Mr. Gladwell does a particularly good job of illustrating Kenna’s dilemma in this chapter by providing several examples that show how standard market testing doesn’t always work. For me, the two lessons about consumer behavior that stick out the most are that humans don’t actually know who they are and what they want; the second is that things that are different automatically get this stigma of being wrong or undesirable. I find these two lessons that are discussed in this chapter the most important because they say the most about human behavior not only in the context of customer insights, but also in other behavior seen through the lens of self perceptions, taste, and treatment of others. Therefore, Mr. Gladwell’s chapter is not only tapping into the psyche of buyer behavior, but it is discovering true psychological reasoning and processes that all humans utilize in their daily lives. Like the piece on the Pepsi Challenge pointed out, it was the strong brand associations linked to Coke that made the product the number one cola in the world, not simply the taste.

I have always agreed in my mind with Mr. Gladwell’s theory that people don’t know what they want; at least for myself. I can’t even assemble my own ultimate sandwich at Subway because I don’t actually know what ingredients I like. This ends with me selecting one of the sandwiches from the menu. But I think this applies to your average consumer as well. We as consumers attempt to pick out what we like the most but the margarine example proves that we don’t actually know what that is. Instead of consciously trying to decide, our minds revert to the subconscious and tell us that margarine wrapped in foil and dyed yellow tastes better than the same margarine that is white and not wrapped in foil. And since this behavior is performed subconsciously, the consumers can’t put into words their true thoughts or feelings about a product. That is why we are best expressed through the clothes we wear and the items we collect and buy, like Mr. Gladwell suggests. However, I think consumers’ pride steps in and refuses to recognize this. For example, I can’t tell you how many times I have told myself I know who I am, yet I go off and do something completely out of character. Then I’m left with my mom telling me: “I told you so.” She really does know me better than I know myself. And perhaps marketers, through creative and unique research, come to know consumers better than they know themselves because they tap into that subconscious level. It is that elusive subconscious level that makes the human condition so complex and capricious. We try to better understand it through books, music, films and other art forms but it can never be pinpointed.

The other lesson that Mr. Gladwell points out is that difference is too often associated with being wrong or undesirable. His detailed example about the Aeron chair clearly defines how humans who can’t place something different into a familiar category will dismiss it. It is human nature to categorize and find paradigms in order for us to file memories into our brains. Things that don’t fit the paradigm are overlooked or even worse looked down upon. This is a behavior that is seen in stereotypes and discrimination. People who look different, act different, or dress different are discriminated because it doesn’t fit the norm. This can be taken one step further when people fear difference which leads to racist acts. Because this lesson has many implications beyond simple consumer behavior, it makes for an intriguing and important issue that helps marketers as well as consumers understand human behavior. An example of this that I know of involves Roger Ebert, a renowned film critic for the Chicago Sun Times. In 1967, a new movie called Bonnie and Clyde made its way into theaters across America. The film, once hailed for its graphic violence, was panned by critics calling it amateurish and poorly crafted because of its gritty visual style and jump cuts. But Roger Ebert dubbed the film a masterpiece understanding that its style complemented the violence by showing how realistic and raw violence is in society. Critics and audiences simply saw that it was different and instantly dismissed the film. The film went on to be nominated for ten Academy Awards and is considered one of the best films about violence in America. Roger Ebert, needless to say, was justified in his movie review.