no thought. We are on automatic pilot. And when we operate in this mode our decisions are not thought through, not reflective and in many instances done out of habit. Think about how we drive.

And even when we are in fully reflective mode we look for shortcuts. Basically although our brain is a wonderful instrument we are lazy. For most of the time we just can’t be bothered to process all the information out there to make the best decision and to act in our best interests.

When this arises we are vulnerable to being nudged. And in so many ways.

This is what those framing the original question were trying to do.

There will be people out there unwilling or unable to process the debate. For these people the wording implied that someone else had made the decision that independence was a good thing and you were just being asked to agree with this hypothesis. There was also a hint that this was the norm and we all want to feel part of the herd, don’t we?

But the nudge was spotted and a nudge free question substituted though this will probably be the first of many nudges on this issue.

In many areas the ordinary consumer is a novice interacting in a world inhabited by experienced professionals. Their lack of experience, imperfect knowledge and inadequate feedback means they want and often need help and support. By organising the context in which the decision is made we as marketers can more consciously help the consumer make decisions. We can become a choice architect, simplifying the choice architecture we give our consumers and customers, and nudging them in the direction of one choice over another.

And remember there is no such thing as a neutral design. Anywhere decisions are being made there will be biases.

Now we marketers either knowingly or unknowingly apply choice design principles all the time-‘8 out of 10 cats prefer’; the use of celebrity and expert endorsements in ads; product  placements in store;  store design; menu design; and so on.

But marketers can and should do more than just sell stuff. We can help people change behaviours in their and society’s interests; we often want them to switch channels; or we can design a helpful customer experience and customer journey. In all these instances and many more the principles of choice design can apply.

The Scots might not have been able to architect their question as well as they might have hoped but there is plenty of scope for the rest of us to do so.