Yearlong survey consistently finds that structure might best communicate innovation, especially with supportive graphics. Materials and production also are good barometers.

In any economic environment, innovation is key to growth. But, during a recession, many companies are tempted to reduce spending on innovation to save money. Luckily, this is not an absolute rule. Daring brands still pushed the boundaries of packaging innovation in 2009.

Earlier this year, Shelf Impact! and international brand consultancy Dragon Rouge formed a partnership to ask branding and packaging professionals to evaluate recent product and packaging innovations. Each quarter, we asked a sample of hundreds of Shelf Impact! readers, from brand managers to designers to materials suppliers, to rate a selection of packages on matters of innovation. View an image and brief description of each of the 10 packages reviewed this quarter.

During 2009, a total of 39 packages (see Fig. 1) were rated throughout the year, in terms of the following five criteria:

• The product concept’s ability to provoke new ways of thinking about a category (see Fig. 2).
• The product structure’s ability to present new ways of interacting with a product type (see Fig. 3).
• The packaging graphics’ innovative cues that help bring the product positioning to life (see Fig. 4).
• The packaging’s use of innovative materials (see Fig. 5).
• The relative effectiveness of the packaging production process (see Fig. 6).

For each of those five areas, respondents were asked to evaluate the designs on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 signified that the packaging innovation delivered poorly and 5 meant that it performed extremely well.

We’ve shared preliminary findings each quarter with Shelf Impact! readers. This article ties it all together.

The intent of this article is not a beauty contest with proclaimed "winners." Shelf Impact! randomly selected a representative sample of what it considered to be innovative packages across categories, and certainly other innovative packages were introduced in 2009. The primary objective is to gain insights on how consumers perceive innovation.

Each package was assigned a score for every one of the five evaluation criteria and also a total score. A composite score then was calculated for each package by averaging the scores for each criteria area.

With a composite score ranging from 3.8 to 4 out of a maximum of 5, the five packaging innovations that rate highest among the 39 selected packages are GE’s Caulk Singles, Hammerite Products' Hammerite Metalmaster, Rising Beverage Co.'s Activate drinks, Target’s Archer Farms cereals, and Dole’s Squish'ems. All the packages in this year’s survey have their strengths, but the common trait that nudges these five packages a little higher is a strong product concept that redefines product categories through breakthrough structure and graphics. A novel choice of materials supports those strengths.

In the case of GE’s Caulk Singles, both the innovative structure and the material address a consumer frustration with messy tubular caulk containers and support the idea of a practical and drama-free experience.
Cutting-edge structure and materials also put the Hammerite Metalmaster paint gun canister high on the list. Metalmaster prolongs the paint's lifespan and minimizes waste by preserving aerosol during paint dispensing and preventing the paint from hardening through contact with the package itself, which is not a bad idea for cost-conscious and environmentally aware consumers.

Activate's packaging structure and graphics are powerful because they engage consumers to release the provided vitamins and active ingredients into water on their own terms. Rising Beverage Co.'s package transforms consumers from passive users into active formulators of their own personal elixirs.

Target's choice of materials for Archer Farms' new cereal container conveys a benefit as daring as its structure or its graphics. By abandoning board-stock perforations in favor of a foil-laminate lid stock and a polypropylene overcap, as well as replacing traditional bag-in-box packaging with an oblong container, the brand promises prolonged product freshness and greater transparency.

Finally, Dole’s Squish'ems does a remarkable job combining graphics and structure in an unusual way. With its pouch-shaped container designed for easy gripping little hands and a playful re-sealable cap, Squish'ems makes it fun and engaging for children to eat their fruit daily.

Structure: The most tangible proof of innovation?

Consistent with our preliminary quarterly findings, the yearly results are making a strong case for packaging structure as perhaps the best strategy for conveying a new way of thinking about a product category (Fig. 3).

Therefore, innovations such as Y Water Inc.'s Y Water, Kimberly-Clark's Kleenex fruit wedge-shaped tissue carton, and GE’s Caulk Singles all get consistently high marks for their ability to re-think their category, as well as for perceived structural transformation.

Graphics and structure go hand-in-hand

The graphics that are perceived as most innovative are not necessarily the most elaborate or sophisticated. For example, Rémy Martin's lavish 1898 Coupe Fine Champagne Cognac and Living Essentials' 5-Hour Energy drink shots received good scores on graphic innovation. Yet, because they fail to effectively marry graphics and structure, at least in our survey respondents' view, both packaging innovations ranked toward the bottom of the list in overall score and in terms of their ability to redefine their respective categories.

Alternatively, innovations like Kimberly-Clark's Kleenex wedge-shaped tissue carton and Dole's Squish'ems won high overall marks because they do a remarkable job of combining powerful graphics with packaging structure (Fig. 4). What makes the combination so effective is the graphics either are used in an unexpected context (in the case of the fruit-wedge tissue carton) or they work toward an overarching brand story (seen in Dole's Squish'ems).

Materials support perceived innovation

The survey responses also point to one other conclusion. Though innovative materials and production processes might not predict overall perception of a packaging innovation as well as graphics and structure, they seem to represent good supporting evidence for innovation. They are necessary, but are not a sufficient indicator of innovation.

Though most of the top performers on our overall list also claim the top spots on the list for most innovative materials (e.g. Caulk Singles, Archer Farm Cereals, Hammerite Metalmaster, Fig. 5) and production (Caulk Singles), other top performers in terms of material innovation (ConAgra Frozen Food) or production (Procter & Gamble’s Prilosec) get average-to-low relative scores in terms of overall innovation.

Conversely, relatively solid structural advancements (e.g. Imperial Sugar's Redi-Measure) or graphic innovation (Vivitas Woman's Mom to Be supplements) lose the edge they have in these respective areas when rolled up into an overall innovation rating because they fail to deliver on cutting-edge materials and production.

-By Eric Zeitoun

The author, Eric Zeitoun, is President of Dragon Rouge USA, an international brand and design consultancy.

View our past 2009 quarterly survey results

Fall—http://www.shelfimpact.com/archives/2009/09/innovation_survey_takeaway_mar.php
Summer—http://www.shelfimpact.com/archives/2009/06/innovation_survey_takeaway_dar.php
Spring—http://www.shelfimpact.com/archives/2009/03/survey_to_identify_metrics_for.php