Recently, I discussed how respondents to the 2010 Big Broadcast Survey ranked the top 30 broadcast technology vendor brands by overall opinion, ranked globally and regionally.
Appearing in the top 30 of an overall opinion poll is obviously a good place for any vendor to be, but this only scratches the surface of how the market views a brand.
While indicative of the market’s view, these overall opinion rankings are presented as a snapshot in time. They also provide a somewhat one-sided view of how brands are regarded, because they take only positive perceptions into account. To get a better understanding of how broadcast technology vendor brands are perceived, it is necessary to look at both the positive and negative opinions of brands and to take into account how these opinions have changed over time.
One way to do this is to ask people who have an opinion of a brand how their opinion of that brand has changed over time, i.e., if it has improved, declined or stayed the same.
When you do this, you can get some interesting results. It turns out that some brands are more polarizing than others, with different respondents having very different opinions. Given these results, it is perhaps more useful to calculate the net change in overall opinion for each brand. In other words, the percentage of respondents who said a brand “got worse” is subtracted from the percentage of respondents who said their opinion of a brand had “gotten better” (ignoring the “stayed the same” number).
This takes into account both the positive and negative perceptions of brands, along with how these opinions have changed over time. It also presents a more balanced view of which brands are getting better and which are getting worse in the minds of market participants.
Interestingly, when these results are broken out regionally, a total of 65 broadcast technology vendor brands make the top 30 ranking in one or more categories, demonstrating the strong variation in opinion change based on geographic segmentation of respondents.
To read the full article, including a listing of the top 30 globally and regionally, click here.
