- a communicational diagnosis and design for the Evaluation unit-

IMPROVING AWARENESS

- a communicational diagnosis and design for the Evaluation unit-

SAID EL HAROUI University of Groningen Management and Organisation

Landleven 5

9747 AD GRONINGEN

email: s1271849@student.rug.nl

MANAGEMENT SUMMARY

This paper has dealt with the Evaluation unit, a company unit of the Unilever Research and Development section, focused on laundry detergents. The unit’s objective is to improve their target groups’ awareness of the information that the unit is able to provide.

At the moment, namely, the Evaluation unit managers feel that the visibility of the unit’s activities is quite low. This paper focuses on the role that communication could possibly play in improving the awareness of the Evaluation unit by informing people about the activities that the unit performs. In order to attain this, however, the unit first has to determine what information about which activities is actually required by these groups.

Secondly, the unit has to determine via which communication channels to disperse this information. Appropriate information dispersion is then supposed to lead to higher extents of awareness. Therefore, the following research question has been formulated:

What are the information requirements of the Evaluation unit’s target groups and in what way should the unit disperse its information in order to improve its awareness within the LFEGTC in Vlaardingen?

The nature of the described problem has much to with communication and attitudinal theory (e.g. McGuire 1985; Petty and Cacioppo, 1986; Ommen, Sterk, and van Kuppelenveld, 1990). These theories indicate how an actor could construct an effective communicational effort in order to attain higher extents of awareness.

Communication theory indicates that in order for a message to reach the target groups properly, four variables need to be addressed: the source, message, channel and the receiver.

In this regard the Evaluation unit represents the source. In order to develop an effective communicational effort, literature indicates that it is important for the source to be credible. Otherwise receivers will not accept the message and the information will not reach them as a consequence of that. Secondly, the message, which is basically the information that the unit wants to disperse, has to be sufficiently unique to go noticed as well as being able to provide sufficient associative potential to link up with target groups’

prior knowledge. Thirdly, the message has to be dispersed through the most appropriate channels. In this regard, ‘appropriate’ means the channel that the target groups are most likely to make use of. Finally, the receiver characteristics, in terms of their involvement with the Evaluation unit, their prior knowledge and attitude indicate how the message and channels should possible be adapted to suit the different target groups’ needs.

In terms of attitudinal theory, the Elaboration Likelihood Model provides the general framework in which communicational efforts should reside. In order for awareness improvement to occur, Petty and Cacioppo (1986) indicate that 1) receivers have to be motivated to process the information; 2) receivers have to possess the ability to process the information and; 3) the message has to contain strong arguments. Thus, in order for the Evaluation unit information to reach its target groups, it has to possess sufficient relevance, it needs be dispersed in an adequate form and at a relevant time and has to contain quality arguments.

This paper has attempted to address these issues with the help of 24 semi-structured

interviews with the unit’s target groups. These were the Project Managers (PMs), the

Technical Brand Managers (TBMs), the Global Project Managers (GPMs), the Unit

Leaders (ULs) and some Project Team Members (PTMs). Furthermore, a questionnaire

was distributed to assess the relevant variables for this research. In this regard I have used

the interviews and questionnaires to assess the target groups’ information requirements,

together with their prior attitude (of the source’s credibility), familiarity, involvement and

their preferred communication channels. This analysis enables the application of the communication model, as well as the provision of the means to answer the central research question. It does so by providing the principal with the identification of information requirements and the assessment of preferred communication channel use.

Results have firstly indicated that all target groups indicate that they are receptive towards receiving information about the current activities of the unit.. Secondly, results also show that information requirements vary between target groups. Thirdly, the analysis indicates that some requirements cannot be fulfilled properly by the unit, since these concern information about activities that the Evaluation unit is not (yet) performing. These other information requirements are: organisational overviews, test/methods overviews, (global) wash conditions overviews, overviews of across project learnings, integral overviews of Evaluation unit project test results and conclusions, competitor analyses and ‘clearance data’ for PTMs. Other information requirements are: overview of capabilities, consumer trends tracking, access to global consumer data, textiles trend analyses, global/packaging habits, access to consumer tests for PTMs, an overview of the distinction between CSI, CMI and CTI and ideas with regard to product development as opposed to product evaluations. Finally, the target groups are very much receptive to information that contributes to a greater consumer understanding.

With regard to the channels to disperse this information, the most preferred are:

•

E-mail

•

Newsletters

•

Special meetings and presentations

•

Presentations at the CTR

•

Face-to-face contact

•

Open days

•

The set-up of a possible website

Logically, different channels lend themselves for different purposes. Whereas face-to-face contact, presentations, websites, newsletter and open days could be used as primary communication channels to disperse information, email, posters and identity guides could be used as secondary (complementary) mediums.

When one finally considers the mediating influence of the receiver characteristics on the communication strategy of the unit, some factors can be noted. Whereas the PMs and TBMs are highly involved and familiar with the Evaluation unit information, the ULs and PTMs demonstrate lower scores on these indicators. This is reflected by the information requirements of the target groups as well as their preferred communication channel use:

whereas the first group of target groups should be targeted with rather detailed information and via relatively richer channels, the latter groups should suffice with lesser details and poorer channels. Lastly, the ‘prior attitude’ section has identified quite some elements that the unit (source) needs to address before turning into the aforementioned communicational activities. Target groups namely indicate that the efficiency, effectivity and commitment of the unit need to be improved. Addressing these issues is essential, since they directly influence the credibility of the unit and consequently the potential success of any communicational effort, initiated by the Evaluation unit.

Adherence to the aforementioned recommendations should increase the chances of

success for improving the awareness of the unit. However to truly, resolve this issue,

some other important extraneous variables need to be addressed. Furthermore,

commitment of top management is essential in making clear to the rest of the organisation

that the information that the Evaluation unit provides is truly significant for further

improvements of the Unilever Research and Development endeavours in the future.

IMPROVING AWARENESS

-a communication diagnosis and improvement design for the Evaluation unit-

ABSTRACT

This paper deals with the identification of information requirements of a company unit’s most important target groups. Furthermore, it focuses on determining the most appropriate communication channels to use to disperse this information. The end goal of these endeavours is to improve the awareness of the work that the unit performs. Through the use of 24 semi- structured interviews, incorporating the essential communicational and attitudinal variables, recommendations could be provided. Results firstly indicate that target groups are very much receptive towards receiving information about the activities of the company unit. Also, some information requirements were identified that the unit is currently not able to fulfil. Preferred communication channels turned out to be email, special presentations, face-to-face contact, newsletters, open days and a website.

In terms of theory, this paper emphasises the role receiver characteristics play in moderating the choice for appropriate communication strategies, thereby complementing media richness theory and confirming persuasion theories. Also, traditional management information requirements could be augmented by the insights generated in this paper.

This thesis namely emphasises the receptivity of managers towards internal developments information.

1 I would like to thank my supervisor here at the Evaluation unit, Nicolette van Veen for her guidance during this research project. The same holds for the rest of the Evaluation unit employees, who were always willing to help and ready to answer any question that I might have. Also, the recommendations of Dr. J. Horgan and Dr. K. van Veen are very well appreciated. Finally, many thanks to my family who have always supported me in everything that I do.

CONTENTS

MANAGEMENT SUMMARY ...2

ABSTRACT...4

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION...7

1.1 Unilever ...7

1.2 LFEGTC ...7

1.3 Evaluations unit ...8

1.4 Background and problem indication ...9

1.5 PH-analysis...10

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW...12

2.1 Awareness ...12

2.2 Elaboration Likelihood Model ...12

2.3 Information processing model ...14

2.4 Source variables ...15

2.5 Message variables...15

2.6 Channel variables ...16

2.7 Receiver variables ...17

2.8 Conclusion...18

CHAPTER 3: METHODS ...19

3.1 Research design ...19

3.2 Methodology ...21

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS ...23

4.1 Appraisal Department...23

4.1.1 Evaluations...23

4.1.2 Infrastructure...23

4.1.3 Textile support ...24

4.1.4 Methods development...25

4.2 Consumer technical insights...26

4.3 CTI-qualitative ...26

4.3.1 Evaluation ...26

4.3.2 Consumer knowledge...27

4.3.3 Methods...27

4.4 CTI-quantitative ...27

4.4.1 Evaluation ...27

4.4.2 Habits ...28

4.4.3 Methods development...28

4.5 Target groups...29

4.5.1 Project Managers ...29

4.5.2 Technical Brand Managers ...29

4.5.3 Global Project Managers...30

4.5.4 Unit Leaders...30

4.5.5 Project Team Members ...30

4.6 Information requirements ...30

4.6.1 Appraisal ...31

4.6.2 Project Managers ...31

4.6.3 Unit Leaders...32

4.6.4 Technical Brand Managers ...32

4.6.5 Project Team Members ...32

4.6.6 Machine Dish Wash...32

4.6.7 Conclusion ...33

4.6.8 CTI ...33

4.6.9 Project Managers ...34

4.6.10 Technical Brand Managers ...35

4.6.11 Unit Leaders...35

4.6.12 Project Team Members ...35

4.6.13 Machine Dish Wash...35

4.7 Reasons for (not) using the appraisal and CTI knowledge...36

4.8 Degree of familiarity ...37

4.8.1 Appraisal ...38

4.8.2 CTI ...38

4.8.3 Conclusion ...39

4.9 Degree of involvement ...39

4.10 Prior attitude Appraisal...40

4.10.1 Project Managers ...40

4.10.2 Global Project Managers...42

4.10.3 Technical Brand Managers ...42

4.10.4 Unit leaders ...42

4.10.5 Project Team Members ...42

4.10.6 Conclusion ...43

4.11 Prior attitude CTI...43

4.11.1 Project Managers ...43

4.11.2 Global Project Managers...45

4.11.3 Technical Brand Managers ...45

4.11.4 Project Team Members ...46

4.11.5 Conclusion ...46

4.12 Communication platforms ...47

4.12.1 Current communication channels ...47

4.12.2 Current communication channel opinion...48

4.12.3 Preferred communication channels...48

4.12.4 Additional requirements...51

4.12.5 Conclusion ...52

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION...53

CHAPTER 6: DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS...54

EPILOGUE ...61

REFERENCES...69

APPENDIX...75

List of figures ...75

List of tables ...75

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

Before going into the problem that this research will focus on, it is important to understand more about the structure and background of the company unit that this research will focus on. This company unit is the Evaluations unit, which is part of the Lever Fabergé Europe Global Technology Centre (LFEGTC) in Vlaardingen. This centre is again a part of the larger Unilever organisation. In the following a description of the Evaluation unit will follow, preceded by a brief outline of the Unilever corporation and the LFEGTC.

1.1 Unilever

Unilever is the name of a Dutch-British multinational focused on the fast moving consumer goods industry. It has operations in around 100 countries and Unilever employed about 223.000 people in 2004. The company was founded in 1930 as a result of a merger between the margarine companies of Anton Jurgens and Simon van den Bergh and the soap and dry goods companies of William Hesketh Lever. Since then it has grown intensively, both as a result of autonomous growth as a series of acquisitions. The company nowadays is structured into two product groups: foods and home & personal care. Leading brands at the moment are Dove, Lux, Sunsilk, Pond's, Axe/Lynx and Rexona. At the moment Unilever is in the midst of large restructuring activities as a result of decreasing profits and margin pressures.

1.2 LFEGTC

One of the organisations that the Unilever organisation encompasses is the LFEGTC. The LFEGTC is basically an R&D centre focused on the research and development of laundry detergents. Important brands that the LFEGTC performs research and development for are: Persil, Skip (France), OMO, VIA (Sweden) and Robijn.

The LFEGTC has a total of about 250 employees and is organised around six functional units. The Evaluation unit is only one of the six units that the LFEGTC comprises. It is important to note that the word ‘unit’ in this regard does not imply business units, which are basically separate entities. One can best think of these units as different departments of the same organisation (LFEGTC). The other units are; Stain Removal, Formulations, PEAK, Processing and Packaging. These units are organised around a logical product development sequence, as also indicated in the so-called ‘innovation funnel’ as demonstrated in figure 1 (Appendix A).

Insert figure 1 about here

Stain Removal is mainly focused on performing relatively fundamental research on cleaning technology. It also studies the behaviour of new molecules and the stabilisation of technologies in liquid detergents. Formulations attempts, partly on the basis of the research of the Stain Removal unit, to create effective laundry detergents. Processing is the unit that is responsible for building the product on a factory scale as opposed to the lab scale by which the Stain Removal and Formulations departments work. The Packaging unit focuses on the design and development of the laundry detergent packages.

PEAK is a supportive analytical unit that performs research on enzymes and fragrances.

Finally, the Evaluation unit focuses on evaluating the final product by examining whether there are any risks associated with the detergent when it would be launched into the market (see figure 2 in Appendix B for an organisational overview).

Insert figure 2 about here

An important aspect to understand is the way new products are developed and launched at the LFEGTC. This namely occurs through projects and via a matrix kind of organisation.

More specifically, the LFEGTC works in a ‘product matrix’ in which “the project managers have primary authority and functional managers assign technical personnel to projects and provide advisory expertise as needed” (Daft, 2001:104). In this respect, at the LFEGTC, the project managers usually have a Formulations background and the functional departments in this regard are the different units (e.g. Stain Removal, Processing, Evaluations etc). Thus, as the definition indicates, the different unit managers assign their personnel to particular projects to work for a certain project manager in multidisciplinary teams. Finally, projects can be divided up into technical projects and regular projects. The latter are projects that have to deliver a product at a certain launch date, whereas the first type of projects are rather long-term focused and the primary goal is not to deliver a ‘launchable’ product, but to develop new technology.

1.3 Evaluations unit

As briefly indicated above, the Evaluations unit is responsible for evaluating new products that have been developed by the aforementioned multidisciplinary teams. The unit is comprised of three departments: an appraisal, a quantitative and a qualitative department, each focused on a different aspect of the evaluating process (see figure 3 in Appendix C for an organogram)

.

Insert figure 3 about here

The appraisal department is basically the first department that evaluates the new product.

They do this under very conditioned circumstances. Their department is essentially comprised of a lot of washing machines and testing equipment focused on testing the new product on numerous technical aspects. These include aspects such as the effectivity of stain removal, the bleaching power, detergent residue removal the influence of different kinds of textiles and the behaviour of the product under different kinds of washing temperatures. Only when the product makes it through the tests of this department it is sent to the next department, which is usually the quantitative department.

As the name indicates, the quantitative department focuses on evaluating products from a quantitative point of view. Their main method of use is the Technical Panel Test (TPT) or in more conventional terms ‘product placement’. This unit takes the new product into the

‘field’ where the consumer gets the chance to evaluate the product. This occurs with the use of diaries and questionnaires in which the different consumers can note their specific washing conditions and record how the product behaves and what their overall opinion about it is.

Finally, the qualitative department evaluates the products, again as the name indicates, from a qualitative point of view. For example, when a new scoop is developed employees at the qualitative department will discuss with and observe consumers whether the technical and ergonomic aspects of the new scoop are well accepted by the consumers and whether it should possibly be adapted to fit the consumers’ needs. Another important part of the qualitative department’s work is to generate insights and to perform explorative research with regard to consumers’ interests, needs, behaviours and attitudes towards doing laundry.

The qualitative and the quantitative department together make up the Consumer Technical Insights (CTI) department, because all the research that they perform is focused on

2 The Evaluation unit is part of the larger Evaluation and Operations unit. However my paper will only focus on the Evaluation part of this unit.

consumers and the technical aspects of the new products without taking the different brands of the products into account.

1.4 Background and problem indication

Partly as a result of the growth and profit pressures at Unilever, as indicated earlier, an increased pressure exists for all the Unilever organisations to demonstrate their raison d’être. This means that organisations and even units and departments have to constantly demonstrate their added value to key decision makers in the Unilever organisation. The same holds for the Evaluation unit. The unit has come to realise that delivering quality work is not sufficient anymore for securing its position in the future. It is namely also important to remain visible in the organisation and making people aware of the work that the unit performs. Although at the moment the position of the unit is still relatively stable, the unit wants to make the first steps in improving the awareness of its work within the Unilever organisation.

Besides the aforementioned pressure, the unit is also faced with another external driver, namely the competition with other Unilever Evaluation units throughout the world. The formal areas of practice of these units have blurred during the years with a direct result that units are increasingly focusing themselves on the working terrains of each other.

Especially the Evaluation unit in Port Sunlight (UK) is increasingly centring itself on the territory of the unit in Vlaardingen and is thereby enlarging its visibility within the Unilever organisation. According to the unit in Vlaardingen the increased visibility of the Port Sunlight unit is a direct result of its Public Relations (PR) activities. They put a lot of time and effort in presenting their knowledge and findings to the relevant target groups within the organisation and therefore do a great job in improving the visibility of their work.

Due to both pressures illustrated above the Evaluation unit in Vlaardingen wants to make the first steps in improving the awareness of the work that they perform. It is this aspect that this paper will focus on. As a sort of pilot study the unit wants to focus first on improving its awareness within the LFEGTC in Vlaardingen, before focusing on the global Unilever organisation. It is namely the case that even within the LFEGTC the awareness of the knowledge, skills and project contributions of the Evaluation unit is considered to be quite low. A general visual representation of the problem is portrayed in figure 5 (see Appendix F). As the figure illustrates, the Evaluation unit wants to get information about its work to the relevant target groups. For this they need to determine what aspects of their work they want to communicate and which communication channels to use.

Insert figure 5 about here

Note that this research project will only focus on the role that communication can play in improving the awareness of the unit. This is a result of both the wishes of the principal as well as the restrictions of writing a master thesis. By focusing the thesis it can be maintained in a manageable form, which enables completion in time.

Thus, the objective of this paper will be to perform a communicational analysis for the Evaluation unit that provides insights into how this unit can improve the awareness of its work with its relevant target groups within the Lever Fabergé Global Technology Centre.

In order to attain this, the unit has to determine whát information should be dispersed and whát the appropriate communication channels are through which this information should be spread. The research question logically follows from this and is formulated as follows:

What are the information requirements of the Evaluation unit’s target groups and in what

way should the unit disperse its information in order to improve its awareness within the LFEGTC in Vlaardingen? This analysis should function as a basis for further PR activities of the unit in the future in maintaining the visibility of the unit within the Unilever organisation. Finally, the principal of this research project is the CTI-qualitative department manager, Miss Nicolette van Veen.

1.5 PH-analysis

Before defining the problem as an ‘awareness improvement’ issue I first performed a PH- analysis to determine its context and characteristics (for the details see Appendix D and E). Although awareness improvement is the main objective of the principal and of this research paper I still wanted to perform this analysis. The main reasons for this decision were: 1) to understand the dynamics of the problem and 2) to have an opportunity to also talk to the Evaluation unit employees and assess their points of view.

What became clear from the PH-analysis was the fact that different people from the Evaluation unit were facing different kinds of problems. More specifically, different departments within the unit faced different kinds of problems. In the following a brief outline of this situation will be presented. Also, an argumentation will be provided to demonstrate how ‘awareness improvement’ could also partly resolve these issues.

Whereas the CTI-qualitative department employees indeed mainly struggled with the awareness improvement aspect (thus getting to be more visible to the outside) the CTI- quantitative department saw this as a lesser problem. They feel that they are visible for their core activities (TPTs), but that there are aspects of their job that could be communicated more strongly. Thus, their aim is to become more visible in the organisation in demonstrating their total knowledge base. On the other hand, the appraisal department struggles to a greater extent with the recognition and image aspect. It appears that the appraisal employees feel that they do not get the recognition for the hard work that they perform from the other units and people and that they possess an unfavourable image. Moreover, the outcomes of their evaluative tests are not always believed and trusted. Also, and this is in line with the two other departments they feel that only parts of their knowledge are visible to the outside, namely just the ‘evaluative test washing’

aspect. They make clear that other units try to re-invent the wheel when the knowledge is clearly present at the appraisal department. Gains could be attained when a greater extent of information sharing is stimulated.

Since I have been ‘hired’ by the management team of the Evaluation unit and their primary objective is to understand how the unit could improve its awareness, the focus will be on this aspect. However, it is not hard to imagine how awareness improvement could also possible (partly) address the aforementioned issues. The creation of awareness should namely first help to improve the visibility/awareness problem of the CTI- qualitative department. Secondly, the relatively ‘unknown’ activities of the quantitative department could be communicated more strongly. Finally, and this argument is more complex: by demonstrating the output the appraisal department generates it should become clear that this department is not only about test washing, but that it does a lot more things that can significantly add value to the organisation. By informing the people about this aspect and thereby creating awareness, their perception and attitude about the department hopefully will change. (e.g. Cacioppo, 1986; Ommen, Sterk, and van Kuppelenveld, 1990; Vos, 1992) This should then generate the trust and recognition the department is longing for in the future.

It is important to note that, as demonstrated in the PH-analysis in the Appendix, that

awareness improvement is not an objective by itself. Improved awareness amongst its

relevant target should eventually lead to more project contributions of the Evaluation unit.

By demonstrating what the unit does it could enthusiast the target groups to make more extensive use of the Evaluation unit’s services and it would enable the unit to portray a more favourable image. Furthermore, by demonstrating the (consumer) knowledge that the unit possesses it can serve as a valuable information pool for the rest of the organisation in the future. This should ensure the future continuity of the unit.

Finally, this thesis is structured as follows. First, the literature available on the main

variables of this paper will be explored. After that a methods section will follow, which

will discuss the problem statement and the research design. Thirdly, the results of the

analysis will be discussed. Finally, a conclusion and discussion will follow in which

recommendations will be provided into how the unit could possibly improve its

awareness.

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

As discussed in the introduction, the unit is basically interested in the answer to this simple question: what are the information requirements of our relevant target groups and in what way should we deliver them this information? Effective information provision is assumed to lead to greater extents of awareness (e.g McGuire, 1985; Cacioppo, 1986;

Ommen, Sterk, and van Kuppelenveld, 1990).

The nature of the problem that the unit is facing has much to with (internal) communication. Therefore this literature review will have its focal point on communication theory as well as other models that provide insights into how to create effective communicational efforts. Before doing so however, the central concept of this paper, awareness, will be discussed.

2.1 Awareness

The notion of awareness is a concept most often associated with the advertising industry in which marketers are often greatly interested in the awareness of their different brands.

Brand awareness is related to the “strength of the brand node or trace in memory, as reflected by consumers’ ability to identify the brand under different conditions” (Keller, 1993). With other words, it relates to the likelihood that a brand name will come to mind and the ease with which it does so. Brand awareness has two important components:

brand recognition and brand recall. The first concept relates to the “consumer’s ability to confirm prior exposure to the brand when given the brand as a cue” (Keller, 1993: 3).

This resembles the somewhat weaker concept of visibility mentioned earlier in which the consumers are required to rightly discriminate the brand as having been seen or heard previously (Keller, 1993). Awareness however also requires consumers to actively recall the brand. Brand recall relates to consumer’s ability to retrieve the brand when given the product category, the needs fulfilled by the category or some other type of probe as a cue”

(Keller, 1993: 3).

It is not hard to imagine that the same concepts can be used for the purposes of awareness in this paper. It is namely also for the Evaluation unit the aim to become entrenched in the target groups’ minds and to be actively recognised and recalled in a positive manner. It is also not difficult to conjecture that recognition and recall are important prerequisites for any possible attitudinal (e.g. positive image) or behavioural changes (e.g. to bring in more project work and to serve as an information pool) in the future (Kok et al., 1987).

Now that that the concept of awareness has been clarified, the following section will go into an influential model, namely the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM). This model provides important insights into how one should structure effective communicational efforts. It demonstrates on a rather abstract level the minimum requirements for awareness improvement to occur. The section after that will go into the Information Processing Model (IPM) and other related literature that provide more concrete links to the way communicational efforts should be shaped.

2.2 Elaboration Likelihood Model

The ELM model exhibits important normative claims about how to communicate in order to succeed in attitudinal change. Although the focus of this research is on awareness and not on attitudes, important aspects of the ELM can be usefully incorporated for the purposes of this paper. For a visual representation of this model, see figure 6 in Appendix G.

Insert figure 6 about here

In 1980, Petty and Cacioppo created this model to explain in detail how a persuasive message works to change the attitude of the receiver

. They proposed that a message is either being processed through the so-called ‘central route’ or through the ‘peripheral route’. The central route holds that a person is more likely to be persuaded when he or she is able to elaborate on the message comprehensively. That is, when he or she is motivated to process the message, has the ability to process it and when the quality of the arguments of the message are relatively high. Only when these conditions are fulfilled the person will be persuaded in accordance to the message. The peripheral route states that if a person is unable to elaborate on a message extensively, then he or she may still be persuaded by factors that have nothing to do with the actual content of the message itself.

This person can then be persuaded by factors that he or she is already familiar with and have a good attitude about; aspects that this person could associate with the message. This persuasion will however most often be of a superficial and temporal character.

In the following an exploration of the ELM will follow.

The first step in the persuasion process through communication is the creation of a persuasive message. In terms of this paper the aim of the communication effort is to persuade people to become more aware of the Evaluation unit’s output. Assuming that the message is of a persuasive character, three conditions have to be met in order to elaborate on a message through the central route, according to Petty and Cacioppo (1986).

First, the target audience needs to have the motivation to process the information. This means that the message has to provide some aspects of relevance to the target group. At least some familiarity with the subject matter of a message will encourage the listener to process it. When the receiver has been motivated to process the information of the message he or she also needs to have the ability to process the information (Cho, 1999).

This means that the message has to reach the target audience in a time when there are relatively few distractions and little opportunities for ‘noise’ to occur. For example, when people are busy with other activities they have less time to pay attention to a particular message. Besides, the competition between persuasive messages is fierce; there is only a certain amount of time that can be dedicated to processing information. Finally, it is essential that the message is communicated at the appropriate level of detail in order for people to understand it. Lastly, when the receiver is motivated and able to process the information the final requirement for persuasion to occur is that the message has to contain strong arguments. This is however complicated by the receiver’s initial attitude;

when this attitude is already positive it is more likely that he or she will develop a lasting favourable attitude. This final requirement is important, because it emphasises that the quality of the message has to be high; otherwise, a boomerang effect could occur. This means that when false or unconvincing arguments are being presented the receiver will reject the message and develop a negative attitude towards the message. This is especially the case when the receiver is an expert. Superficial, false arguments will not work to persuade these people who possess superior knowledge about the subject matter.

If a message fails to be channelled through the central route, it may still find its way to the receiver via the peripheral route. This happens when the receiver is not motivated to think about the message, not able to process it and the quality of the arguments is weak. A message that is channelled through the peripheral route attempts to persuade the receiver by focusing on aspects that have nothing to do with the message itself. Instead, it focuses on aspects of which the receiver already has a positive attitude about, such as a celebrity,

3 Discussion based on a text by Charlie Moore on:

http://www.ciadvertising.org/student_account/fall_01/adv382j/cmoore/elaboration_likelihood_model.h tm

money, nice lay-outs and/or catchy slogans. Cialdini (2001) has identified important peripheral cues that could persuade the receiver when inducement through the central route does not work. Each of these peripheral cues has little or nothing to do with the actual content of the message

:

- Reciprocation is the idea that the receiver is somehow obligated to agree with the message because of some past experience or information.

- Consistency means relying on thoughts held in the past. (“I felt like this before and I feel like this now”)

- Social Proof is akin to peer pressure. The actions and words of others are likely to influence a receiver of a new message.

- Liking simply means that the speaker is likeable. They may be physically attractive, charismatic, or charming.

- Authority is the sense that the speaker has some power over the receiver, be it an expertise in the subject matter or possibly an overbearing attitude.

- Scarcity is the idea that the message will only be around for a short time and that the receiver should snatch it up before it disappears.

The ELM model provides useful and important insights of how to structure effective communicational efforts. For example, in order for the Evaluation unit’s target groups to be reached effectively, they need to be motivated and able to process the information and the message needs to be delivered in an appropriate format. Furthermore, the message has to contain strong arguments. Another model that provides more concrete indications of how the Evaluation unit might deliver its information effectively to its relevant target groups is the information processing model (IPM) (McGuire, 1985). This model deals with the four components of the communication process: source, message, channel and receiver. Although the IPM itself already announces how these aspects need to be structured, additional literature will be discussed that provide insights into how the unit could possibly improve its awareness through effectively shaping these elements.

2.3 Information processing model

During years of research social psychologist William J. McGuire has developed the Information-processing model (IPM). He was one of the first researchers to propose that the (consumer) mind works as an information processor. He distinguishes thirteen different steps in order for attitudinal and behavioural change to succeed:

1. Exposure 6. Skill acquisition 11. Acting on decision

2. Attention 7. Agreement 12. Consolidation

3. Liking 8. Memory storage 13. Proselytising

4. Comprehension 9. Retrieval

5. Cognitive elaboration 10. Decision making

It goes beyond the scope of this paper to elaborate on each of these steps in further detail.

What is important to note however is that the first nine steps resemble the awareness concept as defined in this paper: the degree to which the relevant target groups have knowledge about the Evaluation unit’s output and the ability to actively recall and retain this information. Another important remark that McGuire makes, is that one has to take extraneous variables into account; after all, people differ in sex, demographic characteristics and personalities, which makes some people more receptive to persuasion than others. The steps indicated here have much in common with the central route of the

4 Definitions, like page before, based on Charlie Moore.

Elaboration Likelihood Model. In this regard the ELM is a supplement of the IPM by demonstrating that attitudes and awareness can also be changed without extensive elaboration, namely via the peripheral route.

McGuire (1985) has not only identified the information processing process through which a person goes through before turning into action, as indicated above; he has also linked this process to a communication/persuasion matrix. He argues that in order to attain the thirteen different aspects one has to deliver an effective communicational effort. This means that the quality of the source, the message and the channel have to be adequate Moreover, the characteristics of the receiver need to be assessed (For this, see table 1 in Appendix H).

Insert table 1 about here

Although the primary objective of the paper is to identify the information requirements of the target groups (message) as well as to analyse which communication channels to use, the other communication elements will also be discussed. These namely serve as important mediating and moderating variables in the communication process.

2.4 Source variables

With regard to the source variable quite some research has been performed. In this case the source is the Evaluation unit, because they are the ones that want to disperse information. According to McGuire (1985) and Cacioppo, (1986) it is especially important to have a credible and competent source. Research indicates that competence is usually derived from people who have a higher educational level, are considered to be more intelligent, to possess more status or are considered to be more familiar with the subject. Credible sources are genuine sources that are perceived to have no hidden agendas. According to Kok et al. (1987) an attractive source also enhances the effect of communication efforts. When the source is nice-looking, friendly, demographically and ideologically equal the receiver is more likely to be persuaded. This is especially the case when the message is weak in terms of the Elaboration Likelihood Model. Finally, power represents the last source indicator that can enhance effects with the receiver. Sometimes a receiver can be persuaded by the simple fact that the source has the power to do so.

2.5 Message variables

With regard to the message variable, Kok et al. (1987) indicate that the discrepancy

between what people already know and what you want them to know should not be too

big, neither too small. They indicate that the relationship between discrepancy and

awareness/attitudinal change is characterised by an inverted U shape. At first, an increase

in discrepancy will also lead to an increase in awareness. However, at a certain point this

relationship flattens and even decreases with further discrepancy. Apparently, at a certain

point the message is considered to be too farfetched and no further awareness change will

occur (Kok and De Roon, 1981). Finally, Beijk and Van Raaij (1989) indicate that it is

also important that the message “provides a lot of opportunities for linking up with

schemata in the memory network. The richer the associative potential, the stronger the

effect” (Vos, 1992: 42). In terms of this paper, in which the message is (partly) indicated

by the information requirements of the target groups, literature thus indicates that this

should have sufficient associative potential.

2.6 Channel variables

Vos (1992) indicates that an attractive way of presenting the message is becoming more important everyday in drawing the attention of the target group. Furthermore, it is also essential that the sender chooses a communication channel which will approach the receiver in as direct a way as possible and at a moment when they are most accessible to it. Thus, the ability to process the information should be vastly present (see: ELM).

The communication channel represents a very important aspect in this paper. As indicated above, determining which channel to use to disperse the Evaluation unit’s information is a major objective of this research project. Quite some research has been performed about the most effective channels to use when it comes to dispersing information internally.

Daft and Lengel (1984) have for example proposed in their media richness theory that the choice of a communication channel depends on the equivocality of the message.

Equivocality refers to “the existence of multiple and conflicting interpretations about an organisational situation” (Salmon and Joiner, 2005: 57). According to media richness theory, channels of communication differ in their ability to process ambiguous and equivocal information. Daft and Lengel (1984) indicate that communication channels can be placed in a continuum where face-to-face contact is considered to be the richest channel followed by telephone, email and written documents. Richer channels should be used when dealing with increasingly equivocal messages, since these channels possess characteristics that promote mutual understanding. A visual representation of this model is included in figure 7 in Appendix I.

Insert figure 7 about here

These findings have been confirmed by research (e.g. Daft et. al.,1987; Trevino et. al.

1987; Zmud Lind and Young, 1990; Salmon and Joiner, 2005).

However, conflicting results have also been found in media richness theory. As a result of that media features theory emerged. This theory states that the choice of a communication channel is indicated by the functionality and usability of the selected channel (El- Shinnaway and Markus, 1998). Functionality refers to “the specific way that a communication channel supports users to accomplish their work tasks; while usability refers to the extent to which the channel allows a message to be transferred in a clear and readable format “(Swanson, 1987; Larcker and Lessig, 1980). This would indicate that email and written communication should be used as channels extensively since these represent highly functional and usable channels (e.g. possibilities for editing and re- reading the message) in today’s workplaces. Zmud et al. (1990) differentiate communication channels on the basis of six criteria: channel accessibility, information quality, immediate feedback, cue variety, personalisation and receiver accessibility. Zmud et al. (1990) make clear that not the information with the highest quality is used, but the information that is easiest accessible. Furthermore, they also conclude in accordance with Daft and Lengel (1994) that different channels possess different ‘richness’ characteristics with the richest channels (for example face-to-face contact) possessing the highest degrees of immediate feedback, cue variety and message personalisation. Finally, receiver access refers to the extent that a large amount of receivers can be targeted with a certain communication channel. Email, for example, has a high degree of receiver access. Zmud et. al (1990) conclude by indicating that it is also important to consider whether the information is sent in a lateral or in a downward fashion. Their results are indicated in table 2 in Appendix J.

Insert table 2 about here

Koeleman (1992) presents even more concrete indications of appropriate channel use. He firstly distinguishes between personal (face-to-face) and impersonal communication channels and sums up the advantages and disadvantages associated with them (see table 3 in Appendix K).

Insert table 3 about here

Another distinction of internal communication channels can be made according to 1) whether the information is of a recent or background character and 2) whether the sender or receiver determines the moment of information access. The grouping of channels in this way is demonstrated in table 4 (Appendix L).

Insert table 4 about here

Finally, Koeleman (1992) goes on into discussing the most often used internal communication channels that can be used to disperse information (presentations, newsletters/memos, posters, identity guide, new media). Presentations are appropriate for dispersing specific information and are most often used for horizontal communication.

Newsletters, brochures, leaflets, memos and folders are usually used for informing people about the things that are going on in the organisation (Keikes, 1990). Posters on the other hand are especially used for their ability to remind people of certain issues. Posters should be used as a supportive medium to complement channels that are more focused on the content of the message, as demonstrated in table 5 (Appendix M).

Insert table 5 about here

Information about a certain department and unit can also be dispersed via identity guides.

These are small booklets with the function description, photographs, telephone and location numbers of the employees working at the unit. Furthermore, a description of the most important work that the unit performs could be included in such a guide. Finally, new media provide other communication channels to disperse information, such as email, databases and websites (Koeleman, 1992). Thus, quite some research has been performed about appropriate channel use. In terms of improving the awareness of the unit these channel characterisations represent important insights.

2.7 Receiver variables

Finally, it is also important to adapt the communication to the audience one is addressing.

According to Vos (1992) important receiver variables are prior knowledge and prior attitude. Wierenga and Van Raay (1987) indicate that degree of involvement is also an important part of the receiver variable. Depending on the aforementioned indicators one has to adjust his or her message. For example, receivers who are highly involved with the subject matter are more prepared to collect and read a relatively large amount of data and information (Petty, Cacioppo and Schumann, 1983). This is why Loudon and Della Betta (1988) distinguish between high and low involvement strategies.

All the above-described variables have a combined effect. For example, a highly credible

source is able to communicate a relatively highly discrepant message, since he or she

possesses a higher degree of goodwill (Kok et al. 1987). At the same time, a high degree

of involvement of the receiver makes it harder to convince that person of a different point

of view. Mittal (1995), Zaichovsky (1994) and Kenhove, Wijnen and Wulf (2000)

indicate operationalisations of the concept of involvement, as will be demonstrated later.

2.8 Conclusion

This section has explored several important concepts. First, the concept of awareness has been defined and explored. It has been made clear what the concept encompasses and how it will be used in this paper. Second, the ELM has been discussed and it has been demonstrated that this model provides important insights into how one should structure communicational efforts. In terms of this paper, one can expect that the ‘central route’ has to be pursued. This is caused by the fact that this paper focuses on functional target groups of which one can assume that they are relatively knowledgeable about the subject matters that the Evaluation unit wants to get across (for more detail: see ‘methods’).

Having said this, the ELM indicates that in order for communication efforts to succeed one has to make sure that the message carries at least some familiar aspects. This way the receiver will be more likely to be motivated to process the information. Secondly, the message has to be communicated through the appropriate communication channel at the appropriate time and in the appropriate format. Finally, the ELM indicates that the message has to possess strong arguments.

Besides the ELM, the Information Processing Model and other research also provide useful insights into how to construct a communicational effort to promote awareness.

With regard to the source, research indicates that it has to be credible, competent, attractive or powerful. The message has to contain sufficient associative potential in order to trigger the attention of the receiver. Furthermore, the communication channel has to be appropriate for its objective and of an attractive character. In this regard different channels have been discussed and each of them posses (dis) advantages. Finally, with regard to the receiver one has to take into account their degree of prior knowledge, attitude and the degree of involvement they possess.

In the following, the methodological aspects of this paper will be discussed. Here, it will

also be demonstrated how the insights obtained from this literature review will be

incorporated in the conceptual model and the remaining of the paper.

CHAPTER 3: METHODS

In the following the main elements of the problem statement will be discussed. This methodological section follows de Leeuw (2001), as also demonstrated in figure 8 (Appendix N).

Insert figure 8 about here 3.1 Research design

As said, this paper will focus on determining the most appropriate way of approaching the relevant target groups of the Evaluation unit in order to improve its awareness. In order to attain this aim the following research question has been formulated: What are the information requirements of the Evaluation unit’s target groups and in what way should the unit disperse its information in order to improve its awareness within the LFEGTC in Vlaardingen? The answering of this question will be carried out with the help of investigative questions.

These questions are inspired from the conceptual model, demonstrated in figure 9 (Appendix O).

Insert figure 9

The model again is partly derived from communication theory, presented in the literature review. This theory indicates, as we have seen, that there are four important factors that determine the effectiveness of the communication process. These are; source, message, communication channel and receiver (target groups) (McGuire, 1985). The problem that the Evaluation unit faces can effectively be modelled with the help of this model.

The investigative questions follow the same general communication structure (for a more detailed overview of the investigative questions, see Appendix P). In the following the conceptual model together with the investigative questions will be explained and I will demonstrate how the answering of these questions will enable the integral answer to the main research question.

The first part of the analysis will go into the message aspect of the model. The message indicates what information should be dispersed. Therefore, in this section the focus will be on identifying the information that the Evaluation unit currently generates (current message) and will be compared to the information requirements of the target groups (preferred message). Possible gaps and misfits between these information flows will be identified.

The message has been operationalised in the model into existing and additional information requirements. Existing information requirements relate to target group requirements that the unit is currently able to fulfil, because they relate to information about their current activities. For example, it could include information about its textiles knowledge or information about their methods development. Additional information requirements relate to information requirements that the unit is currently not able to provide or does not provide in an appropriate manner. Both these information requirements thus determine what aspects to communicate in the message.

Finally, the literature review indicated that regardless of the content, the message should

first be sufficiently unique to be noticed and at the same time provide sufficient

opportunities for linking up with existing schemata in people’s memory networks (Beijk,

and Van Raaij, 1989).

Next, the characteristics of the source will be assessed. Communication theory indicated that ‘credibility’ is essential. The literature review also indicated that ‘source attractiveness’ and ‘source power’ are important source characteristics. These will however not be addressed in this paper, since these represent difficult to assess concepts.

Furthermore, these concepts are relatively less important compared to the credibility and expertise of the unit, since delivering quality output is considered essential at the LFEGTC. There are two aspects that determine the credibility of the unit in this case.

First, the quality of the total capabilities and knowledge base that is present at the unit and second the perceived quality of the various project contributions.

The next step will mainly concern itself with identifying the current state of the target groups (receivers) in terms of their ‘prior attitude’, ‘degree of involvement’ and ‘degree of familiarity’ with the Evaluation unit output (Kok, Wilke and Meertens, 1987). As explained in the literature review, these are namely important mediating and moderating variables that indicate what aspects of the information should be communicated and in what manner. Before doing this however, the relevant functional target groups will have to be identified. In terms of this paper we have chosen to only focus on the functional target groups. This group is defined as those people who could use the Evaluation unit output in their daily activities for (more) effective product developments.

Concluding this section, the analysis will go into possible reasons for using and not using the information available at the Evaluation unit (see investigative questions). Possible reasons for not using the information could be: the information that the unit generates does not fit with the requirements of the target groups, the information might not be of an adequate quality or target groups may not be aware of the fact that this information is available. This means that the Evaluation unit is not adequately dispersing its knowledge throughout the organisation through the appropriate communication channels.

Therefore, the following step will go into the communication channels used by the Evaluation unit (see sub-research question two). The main question in this section will be;

in what way does the Evaluation unit currently disperse its information and is this the preferred channel from the target groups’ points of view?

This section will therefore start off with desk research. The aim will be to assess the communication channels that are being used at this moment. The subsequent stage will be the determination of the extent to which the target groups make use of these communication channels and whether other channels should be used. Communication theory indicates that the medium of choice has to be appropriate for its projected objectives as well as being attractive to capture the receiver’s interest (Bosman et. al 1989). Finally, the reasons for a possible lack of use of these communication channels will be identified.

Of course, different outcomes of the diagnosis will indicate different possible solutions. A

‘misfit’ between the information requirements of the target groups and the Evaluation unit will lead to a possible need for an adaptation of its message. Poor communication and dispersion of knowledge will however indicate other possible solutions, such as changing or complementing the current channels of use.

Summarising, the paper analysis should thus indicate what information should be

communicated and through which communication channels, depending on the target

group’s needs and characteristics. This again will enable the answering of the main

research question by providing recommendations about how to improve the awareness of

the unit.

3.2 Methodology

To conclude the methodological model of de Leeuw (2001), the remaining components will be discussed in the following.

Since the outcomes of this research are to a large degree dependent on the responses and characteristics of the target groups I have decided to use a combination of interviews and questionnaires to assess the different variables portrayed in the conceptual model. The target groups thus represent to a large extent the units of analysis (Babby, 2004).

Furthermore, with regard to the type of research, it will be of a largely qualitative character. Although the questionnaires will result in some quantitative data these will be treated in a qualitative manner. This is caused by the relative small size of the population in this research

.

A total of 24 semi-structured interviews were undertaken varying between ¾ hour and 1,5 hour, depending on the amount of output the respondents could provide. The interview and a small sample section of the questionnaire are enclosed in Appendices Q and R. The interviews were mainly used to assess the prior attitude of the respondents, their information requirements (message), their preferred communication channel and their general perception towards the quality of work of the Evaluation unit. These namely represent relatively ambiguous concepts that are hard to assess via questionnaires (de Leeuw, 2000). Aspects, such as the degree of familiarity with the unit’s output, the degree of involvement, the preferred frequency of information provision and the preferred communication channels have been assessed via the questionnaires. The nature of these questions are namely of a character, that respondents are predicted to feel wearied after posing the same questions repeatedly in face-to-face interviews. Furthermore, these concepts are relatively easy to assess via questionnaires. Note also that the questionnaires will identify the existing information requirements whereas the interviews allow additional information requirements to be determined. The additional information requirements will be identified in an ‘unprompted’ fashion, since no explicit stimuli in the form of a question relating to an Evaluation unit activity is posed. The questionnaires, however, allow for ‘prompted’ information requirements to be identified, since the questionnaires contain explicit questions that pose people the question whether they would like to be informed about a certain Evaluation unit activity. The total information requirements are thus the information requirements identified during the interviews plus those determined through the questionnaires. The same basically holds for assessing the preferred communication channels: the interviews allow for an unprompted manner of identifying these, while the questionnaires explicitly relate these to an Evaluation unit activity. This way of proceeding enables a more comprehensive fashion of identifying target groups’ preferences. Finally, to make sure that I had cited the respondents adequately the interviews were sent back to the respondents where they had the opportunity to check whether I had cited them correctly.

As will become clear later on, in the results section, the most important target groups identified in this research are: the project managers, the global project managers, the technical brand managers, the unit leaders and the project team members. From the general population of project managers I have interviewed 8 out of 9. I have interviewed all three global project managers and both technical brand managers. Furthermore, I have interviewed 4 out of 5 unit leaders. With regard to these four target groups one could say I have interviewed close to the whole population.

The project team members, however, represent a very large group at the LFEGTC. It would be very time and resource consuming to interview them all. I have therefore made

5 The small population size is fact does not have to be a problem when it would include the whole population. However, a sample was taken from the target group ‘project team members’, which makes a more qualitative treatment of the data (statistically) more appropriate.

a selection of 5 project team members; 2 from the Packaging department, 1 from the Processing department, 1 from the Formulations department and 1 from the Stain Removal department. On top of that I have interviewed a Machine dish wash employee to also obtain input from this product group. These project team members were selected on the basis of experience with working together with the Evaluations unit. Whereas the responses of the first four target groups can be generalised to the whole population, this is not the case for the project team members’ case. Results obtained here should therefore be treated as an indication of respondents’ points of view and should consequently be treaded with caution.

Finally, the measuring methods in this research are as follows. For assessing the degree of involvement the cognitive Zaichovsky (1994) indicators have been used. These are:

importance, need, relevance, value and significance. In this regard the perceived importance, need, relevance, value and significance of the Evaluation unit’s information have been assessed from the target groups’ points of view on a five point scale. The degree of familiarity has also been assessed on a five-point scale ranging from ‘totally unfamiliar’ to ‘very familiar’. A short description was provided of the Evaluation unit activity of which the degree of familiarity was being assessed. This was done in order to make sure that the validity of the measurement was maintained. A respondent can namely claim that he or she is very familiar with the activity ‘infrastructure maintenance’, but when he or she is not aware of the fact that infrastructure encompasses the maintenance of the water plant as well as the equipment and nothing else, the measurement did not measure what it was intended to measure. This would decrease its construct validity (de Leeuw, 2001).

As one can also observe in the questionnaire is that I have added separate questions assessing the preferred degree of information provision frequency. This was done, partly for practical relevance reasons, as well as to circumvent the dangers of information overload as well as information scarcity. Also note that the option ‘newsletter’ has been incorporated in the questionnaire. This name was chosen to relate to the prior knowledge of target groups of internal communication channels. In terms of this paper, the newsletter stands model for any written document that possesses information about the Evaluation unit and that can be distributed periodically.

As said, the attitudes with regard to the quality of the work that the Evaluation unit performs will be assessed via the interviews and general patterns in statements will be used to cluster the comments made and to synthesise important conclusions.

To conclude, the limitations of the research are as follows. This paper only focuses on the

contributions communication can make to awareness improvements. Also, it deals

primarily with functional target groups within the LFEGTC. Finally, this paper does not

focus on the practical content and format of the communicational efforts.

CHAPTER 4: RESULTS

In the following the different investigative questions will be answered. This analysis should provide the results toward answering the main research question of this paper. In this section, first the current output of the Evaluation unit will be outlined, followed by an identification of the relevant target groups for this research. Then, the information requirements of these groups will be identified. After that the target groups’

characteristics will be assessed in terms of their degree of familiarity, prior attitude and degree of involvement with the Evaluation unit. Finally, the current and preferred use of communication channels will be discussed. The focus of this section will be on reporting the results. In the ‘discussion and recommendations’ section these results will be elaborated on.

As said, first a description of the work of the Evaluation unit will be provided. This indicates what the current information provision of the unit represents. Later on this will be compared to the information requirements of the target groups. This should indicate possible fits and misfits between the information requirements of this group and the information that the unit is able to provide. Furthermore, by outlining the current information provision situation the target groups’ degree of familiarity with it can be assessed later on. Finally, this description functions as background information of the activities that the unit performs. The following will start off with a description of the output of the Appraisal department.

4.1 Appraisal Department

The work of the Appraisal department can be divided up into four parts: washing

evaluations, infrastructure, textile support and methods development. In the following all four aspects will be discussed.

4.1.1 Evaluations

The first aspect of the Appraisal department’s work is the evaluative washing part. This function represents the reason for existence of the department. When products are being developed the Appraisal department is responsible for testing the technical aspects of the new fabric detergent. Only when the product makes it through these tests the product is cleared to be tested in the market. The Appraisal employees usually test on three aspects:

in-use properties, cleaning and redisposition and multi-wash performance.

In-use properties are the basic performance measures. These include residue tests, foam tests and bleach damage tests. These aspects are usually tested with the help of only one wash cycle. The rationale for this decision is to closely resemble consumer conditions.

The second aspect of evaluation measurement is the cleaning and redisposition performance. This basically means that the Appraisal employees measure to what degree the stains have been removed. This again happens with the help of one washing cycle.

The final aspect of the evaluation aspect is the measurement of the multi-washing performance of a certain type of detergent. These tests have the objective to assess how the newly developed product behaves when it is used extensively on textile, namely with the help of twenty to forty and sometimes even sixty wash cycles. The laundry is then measured in terms of pilling, shape retention, ashing and tensile strength loss. In 2004 hundreds of these evaluative tests have been carried out.

4.1.2 Infrastructure

The infrastructure aspect of the Appraisal department basically revolves around two sub-

activities: the maintenance of the water plant and the ‘hardware’ aspects of the