Consumers are taking an ever-increasing interest in what they are putting their money towards, in all areas, but are also progressively more focused on what they are using on their bodies. As well as this, there are increasing regulations around commonly used on-packet claims such as “hypoallergenic and” “free from…”.

Challenges and process
During the process we were faced with a couple of complex challenges, the first being: how can we get to the heart of consumer needs?

By conducting a variety of in-depth user interviews, we were able to uncover what consumers look for in products (including must-haves and avoids), their knowledge of existing accreditations and their purchasing decision factors in general. In discussions with industry experts (from brand and marketing managers to dermatologists) we focussed on emerging trends and consumer demands.

From this wealth of information we were able to paint a picture of consumer landscape. We realised there was a lot of confusion about terms like “dermatologically tested” but this did not translate into a desire for allergen-free messaging. Instead, there was a greater demand for sustainable and natural products, with consumers seeing these a better stand-in for allergy-free claims. However, throughout all our interviews we found that people are overwhelmed by the amount of information they are faced with, and need something that will give them reassurance and certainty in what they buy. This was at the core of deciding the role the accreditation needed to play.

Insight
Ultimately, there was a gap in the market for a one-stop-shop accreditation that answers all key consumer needs; products that are good for the planet and for your body. This would help consumers navigate the products available to them, and empower them to purchase and explore new products responsibly. It would also allow large organisations to clearly communicate their sustainability credentials to their audiences in a clear and concise manner.