[Understand in 1 Hour] A Textbook on CEPs, CEPs, and Top-of-Mind Awareness

It has been 6 years since my note summarizing that "Top-of-Mind awareness is important!" went viral.

With the recent attention on CEPs (Category Entry Points), I feel that there is a growing momentum, albeit gradually, regarding the importance of achieving Top-of-Mind awareness and the sentiment that "Isn't there really no way left to win other than raising your recall ranking?".

However, while there are many articles and information out there saying "Exploring and identifying CEPs is important!", "Expanding CEPs is important!", and "Being recalled through expanded CEPs is important!", there is (I feel) not much on "How?". Furthermore, I feel there is little information that answers the question, "I understand the result-oriented logic that 'strong brands have high penetration' (i.e., 'weak brands should increase penetration'), but we don't have the money to increase penetration across the board (in as many CEPs as possible)...?".

So, I decided to write this.

It is 27,000 characters long. I think it will take an hour to read properly. It might be difficult to understand deeply after just one reading. But when you, or everyone on your team, understands, agrees with, and creates a common language around what is summarized here, surprising changes should occur. Please bookmark this article so you can read it carefully later, share it with your team to create a common language, and use it as a guide for your practical work.Also, it would encourage me if you could 'like' it.I might get carried away and write a sequel. Also, I would be even happier if you posted about it on X.Let's join hands and make the industry better together.

The content of this article should be a flash of light for many marketers who are at a loss for their next move, wondering, "So, what exactly should I do to sell?!" Here we go.

0. Summary of this article

If you want to increase sales, you must design not just to be "liked" by consumers, but to be "remembered" at the necessary moment.

Brand selection does not begin only in front of the product shelf or on comparison sites. It starts much earlier, the moment a need arises within the consumer, such as "I want to do something about this" or "I need this."

This article deals with the CEPs (Category Entry Points) that serve as the starting point, and the structure that creates Top-of-Mind awareness.In the consumer's mind, the need is first made manifest by purpose CEPs, then the category is recalled as a solution, then candidate brands are narrowed down by purchase CEPs, the Top-of-Mind brand is decided from the recall set, and finally, a purchase is made.

What is important is that Top-of-Mind awareness is not just a popularity contest, but the result of a memory search that rises to the surface first in this sequence of events. Therefore, what should be asked in practice is not just "who to say what to." It is designing at which entrance the need arises, which category wins there, which brand association becomes the reason for choosing, and what RTB (Reason to Believe) makes that association believable.

So, what should you do to raise your recall ranking?

Increase contact volume. Increase awareness. Increase brand favorability. Strengthen differentiation. Get people talking on social media. Make it easier to buy. These are all valid arguments. On the other hand, a collection of valid arguments creates an addition of measures. Addition eats up budgets and organizational structure, and in the end, makes "everything half-baked." The worst thing is that after all the addition, the "way you are remembered" becomes shaky.Consistency and continuity are key to recall, so "shakiness" is a fatal wound.

Therefore, this article presents a concrete method for making Top-of-Mind awareness reproducible. What, in what order, and how should your company do it to raise its recall ranking?

I will summarize that concrete method.

1. The true nature of Top-of-Mind awareness is the "entrance"

Top-of-Mind awareness is not the order of being liked. It is an extremely mechanical phenomenon that occurs in the consumer's mind.

Consumers make all kinds of choices every day. Morning preparations, commuting, work, housework, childcare, meals, bathing, sleeping. In all of these, there are "small troubles" or "small purposes." People do not decide what to buy by thinking logically from scratch every time. Depending on the situation, they simply open the drawers in their minds and choose from their usual candidates.

The moment a situation occurs, a purpose arises, and one thinks, "I'll solve this with something," the drawer in the brain opens. Only then does the category as a solution emerge, and candidates are called up. For example, the following situations:

This “trigger that opens the drawer” is what CEPs are. In other words, CEPs can also be called “the entrance through which a category is recalled”.

The entrance is not “product language” but “situational cues”

CEPs are not about searching for words to make people remember a product. An entrance is a “situational cue” that lights up on the consumer's side before the category itself. Consumers first recognize a situation, then bring up a category as a means to resolve that situation, and finally call up candidates.

If you confuse the entrance with “verbalizing reasons for purchase” or “benefit expressions” here, the number of entrances will increase from the company's perspective, causing repetition to disperse, memory to fade, and making it difficult to convert into spontaneous recall. Therefore, the starting point for entrance design should not be product language, but the classification of situations that consumers naturally possess.

Many marketing discussions get lost because they skip this entrance and jump straight into “who is the target” or “what should we appeal.” Polishing an appeal without deciding on the entrance is like making a beautiful label without deciding which drawer to put it in. If you do that, it won't be opened when it's needed.

“Designing top-of-mind awareness” means designing the entrance and raising your company's recall ranking at that entrance. At what moment, through which entrance, does which category arise, and how do you create a state where your brand is placed at the top of that drawer? If you can design this, you will be able to draw a straight line to top-of-mind awareness.

2. CEPs are divided into “Goal CEPs” and “Purchase CEPs”

In this article, we will view CEPs in two layers: Goal CEPs and Purchase CEPs. The reason for viewing them in two layers is that discussions in the field tend to be biased only toward the “buying phase,” making it easy to get caught up in the tug-of-war of the final phase.

Goal CEPs are the situations, desires, and problems that arise when a consumer develops a reason that “a task to be solved has occurred,” triggering the start of problem-solving behavior. At this stage, it has not yet been decided which solution will be used.

Purchase CEPs are the entrance structures that occur when the consumer enters the act of “buying” and influence which brand is chosen. In Purchase CEPs, “in what situation to buy” is first determined by occasion conditions, and then “what to satisfy” and “what cannot be compromised” arise as need conditions.

This distinction is critically important in practice (details will be provided later).

If many brands only chase Purchase CEPs, they will end up exhausted in the final phase of the main battle, such as through soaring search ad costs, attrition on comparison sites, and price wars. Of course, you cannot ignore that, but it is not the only main battlefield that determines victory or defeat.

What significantly influences victory or defeat is whether you have secured high recall for your category and brand much earlier, at the Goal CEPs stage. Brands that are ranked high in Goal CEPs are more likely to have an advantage in comparisons during Purchase CEPs. Conversely, brands that have not achieved high rankings in Goal CEPs are more likely to be forced into a battle of conditions during Purchase CEPs.

The law of gravity that “growth is governed by breadth (penetration rate)” also applies here. Goal CEPs have a high frequency of occurrence and a large population. If you capture this, the penetration rate is more likely to move. On the other hand, Purchase CEPs have a lower frequency of occurrence compared to Goal CEPs, and the population is limited. Even if you only chase this, it is difficult to increase your breadth.

In other words, designing top-of-mind awareness can be rephrased as capturing the phase where the reason “let's solve this with this category” is born in Goal CEPs, and designing to increase the recovery efficiency of brand selection in Purchase CEPs.

3. Identify the entrance, narrow down the entrance, and fix the entrance

There are three main tasks we will perform in this article.

First, identify the entrance—that is, in what situations consumers open the drawer. Second, narrow down the entrances from which it is easier to move the penetration rate and where your company is likely to win. And third, repeat without blurring the meaning at the chosen entrance to fix the recall.

In other words, this article proceeds in three stages: “finding the entrance,” “choosing the entrance,” and “creating a state of being remembered at the entrance.” The entrance referred to here is not something invented by lining up words that a company likes. It is a situation that is already occurring on the consumer's side and is a real trigger that encourages the manifestation of necessity. Therefore, even if you polish your appeal without identifying the entrance, you will not be remembered at the necessary moment. Conversely, if you widen the entrance too much, the meaning will disperse and the memory will weaken.

That is all for the introduction. From here, we will move on to the main explanation.

4. The Two-Layer Structure of CEPs and the Map of Top-of-Mind Awareness

The core of this article is summarized in a single map called the "Map of Top-of-Mind Awareness." All subsequent discussions in this article are essentially consolidated into this map. If you are ever unsure about your measures or actions, check where your company is stuck: Purpose CEPs, Category Recall, Purchase CEPs, Consideration Set, or Recall Ranking.

In the consumer's mind, thinking generally proceeds in the following order.

Purpose CEPs -> Category Recall -> (Brand recall at the initial stage) -> Purchase CEPs (Occasion conditions / Needs conditions) -> (Brand recall at the selection phase) -> Consideration Set / Top-of-Mind Awareness -> Purchase

Note that "Category Recall" here refers to "the emergence of one or more categories as a means of resolution." Sometimes a single category emerges, and sometimes multiple categories emerge simultaneously. The latter will be discussed later as an inter-category tournament.

5. Definition of Terms

To ensure we don't get lost, let's standardize our terminology here. It might feel long-winded and overly complex. You might feel like, "I don't care about definitions, just get to the point!" However, a strategy for achieving top-of-mind awareness requires a certain theory. A theory is a bundle of facts extracted from real-world phenomena, abstracted, and conceptualized. All of this is done through "language," and discussions and decision-making among multiple people are conducted through many "words." That is why it is important to align on correct definitions.

Marketing is not something you do alone. You work with many people—superiors, subordinates, colleagues, team members, outsourced partners, and customers—to converse, discuss, recognize the current situation, identify issues, think of measures, document them in language, deliberate, make decisions, execute, review results, and connect them to the next step. This entire series of processes is conducted through "language."

As the number of people involved increases, as the number of measures increases, and as the project grows larger, even a slight discrepancy in the interpretation of definitions can lead to an irreparable gap, causing things to "mysteriously fail" or "not go as expected."

Therefore, words and definitions are important. You don't need to memorize everything. Here, take it as "I see, that's how it is," "I thought these two were similar, but they are different," or "So there is a definition like this," and come back to refer to it whenever necessary, letting it sink into the entire team. Aligning definitions is the shortest path to avoiding major failure and reaching the destination first. Here, I will define 10 representative terms.

※ These concepts do not exist individually but are "elements within a structure," so (although it is difficult on a smartphone or PC) if possible, I recommend printing out the "Map of Top-of-Mind Awareness" in Figure B and reading the definitions while looking at the figure (the overall picture) to understand the positional relationships and connections with other elements, which will facilitate understanding.

1) Purpose CEPs

Purpose CEPs are the triggers that occur when a consumer feels that "a task to be solved has arisen" and begins resolution actions. At this point, it has not yet been decided which resolution means to use. For example, situations such as "my lunch break is short and I have limited time to eat," "a deadline is approaching and work is dragging on," or "summer vacation is approaching and I'm starting to think about plans." Also, Purpose CEPs have varying degrees of intensity. For example, in the case of summer vacation, "I should start thinking about plans soon" is a weak entry point, "I'll be in trouble if I don't coordinate the family's schedule" is a medium entry point, and "the reservation deadline is approaching and I'm panicking" is a strong entry point.

2) Category Recall

Category Recall is when, after Purpose CEPs occur, a category emerges in the mind, thinking "this situation can be solved by this means." For example, for the Purpose CEP of "short lunch break," "a meal that can be eaten quickly" emerges. For the Purpose CEP of "summer vacation is approaching," multiple categories such as "travel," "theme park," and "camping" emerge simultaneously. In other words, Category Recall is the phase where "what to solve it with" lights up in the consumer's mind.

3) Purchase CEPs

Purchase CEPs occur when a consumer enters the act of "buying" and are the entry structure that influences which brand is chosen. There are occasion conditions and needs conditions. Here, first, "in what situation to buy" is determined (occasion condition), and then "what I want to satisfy" and "what I cannot compromise on" emerge (needs condition). For example, after deciding to "buy canned beer," a situation such as "I need it by tonight" or "I'll buy it while I'm out shopping" is determined, and then conditions such as "I don't want to fail with my usual taste" or "I want something that goes well with a meal" emerge. In other words, Purchase CEPs are the entry points that drive brand selection at the buying phase.

4) Occasion Conditions

Occasion conditions are conditions that determine "for what situation I am buying." It is not just a date or deadline, but includes where, for what purpose, and in what context it will be used. For example, "preparing before a trip," "buying locally while on a business trip," "tidying up before guests arrive," "needing it by tonight," and "buying more because I ran out" are all occasion conditions.

5) Need Criteria

Need criteria are the judgment standards that emerge as 'must-haves' in a given purchasing situation. For example, 'I want something lightweight,' 'I want it to work immediately,' 'I want to reduce hassle,' 'I want something I can trust,' and 'I don't want to fail' are all need criteria. In practice, these criteria are strongly linked to PODs (Points of Difference, or reasons why that brand is chosen) and RTBs. This is because the final question asked is, 'Can that brand truly satisfy those criteria?'

6) Brand Recall

Brand recall is the phenomenon where a specific brand is brought to mind as a candidate in the consumer's mind. In this book, we consider that brand recall does not happen just once, but occurs in at least two phases.

The first is brand recall at the initial stage. This is a phenomenon where representative or standard brands roughly come to mind at a very early stage when the target CEPs occur and the category is activated. For example, the moment you think, 'I should restock beer,' your 'usual brand' comes to mind almost simultaneously.

The second is brand recall at the purchasing stage. This is a phenomenon where purchase CEPs are activated, and candidate brands are specifically verified under the occasion criteria and need criteria. For example, after deciding, 'I'm going to replace my hair dryer,' this is the phase where brands are narrowed down based on criteria like, 'This one for fast drying,' 'This one for lightness,' or 'This one for hair manageability.'

The former is close to 'identifying candidates for a solution,' while the latter is directly involved in 'forming the consideration set and determining top-of-mind awareness.' Distinguishing between these makes it easier to understand why brands come to mind quickly for convenience goods, and why rankings change after comparison for high-involvement products.

7) Brand Association

Brand association is the 'bundle of meanings' that is linked to and emerges for that brand in the consumer's mind. The meanings referred to here are not just adjectives. They are the reasons that make one feel, 'In this situation, this brand is appropriate.' For example, associations like 'Sensodyne = hypersensitivity care,' 'NONIO = bad breath prevention,' and 'Ora2 = whitening' fall into this category. In other words, brand association is the bridge that connects the entry point to the brand (to be recalled as a brand).

8) RTB

RTB stands for Reason To Believe, and it is the basis that makes one believe, 'That brand association or benefit seems true' or 'This brand will actually satisfy my needs'.

RTBs include product facts such as specifications, functions, formulations, and design; explanations of the mechanism of effect; comparative test data and third-party evaluations; and social proof such as track records, awards, and the number of users. For example, for the association of 'can be made quickly,' the RTBs would be 'three minutes in the microwave' or 'pre-cut, pre-seasoned, and just heat.' For the association of 'can be trusted,' RTBs could be 'supervised by a doctor,' 'many years of experience,' or 'No. 1 in customer satisfaction.'

The important point is that an RTB is not just a rephrasing, but a concrete basis that supports 'why it can be said.' An association alone ends with 'it seems good,' but with an RTB, it changes to 'that is why I choose it.'

9) Consideration Set

A consideration set is the collection (list of brands) of favorable options that are spontaneously recalled in the consumer's mind within that category when the consumer's needs become manifest (when CEPs are activated). Consumers do not consider countless brands equally. In many cases, they begin their consideration from the brands they were able to recall. For example, the moment you think, 'I'll buy beer to drink at home this weekend,' suppose 'Asahi Super Dry,' 'Kirin Ichiban Shibori,' and 'Sapporo Black Label' come to mind. This 'lineup that came to mind' is the consideration set. The consideration set is often very small, typically limited to about one to three items.

10) Top-of-Mind Awareness

Top-of-mind awareness is the brand that comes to mind first within the consideration set. For example, if you are asked, 'What comes to mind when you think of chocolate snacks?' and 'KitKat' comes to mind first, that is the top-of-mind awareness for that entry point. The purchase conversion rate for the top-of-mind brand shows a surprisingly high figure (the brand that is top-of-mind has a high probability of actually being purchased). Therefore, achieving top-of-mind awareness has a very significant meaning in marketing practice.

6. The difference between 'Jobs and Needs' and 'Jobs and CEPs'

Many people confuse 'Jobs and Needs' with 'Jobs and CEPs,' so I will add a supplementary note here.

Jobs Theory is a way of thinking that views customers not by their attributes, but as 'tasks they want to make progress on.' Its origins lie in a 1960 paper by Theodore Levitt, which was later developed by Clayton Christensen and others, and widely systematized in their 2016 book, 'Competing Against Luck.' Today, it is one of the representative practical frameworks used for new business development, product design, and appeal design.

In the context of this book, a job is the actual task one wants to solve that arises when a consumer feels, 'I want to move this situation forward.' A job represents the 'content of the task'—what one wants to achieve. On the other hand, needs are the conditions or desired states one seeks, such as 'I want it to be like this' or 'I want to satisfy at least this much,' when carrying out that job. In other words, a job is 'what I want to move forward,' while a need is 'what I want to satisfy in order to do so.'.

For example, let's think about 'I want to tidy up my room.' In this case, the job is 'I want to tidy up the room and return it to an orderly state.' Meanwhile, in the process of carrying out that job, needs arise such as 'I want to finish in a short time,' 'I want to reduce the effort,' 'I want it to look clean,' or 'I want to make it harder to get messy later.' In short, a job is the task itself, and a need is the condition one seeks in the means to solve that task.

What is important here is that jobs also have varying degrees of intensity. Jobs do not exist simply as 'present or absent'; they have an intensity—'how strongly do I want to move this task forward?' For example, even with the same job of 'I want to tidy up my room,' a weak job might be 'It's a little messy and bothers me, but it's not a problem yet.' A medium-intensity job might be 'I'm starting to feel inconvenienced or stressed because it's not tidy, and I want to do something about it soon.' A strong job might be 'I'm in trouble if it stays like this; I want to tidy it up right now.' In other words, jobs have shades of intensity, and depending on that strength, how much priority is given to them changes.

On the other hand, purpose CEPs are the triggers that bring that job to the forefront and lead to action to 'solve it now'. They represent the 'starting point' of when and in what situation that task begins to move.

Using 'I want to tidy up my room' as an example again, the job is the task itself: 'I want to tidy up the room and return it to an orderly state.' However, this job does not always turn into action. There are moments when the job comes to the forefront and action begins. Those are purpose CEPs. For example, in situations like the following:

• A guest is coming over suddenly, and I realized the room is in a state I'd be embarrassed for them to see.

• I had some free time over the weekend and felt, 'I can do it now.'

• I couldn't find something I was looking for and realized the mess was the cause.

• I became concerned about the background, such as when taking a photo or having an online meeting.

• I hit my little toe on something on the floor, was in agony, and decided I'd reached my limit.

What I want to clarify here is that the intensity of a job and the intensity of purpose CEPs are similar but different. The intensity of a job is the degree of 'how strongly do I want to move this task forward?' On the other hand, the intensity of purpose CEPs is the degree of 'how easily is that task likely to actually start moving?' For example, even if the job of 'I want to tidy up my room' is quite strong, there are times when you don't have the time to take action. Conversely, even if the job itself isn't that strong, action can start all at once when a strong purpose CEP occurs, such as 'a guest is coming over suddenly.' In other words, a job is the strength of the task itself, and purpose CEPs are the strength of the trigger that activates that task.

Even for the same job, there can be multiple purpose CEPs. And if the purpose CEP changes, the solution that comes to mind—that is, the category—also changes. If a guest is the entry point, 'means to tidy up in a short time' are likely to come to mind; if a lost item is the entry point, 'storage or organization means' are likely to come to mind; and if having free time is the entry point, 'means to tidy up everything at once' are likely to come to mind, and so on.

In short, a job is 'what I want to move forward,' a need is 'what I want to satisfy for that,' and a purpose CEP is 'when it starts moving.' A job is the content of the task, a need is the condition for solving that task, and a purpose CEP is the trigger that activates that task. By grasping these separately, designing entry points and recall becomes significantly easier.

Note that a little caution is needed regarding 'needs' as used in this article. In general, in the context of Jobs Theory, 'needs' often refers broadly to the conditions or desired states that a consumer wants to satisfy when moving a job forward. For example, for the job of 'I want to tidy up my room,' things like 'I want to finish in a short time,' 'I want to reduce the effort,' and 'I want it to look clean' fall under this. This is the general requirements for moving a task forward and is not yet limited to a 'specific purchasing situation.'

On the other hand, 'need conditions' as used in this book is a term used as part of purchase CEPs. In other words, it refers to the selection criteria that arise to narrow down candidate brands—such as 'this is a must' or 'I want it to be like this'—in a situation where the category or purchasing situation has already been determined to some extent.

In other words, needs in the job context is a concept that broadly captures the conditions for moving a task forward, while need conditions in purchase CEPs is a concept narrowed down to 'conditions that influence brand selection at the point of purchase' among those..

For example, for the job of 'I want to tidy up my room,' 'I want to finish in a short time' and 'I want to reduce the effort' are needs in a broad sense. However, as a result, when the category is determined as 'I'll buy storage supplies' or 'I'll buy cleaning goods,' and you enter the actual purchase, need conditions such as 'I want something easy to use,' 'I want something with strong effectiveness,' or 'I want something inexpensive' arise, and candidate brands are narrowed down.

In short, needs in the job context are higher-level requirements, and need conditions in purchase CEPs can be understood as those requirements 'concretized as conditions for brand selection when entering a purchasing situation.' It is good to think of it this way.

To summarize, the terminology system of this chapter is as follows.

• Job: A task you want to move forward

• Needs: Conditions you want to satisfy to move that task forward

• Purpose CEPs: The trigger that sets that task in motion

• Need Conditions: Conditions that influence brand selection at the point of purchase

7. Inter-category tournaments and brand recall at the initial stage

The "Top-of-Mind Map" showed that in the consumer's mind, the basic flow proceeds as follows: Purpose CEPs → Category Recall → Purchase CEPs → Consideration Set/Top-of-Mind → Purchase. While this flow is a "basic form simplified into a single line for easy explanation," in actual purchasing, it is not necessarily the case that only one category lights up the moment Purpose CEPs are triggered.

In the consumer's mind, multiple problem-solving methods are often considered as candidates simultaneously.For example, suppose the Purpose CEP "I've lost focus due to overtime. I want to push through a bit more" occurs. At this time, what mainly happens is first, the generation of candidate solutions. Eating something sweet. Drinking coffee. Drinking an energy drink. Using eye drops. Washing your face. Taking a walk. These multiple methods arise simultaneously. Here, the competition between solutions is happening before the brand competition.

At this stage, consumers are not just abstractly thinking about solutions. In reality, they are considering candidates in fairly rough units, including representative or standard brands associated with each category. For example, the moment they think of "something sweet," not only types like chocolate or cookies, but even standard brands (e.g., KitKat) may vaguely come to mind. This is the "initial stage brand recall" defined in the previous section.

After that, a narrowing down of which solution to adopt occurs in the consumer's mind. This narrowing down is determined less by logical comparison and more by simple rules based on System 1 (fast thinking). Priority is given to solutions based on criteria such as: Can I do it right away? Is it easy? Does it work immediately? Does it cost much? Is it unlikely to fail? Is it something I always do? Does it suit me?

Suppose "something sweet" wins here. Then, a tournament begins to decide which sub-category to choose within "something sweet." Is it chocolate, cookies, gummies, ice cream, or dorayaki?

If chocolate wins, only then does the competition begin to decide which chocolate (brand) to choose. This is where the candidate group, specifically formed under Purchase CEPs—the consideration set—emerges (all of this happens unconsciously in the mind within a few seconds. The brain is amazing, isn't it?).

The important point is that the consideration set as referred to in this article, in principle, refers to the "group of brand candidates that specifically emerge under Purchase CEPs after the category has been determined to some extent.". Therefore, the inter-category tournament can be said to be a preliminary selection that precedes the consideration set. Before entering the brand tournament, there is actually an inter-category tournament of solutions.

Grasping this phenomenon has two practical implications. First, the target of CEP design is not just the "entrance to your own category.". The entrance often spans across benefit competition.When a consumer processes that need, you must look at whether your category can win in the first place—that is, whether it can win the inter-category tournament. If you don't look at this and only polish the "entrance within your own category," it is meaningless if the category doesn't light up in the first place.

Second, physical availability affects "which solution wins" even before brand competition. Even if something sweet is good, if it is not immediately available, the consumer will drift to another method that can be completed at hand. Ease of purchase moves not only the recovery of the purchase but also the adoption probability of the solution itself.

If you keep this organization in mind, the examples of beer, hair dryers, and how to spend summer vacation that appear later will also be easier to read. In any example, the consumer is not looking at only one category from the beginning. This is because they roughly decide which of multiple solutions to adopt, and then enter the brand competition under Purchase CEPs.

8. Concrete image of the "Top-of-Mind Map"

Here, to make the flow of the "Top-of-Mind Map" easier to visualize, I will show three concrete examples. In each case, category recall occurs from Purpose CEPs, passes through an inter-category tournament if necessary, candidates are narrowed down by Purchase CEPs, and a consideration set and top-of-mind are formed. What is important here is that the more the scene or condition triggered by Purchase CEPs is connected to brand associations, the higher the recall ranking rises, pushing it to the top-of-mind. And you should be able to confirm the flow where that connection is reinforced and fixed by RTB.

Example of canned beer

(In this example, we will confirm that for convenience goods, the process from recall to purchase appears short)

You open the refrigerator and realize you are running low on canned beer. You have plans to drink at home over the weekend. You want to have some ready for guests coming tomorrow. This situation represents the purpose CEPs, where the errand of "needing beer" arises. Consequently, the category of "buying canned beer" comes to mind as a solution.

In categories close to convenience goods, initial brand recall occurs quite quickly at this stage. This is because the moment you think "I need to restock beer," your "usual brand" often comes to mind almost simultaneously.

Once you enter the purchasing phase, the purchase CEPs are activated. First, the occasion conditions are set, such as "I need it by tonight," "I'll buy it in bulk while I'm out shopping," or "I need to buy it early considering the time it takes to chill." Then, the needs conditions come to the forefront, such as "I don't want to fail with my usual taste," "I want something that goes well with a meal," or "I want something safe that guests will accept."

At this point, the brand associations that are strongly connected to the situation and conditions rise to the top of the recall set. For example, for "I don't want to fail," associations like "the usual peace of mind" or "a reliable staple" are effective. For "guests," associations like "accepted by everyone" or "not too eccentric" work well. For "goes well with a meal," associations like "compatibility as a mealtime drink" or "a crisp aftertaste" are effective.

Then, when these associations are reinforced in a way that the consumer can believe, rather than just being an impression, the connection to the situation and conditions is solidified. For example, "No. 1 in sales," "shipped directly from the factory," or "winner of an international award" become the RTBs (Reasons to Believe).

In this way, the recall set is narrowed down to a few brands, and the top-of-mind brand is the one that comes to mind first among them. In categories closer to habitual purchasing, the process from purchase CEPs to the recall set and top-of-mind awareness is shortened, and often the top-of-mind brand is directly linked to the purchase. However, when situations or conditions change, such as with guests or meals, the top-of-mind brand can change. That is precisely why it is meaningful to design which situation, which condition, and which association you will win with, and to solidify it with RTBs.

Example of a Hair Dryer

(In this example, we will confirm that the ranking of the recall set changes based on needs conditions.)

Even though you are careful with treatments and hair oils, your hair hasn't been manageable lately. You feel that the way you dry your hair or the hair dryer itself might be affecting it, and the thought of replacing it crosses your mind. This is the purpose CEPs, where the errand of "needing a means to style my hair" arises.

The solutions that come to the consumer's mind here are not limited to one. Reviewing hair oil. Changing treatments. Consulting a hair salon. Replacing the hair dryer. A cross-category tournament occurs here. Among these, when additional circumstances overlap, such as "I've been using my current hair dryer for a long time" or "I want to use the latest one," the choice leans toward the "changing the hair dryer" category.

However, in categories like home appliances, it doesn't end there. Once you enter the purchasing phase, purchase CEPs are activated. However, in categories like hair dryers, unless there are special circumstances—such as wanting to take it on a trip next month or needing one today due to a sudden breakdown—strong occasion conditions do not arise very often. In many cases, consumers proceed with comparison and consideration centered on needs conditions, such as "what do I want to satisfy?" or "what can't I compromise on?" (In some product categories, like hair dryers, there are almost no occasion conditions, and "purchase CEPs ≈ needs conditions" is not uncommon).

Therefore, for hair dryers, needs conditions such as "I want to shorten drying time," "I want to make my hair more manageable," "I want to add shine to my hair," or "I want a stylish design" tend to be the main axes for narrowing down candidate brands.

At this time, the stronger the brand association linked to these conditions, the higher it rises in the recall set. And the more that reason is reinforced by RTBs, the more strongly the connection to the conditions is fixed.

In this way, the recall set is narrowed down to a few brands, and the top-of-mind brand is the one that comes to mind first among them. Even in categories like home appliances where comparison and consideration take a long time, the order of the recall set actually changes significantly depending on "what you felt you couldn't compromise on." This tendency is particularly strong in categories like hair dryers, which are easily chosen based on needs conditions. Winning top-of-mind awareness is nothing less than designing an association that makes the consumer naturally think "this brand is the most appropriate" for the needs conditions they value, reinforcing it with RTBs, and repeatedly solidifying it.

Example of How to Spend Summer Vacation

(In this example, we will confirm that there is a cross-category tournament before brand competition.)

As summer vacation approaches, you start thinking about what to do with your children. This is a weak purpose CEPs. Furthermore, when it becomes necessary to coordinate family wishes and schedules, or when you start to feel anxious as deadlines for reservations and preparations become visible, the entry point becomes stronger.

When purpose CEPs occur, multiple options for how to spend time arise as solutions. Travel, theme parks, experiential leisure, camping, etc. Since categories arise simultaneously here, a cross-category tournament begins in the consumer's mind: "which category should I use to solve this?" While looking at costs, travel, congestion, family preferences, etc., the category is narrowed down to "let's go with camping this time."

Next, when you enter the purchasing phase, purchase CEPs are activated. First, the occasion conditions are set, such as "summer vacation is approaching, and I need to secure a place where reservations are possible quickly," "I want to secure it before the weekend schedule fills up," or "I want to decide at the last minute after checking the weather forecast." Then, the needs conditions arise, such as "close by," "want to keep costs down," "less likely to be crowded," "children can enjoy it," or "facilities are well-equipped," which are non-negotiable conditions.

Here, brand associations connected to the situation and conditions come into play. Campsites and facilities also have a "character." For "children can enjoy it," associations like "plenty of activities" or "safety is considered" work. For "facilities are well-equipped," associations like "clean" or "no trouble even for beginners" work. For "less likely to be crowded," associations like "large plots" or "can spend time quietly" work. Facilities with stronger associations like these rise to the top of the recall set.

Furthermore, the more an association is reinforced by RTBs, the more fixed the connection to a situation or condition becomes. Actual reviews, photos, the volume of information on booking sites, the reputation of staff support, the number of repeaters, and specific facility information all function as RTBs. As a result, the consideration set narrows down to a few items, such as campsites A, B, and C, and the top-of-mind brand becomes the candidate that comes to mind first among them. The decision is made early—'If it meets the conditions, then it's A this time'—and it leads directly to a booking.

This example shows that the map of top-of-mind awareness applies to decision-making for leisure and facility selection using the same structure as it does for small purchases like consumer goods. Connect associations with situations and conditions, reinforce them with RTBs, and aim for the top of the consideration set. This is what it means to 'capture top-of-mind awareness'.

9. In habitual purchasing, two brand recalls appear to overlap

In this article, we categorize brand recall into 'initial brand recall' that occurs near the target CEPs and 'purchase-phase brand recall' that occurs at the point of purchase CEPs.

However, in habitual purchasing (typically represented by daily shopping at supermarkets or convenience stores, or 'repurchasing' on e-commerce), these two often overlap and are observed as a continuous phenomenon. In the consumer's mind, the moment the target CEPs are triggered, the top-of-mind brand is immediately recalled, and it appears as if they go straight to purchase. However, this does not mean the middle part has disappeared. It simply means the purchase CEPs have become fixed and the consideration set has been minimized.

For example, when a target CEP such as 'running out of stock' or 'the supply is low and about to run out' (for household coffee beans or beer) occurs, the action of 'replenishing' is triggered in the consumer's mind. At that moment, need conditions such as 'I want to get it done easily without hassle,' 'I don't want to make a mistake,' 'my family won't complain,' and 'I want to get it immediately,' as well as occasion conditions like 'regular replenishment' or 'my usual shopping route,' are operating without being verbalized. However, because they are almost the same every time, they do not take the form of a comparative evaluation. As a result, there is only one item in the consideration set, and top-of-mind awareness and purchase become almost synonymous.

The important point is that the expression 'replenishing my usual beer' is actually stating the category and the brand at the same time. Strictly speaking, the category recall is 'replenishing beer,' followed by a minimal consideration set where 'only my usual brand comes to mind,' and the top-of-mind brand is immediately decided as that brand. However, in the consumer's mind, these two stages appear to overlap almost entirely. That is why in habitual purchasing, it appears as a direct jump from 'target CEPs to top-of-mind awareness'.

For this reason, in addition to the basic flow, this article explicitly states that an 'abbreviated form' is established in habitual purchasing. The abbreviated form is a state where purchase CEPs are fixed and the consideration set is minimized, resulting in the initial brand recall and the purchase-phase brand recall almost overlapping, and the top-of-mind brand being automatically selected.

However, this phenomenon is not a special theory limited to habitual purchasing. Habitual purchasing is merely the most extreme and easy-to-understand example. In convenience goods or categories where the same purchasing context is repeated, there is a characteristic that initial brand recall and purchase-phase brand recall tend to overlap, to varying degrees. It is best to understand habitual purchasing as a state where that overlap has progressed to the extreme, resulting in almost automatic selection.

10. Design CEPs by 'Width x Depth'

As the concept of CEPs spreads in the field, 'misunderstandings of what should be done' are beginning to increase. Should we increase the number of entry points (CEPs), or should we improve the positioning at each entry point, i.e., the recall ranking? Misinterpreting this distinction can lead to major strategic errors and waste a lot of time and money, so caution is required.

• The problem of CEP 'width' (not enough entry points)

• The problem of CEP 'depth' (low recall ranking at each entry point / no competitive advantage)

The entry points, or the situations themselves, almost always already exist on the consumer's side. What a brand can do is broaden the interpretation of those situations—that is, what kind of problem they are treated as—and increase the connections between the situation and the category/brand.No brand demonstrates this 'width x depth' as clearly as Pocari Sweat.

At the time of its launch, Pocari Sweat was a brand that was triggered by a relatively narrow entry point: 'a sports drink to drink after sports or club activities.' Therefore, Otsuka Pharmaceutical continued its efforts to expand the entry points themselves through long-term marketing communication. They broadened the understanding of life challenges, not just during sports, but also that 'you are sweating in the bath,' 'you are sweating while sleeping,' 'you are sweating when you have a fever,' and 'dehydration progresses when drinking alcohol.' They permeated the perception that 'your body lacks water not only after sports, but also after bathing, before and after sleep, when you have a fever, and after drinking alcohol' -> 'you should drink Pocari Sweat.' As a result, CEPs have expanded beyond sports to include heatstroke prevention, after bathing, when having a cold, after drinking alcohol, etc. This is truly an expansion of 'width'.

However, the important thing is that they did not stop at just increasing the entry points. Where Pocari Sweat is particularly strong is in its deep recall at the entry point of 'drinking when you want to restore a healthy state.' In other words, after expanding the width, it is deeply embedded in specific entry points. This is 'depth'. Even if the width increases, if the recall ranking at each entry point is low, it becomes a state of 'the entry point exists, but it is not remembered.' Pocari Sweat is strong because both the wheels of width and depth are turning.

Here, let's also grasp the relationship with the inter-category tournament. Inter-category competition—the battle of 'which solution will be chosen'—is difficult for a single company to push forward alone. Even if a company invests and increases the adoption probability of the entire category, the results will not belong to that company alone. The benefits are widely distributed across the entire category, and it is a situation where the top brands with strong recall and large market share are particularly likely to recover the investment. In other words, even if a challenger or follower pushes up the entire category on their own, that investment will ultimately become a tailwind for the top brands.

The company with the number one market share can easily make market expansion investments that increase inter-category competitiveness, and there is significant meaning in actually waging that battle. This is because they are in the best position to recover the fruits when the entire category grows. On the other hand, what companies with a market share of second place or lower should prioritize is not making the category itself win, but increasing the probability that their company will be chosen after the category is selected. In other words, the main battlefield is not 'target CEPs -> category recall,' but the subsequent 'purchase CEPs'.

Specifically, first, enter the consideration set for many purchase CEPs and increase the number of entry points where you are remembered. Then, increase your recall ranking in occasion conditions or need conditions where your company is likely to win, and build up a state where you are the top-of-mind brand, or at least in the top of the consideration set.

Many companies and brands are fighting from a position of second place or lower, rather than being the market leader. That is precisely why, in practice, a strategy to increase the win rate at the point of purchase after the category has been chosen is more important than a strategy to grow the entire category. Companies in second place or lower in the market should not spread their resources thinly across the battle to expand category adoption, but should instead concentrate their resources on the purchase CEPs where they can win.

11. What Determines the Depth of Recall

So, which entry point, which benefit, and which brand association should be linked to increase the recall ranking and achieve top-of-mind awareness? Under resource constraints, it is more rational to choose entry points where you can win and fix your associations there, rather than trying to win at every entry point. This is because the resources a company can use are finite.

The depth of recall, or recall ranking, is determined by "how strongly the brand's association is connected to the entry point." And to strongly reinforce that association and keep it unshakable, RTBs (Reasons to Believe) are necessary. To put it more deeply, recall ranking is determined by whether or not the brand is recalled as the 'brand most likely to provide the greatest benefit at this entry point' the moment the entry point is triggered.

First, let's re-examine recall ranking as "connection strength with the entry point." The moment the ranking is decided in the consumer's mind is the entry point of the buying situation, that is, the moment the purchase CEPs are triggered. Here, "in what situation to buy" is first determined by occasion conditions, and then "what cannot be compromised" and "what is prioritized" are activated as need conditions. Boosting recall ranking means creating a state where your brand association comes to mind first and most naturally in the consumer's mind the moment these are triggered. In other words, the stronger the connection to the entry point, the easier it is to become the top-of-mind brand.

However, there is one major point of caution here. Many marketers tend to replace "going for top-of-mind awareness" with "going for category top-of-mind awareness" (for example, "XX when you think of beer" or "XX when you think of toothpaste"). Of course, it is undoubtedly strong if you can achieve that. But that is the stronghold of the category share leader brand. Even if the possibility of a challenger or follower company or brand in second place or lower in the market capturing the top-of-mind position is not zero, it must be said that the difficulty level is extremely high.

Therefore, in this article, we recommend that challengers and followers do not try to take "category top-of-mind awareness" head-on, but rather win in limited situations and conditions such as specific occasion conditions or need conditions, enter the consideration set, and then raise it to top-of-mind.

Let's look at an example of the toothpaste category from the data of the "Top-of-Mind Awareness Survey 2025" conducted by our company, Tribal Media House.

First, when listing the values that consumers seek in toothpaste in the toothpaste category, "cavity prevention" comes to the top. As Figure F shows, cavity prevention is the largest at 37.6%, followed by periodontal disease prevention at 34.8%, and bad breath prevention at 28.8%. In other words, the largest entry point in the toothpaste category is (naturally) "cavity prevention."

Next, looking at the top-of-mind ranking for the entire toothpaste category, "Lion Clinica Toothpaste" has achieved the number one spot for top-of-mind awareness (Clinica is the No. 1 brand in the toothpaste category share).

Furthermore, the top-of-mind awareness for "when preventing cavities," which is the greatest need in purchase CEPs, is also "Lion Clinica Toothpaste" at number one, which is the same result as the category top-of-mind awareness.

What can be read here is that the category top-of-mind awareness, that is, the main battlefield, strongly overlaps with the "top-of-mind awareness of the greatest need condition in purchase CEPs." Therefore, for a challenger or follower in second place or lower in the market to try to take "category top-of-mind awareness" head-on means to collide head-on with the strongest brand at the entry point of the greatest need. It is natural that it is difficult to win.

However, the story changes when you switch the need condition. In the need condition of "when caring for sensitive teeth," "Haleon Sensodyne" is the overwhelming number one, with a 295-point lead over the second-place "Lion Clinica Toothpaste."

This is important.

Sensodyne does not hold the absolute number one spot in the entire toothpaste category. Nevertheless, it has achieved top-of-mind awareness in the specific need condition of "sensitive teeth" and has gained strong recall. The data also shows that by gaining a position in the specific need of "sensitive teeth" rather than the greatest need of "cavity prevention," it is ranked second in the top-of-mind awareness for the toothpaste category. In other words, when you change the entry point, the opponent you compete against changes. This is a realistic top-of-mind strategy for challengers and followers in second place or lower in the market. In short, shift the strategy from "XX when you think of toothpaste" to "XX when you think of [specific] toothpaste."

However, naturally, you cannot win just by "deciding on an entry point." When matched at the entry point, you need to remain as a candidate as a "brand suitable for that entry point." What should be grasped here first is the point that what is matched at the entry point is not the brand name itself, but the "benefit you want to obtain at this entry point." Consumers do not compare and consider multiple brands on an equal footing the moment the entry point opens, but rather intuitively match "which one is most likely to provide the benefit at this entry point." That is why winning at the entry point means making the connection between the benefit at the targeted entry point and your own brand the strongest..

Figure J further supports this. The three brands, Sensodyne, NONIO, and Ora2, have each firmly established an image tied to specific need conditions: "Sensodyne = sensitive teeth care," "NONIO = bad breath prevention," and "Ora2 = whitening effect." If you can reliably acquire the relevant image for a targeted need, you can achieve recall. firmly acquired an image tied to specific need conditions. If you can reliably acquire the relevant image for a targeted need, you can achieve recall. Winning at the entry point is synonymous with strongly connecting the entry point to brand associations.

In short, what determines the depth of recall is not abstract favorability or atmosphere, but the connection strength between the entry point and brand associations.

Figure K schematically illustrates this relationship. When an entry point is triggered, which brand is easily recalled in the consumer's mind is determined not by the number of associations the brand has, but by how strongly meaningful associations are linked to that entry point and, furthermore, reinforced by RTBs. Brand recall is a phenomenon created by the connection between the entry point and brand associations, and it is best to view RTBs as a mechanism that strengthens that connection and stabilizes recall ranking.

12. RTBs that reinforce brand associations

Brand associations do not become strong just by "saying them." RTBs are always necessary for that. Before we get into the discussion of RTBs, let's first align on the perspective from which it is best to organize brand associations. A useful auxiliary line for capturing strengths is what we will conveniently call POX here.

POX refers to a way of organizing a brand's strengths and weaknesses using three elements: POP, POD, and POF.

POP (Point of Parity) is the minimum condition for remaining a candidate in that category. In other words, it is a "condition that must not be missed first." For example, for a hair dryer, conditions like "dries properly," "is not dangerous," and "has a certain level of quality" fall under this. You cannot sell with just POP, but if you lack POP, you cannot remain a candidate.

POD (Point of Difference) is a point of differentiation that functions as a reason to be chosen over competitors. For example, for a hair dryer, associations like "high airflow/fast drying," "hair is easy to manage," and "gives hair shine" can be PODs. When consumers think about "what they cannot miss" at the point of purchase, the difference that emerges most strongly linked to that condition pushes up the recall ranking.

POF (Point of Failure) is a factor that causes a brand to drop out of consideration, or a source of anxiety. For example, for a hair dryer, elements like "too expensive," "heavy," "seems easy to break," and "seems like it will damage hair" fall under this. If a company is weak in an area that overlaps with customer needs, leaving it unaddressed will cause the brand to drop out of consideration.

Translating these three into the context of this book, POP is the "condition for remaining in the recall set," POD is the "difference that pushes it to top-of-mind," and POF is the "factor for dropping out of the recall or consideration set". In other words, it is best to view POX as an auxiliary line for determining which brand associations should be met as minimum conditions, which should be strengthened as reasons for being chosen, and which should be eliminated as sources of anxiety.

For example, in the case of toothpaste for sensitive teeth care. POP is "being able to brush properly as toothpaste." If this is missing, you won't even remain a candidate. POD is the difference of "being strong against sensitive teeth," and we confirmed earlier that Sensodyne is strong here. POF is a source of anxiety such as "the effect seems weak," "the price is too high," or "it seems difficult to keep using for a long time." In practice, by looking at these three separately, it becomes clear "what to prepare to meet minimum conditions," "what to strengthen as a difference," and "where to eliminate factors for dropping out of consideration."

And this is where RTBs come into play. RTBs are the grounds that make consumers believe "that brand association or benefit seems true" and "this brand will actually fulfill it." Associations without RTBs tend to remain just "seem good" even if you increase the number of contacts. Because competitors can also talk about the same associations, recall is split the moment the entry point is triggered, and the ranking does not rise as expected. On the other hand, associations with RTBs are fixed in memory as "that brand's characteristic" the more they are contacted, and the speed of activation and the degree of conviction at the moment the entry point is triggered increase. As a result, it pushes up the ranking within the recall set.

One thing I want you to be careful about is that the brand associations that should be strengthened do not just have to correspond to purchase CEPs. In addition to "corresponding to purchase CEPs," the condition is "being able to rely on the company's own unique RTBs." In other words, associations that hit the entry point but cannot be supported by RTBs cannot create depth. Conversely, if you narrow down to associations that can be supported by RTBs and connect them strongly to the entry point, the recall ranking will be easier to raise.

By following this order, you can reduce the wavering often seen in the field, such as "adding words that seem to hit" or "listing various benefits." This is because the entry point, associations, and the company's own unique RTBs are connected in a single line. It might be easier to understand if you organize it as: POP remains in the candidate set, POD is chosen, POF is eliminated, and RTBs support the whole thing.

Also, for convenience, it is easier to understand if RTBs are organized into two types.

One is Performance RTB. It is the grounds that make people believe "it really works" and "it can really be solved." Ingredients, mechanisms, tests, data, expert recommendations, patents, etc., fall under this. For example, for the association of "can be made quickly," "three minutes in the microwave" and "pre-cut, pre-seasoned, and just heat" are Performance RTBs.

Another is Trust RTB (Reason to Believe). This is the basis for making people believe that a product "won't fail" or is "safe." This includes long history, market share, status as a standard, corporate prestige, track record, and customer base. For example, for the association of "being safe," "supervised by doctors," "many years of experience," and "large number of users" act as Trust RTBs.

What is important is that the association corresponding to the entry point and the RTB supporting that association are connected in a single line. Only when this single line is formed does the depth of recall turn into a sustainable strength. POP is the foundation for remaining as a candidate, POD is the differentiator that pushes up top-of-mind awareness, and POF is the anxiety factor that leads to being dropped from consideration. And RTB plays the role of making those three, especially POP and POD, believable as "authentic," and relatively weakening POF. Therefore, in practice for capturing top-of-mind awareness, you must treat the entry point, brand association, POX, and RTB not as separate entities, but as a single design.

13. How to capture top-of-mind awareness differs between convenience goods and shopping/specialty goods

So far, I have explained that the design of top-of-mind awareness can be organized into a single line: "Purpose CEPs → Category Recall → Purchase CEPs → Consideration Set/Top-of-Mind Awareness → Purchase." However, not all categories move along this line at the same speed. What is particularly important is that the way consideration sets and top-of-mind awareness are created, and how victory or defeat is determined, differs significantly between convenience goods and shopping/specialty goods.

For convenience goods, "Purpose CEPs → Consideration Set" happens in an instant (this is a review of what was explained earlier)

Purchasing convenience goods is super fast. The moment a consumer encounters purpose CEPs such as running out of stock or daily errands, the process is shortened to the point where category consideration and the verbalization of purchase CEPs barely occur; the consideration set is formed in an instant, and it almost always leads directly to a purchase. The competition here is not deep comparative consideration, but rather resembles a game of musical chairs. First, being a candidate that can sit in a chair—that is, being in the consideration set—is the minimum requirement.

This is because with convenience goods, a certain amount of variety seeking occurs among multiple brands in the top consideration set. Even while consumers say, "I always buy the same thing," they are actually repeating, "I buy from roughly this selection." Therefore, if you are in the consideration set, you can sit in a chair with a certain probability (you will be bought once every few times).

However, to win the game of musical chairs with a high probability, just being near a chair is not enough. It is important to increase the probability of having a reserved seat, that is, to secure the top-of-mind position. This is because the top-of-mind brand is more likely to be chosen the smaller the consideration set is, and this tendency is stronger the faster the shopping process is.

However, the royal road to increasing sales for convenience goods lies in "increasing the number of recalled entry points and continuing to enter the consideration set through multiple purpose CEPs" before "capturing top-of-mind awareness at a specific entry point." In convenience goods, there are as many chairs as there are entry points. Increasing the probability of being near a chair, that is, increasing the entry points that lead to the consideration set, pushes up penetration and creates the base number of people who will buy.

On top of that, the correct understanding is to position top-of-mind awareness as a lever to increase the win rate for each entry point. After creating a state where you enter the consideration set at many entry points and can sit in a chair with a certain probability, you aim to capture top-of-mind awareness at particularly important entry points. By doing this, even amidst variety seeking, the probability of your company being chosen for main use increases, and you can reduce missed opportunities.

Furthermore, for challengers and followers with a market share of 2nd place or lower, a more realistic approach is to take it one step further from here. In other words, instead of trying to expand all entry points, choose occasion conditions or need conditions where you can win, and aim to capture top-of-mind awareness in those situations/conditions (the earlier example of Sensodyne). Instead of a head-on collision at the largest entry point where top brands are strong, aim at situations/conditions where your company can have an advantage in benefits and RTB, and increase the probability of a reserved seat where "if it's this entry point, it's this brand."

Shopping/specialty goods have "a preliminary round before the main battle"

On the other hand, shopping and specialty goods differ in both the speed and distance of purchase. After purpose CEPs occur, category recall is triggered, purchase CEPs are determined, a consideration set and top-of-mind awareness are formed, and then information search and careful comparative consideration begin, leading to a purchase. In this category, it is not often that brand recall at the initial stage leads directly to a purchase. That is precisely why brand recall at the purchase phase becomes more important.

Note that in this type of category, "brands that were not in the consideration set flow in as candidates later during the comparison phase (a cut-in occurs)" happens. For example, if you think about buying a hair dryer and are initially comparing brands mainly based on top-of-mind and second-recall brands on Amazon, you might encounter aided recall triggered by sponsored product ads, search results, price affordability, coupons, reviews, delivery speed, etc., thinking, "Oh, come to think of it, there was this brand too," and it enters the comparison arena as a new candidate.

However, even if late entry (cut-in) occurs during the comparison phase, it remains true that brands that were in the consideration set from the beginning and have captured top-of-mind awareness are still at an advantage (data proves that the purchase rate by recall rank for shopping/specialty goods is overwhelmingly higher for the top-of-mind brand. The purchase rate drops significantly from top-of-mind to second-recall). For high-involvement products or comparison products, the latter half of ZMOT (Zero Moment of Truth), physical availability, price, reviews, inventory, delivery, and how they appear in comparison tables cause candidates to increase or decrease. Therefore, in practice, while making the acquisition of top-of-mind awareness the main battlefield, you must also consider the design of the final consideration stage so as not to lose to brands that entered late during the comparison phase.

What must not be misunderstood here is that for shopping/specialty goods, it is not the case that "comparative consideration is everything." It is more reasonable to think that by the time the consumer enters the main battle of comparative consideration, they have already crossed the starting line, and most of the victory or defeat has already been decided before entering the main battle.

[Figure Note] The person icons in the figure do not represent the consumers themselves, but schematically represent the brand recall rank in the consumer's mind. The higher the recall rank in the "latent needs period / prospective customer period (preliminary round)" on the left, the easier it is to start from an advantageous position at the start of comparative consideration in the "manifest needs period / immediate customer period (main battle)" on the right.

The key here is the length of the "prospective customer period." For shopping/specialty goods, there is almost no time when consumers are thinking about the category on a daily basis. However, the timing for replacement will definitely come eventually. For example, in the case of air conditioners, the average replacement period is said to be about 13 years (according to Mr. Yoshitake Katayama, General Manager of Advertising and Public Relations at Daikin Industries).

In other words, for 13 years, consumers basically live their lives without ever thinking about air conditioners. However, this period is the preliminary round. The preliminary round is a time when consumers have no immediate intention to buy, but through marketing communication, the connection between entry points and brand associations is gradually built up, and their recall ranking slowly shifts.

If you raise your ranking during the preliminary round, your starting line for the main event will be pushed forward. The moment strong objective CEPs like a breakdown or moving occur, it may look like consumers are all starting to run at once, but in reality, they do not all start from the same position. Brands that were ranked higher in the preliminary round can start the main event from an advantageous position. Even if they encounter negative reviews during the comparison process, the emotional heuristic works in favor of the top-of-mind brand, making it harder for their momentum to slow down. As a result, the probability of them crossing the finish line (getting purchased) increases.

14. Summary

In this article, I have explained the OS for decoupling top-of-mind awareness from "results" or "luck" and re-conceptualizing it as a designable target. The basic form of the top-of-mind awareness map is

Objective CEPs → Category Recall → Purchase CEPs → Consideration Set → Top-of-Mind Awareness → Purchase.

However, in reality, an inter-category tournament sometimes occurs before this basic form. Or rather, in most cases, inter-category competition occurs before the consideration set competition within a specific category.

Also, brand recall is not a single-stage phenomenon; it occurs in two stages: brand recall at the initial stage and brand recall at the purchase stage. For strong brands or habitual purchases, these two almost overlap, making it look like a direct path from objective CEPs to top-of-mind awareness. However, this is a characteristic seen in general consumer goods or very strong brands, so it is not a position that every company can aim for. For challengers or followers with a market share of 2nd place or lower, I think the realistic choice is, like Sensodyne, first to raise the recall ranking in a specific segment (specific CEPs), and if possible, take the top-of-mind position. Once that is achieved, expand the territory to adjacent CEPs. strategy.

CEP design has width and depth. Width is how many entry points it is matched with, and depth is how reliably and how highly it is recalled at those entry points. In practice, it is necessary to identify, narrow down, and fix the entry points. And what determines the depth is the connection strength between the entry point and the brand association. Furthermore, RTB is necessary to ensure that the connection is not shaken. The entry point, association, and RTB must be connected in a single line. This is the condition for acquiring top-of-mind awareness.

What differs between convenience goods and shopping/specialty goods is not the OS itself. It is the difference in where parts are easily shortened and where they are explicitly manifested within the same OS. For convenience goods, it is important to widen the scope and increase the win rate at important entry points. For shopping/specialty goods, it is important to design associations and RTBs that can win at the purchase stage and secure an advantageous starting line before the main event.

Based on the above, I hope you can draw up your own (different from competitors) top-of-mind awareness strategy.

Thank you for reading until the end! (Great work!)

Recommended Reading

===

At Tribal Media House, we provide PMO support to formulate such effective CEP/CEPs (Category Entry Points) and top-of-mind awareness strategies, and accompany you through execution, effectiveness measurement, and improvement.

"Top-of-Mind Awareness Map" Lecture/In-house Training

We offer the content of this article as a lecture or in-house training service. If you want to create a common language within your company and accelerate this theme, please feel free to contact us. I say this myself, but the satisfaction level is super high. We will not betray your expectations.

Top-of-Mind Awareness Acquisition Workshop

We also offer workshop programs. If you want not just to listen, but to have participants use their own heads and hands to acquire practical skills! Or if you want to quickly create a team-consensus strategy direction that you can start working on from tomorrow! This is recommended.

Top-of-Mind Awareness Acquisition Strategy Consulting

For those who want to build a solid strategy after thoroughly researching the exploration and identification of CEP/CEPs (Category Entry Points) that your company should target, the competitive situation (ranking) of consideration sets and top-of-mind awareness, brand associations, POX (POP/POD), and the effectiveness of RTBs, we provide professional consulting services. We will work together to create a strategy that can be put into execution (without ending up as a pie in the sky) by involving other departments and superiors with different interests.

Strategy Consultant Recruitment | Tribal Media House

We are looking for strategy consultants to provide these professional services to clients alongside Ikeda. If you want to acquire high-level skills that cannot be replaced by AI and are committed to growing your clients' businesses, please contact us. Let's eliminate marketing failures from this world.

===

If you would like to learn more deeply about the contents of this article, we also recommend these books.

===

To contribute to the development of the marketing industry I love, I operate MARPS, where you can learn systematic marketing [for free]. You can take high-quality lectures that would cost 20,000 or 30,000 yen elsewhere for [free]. Many guest speakers. Over 100 past lectures. Over 8,500 members. 95.1% satisfaction rate. I hate to say it myself, but you're missing out if you don't take these courses.

===

Continue reading here! (Follow me♡)