Why Products With Disastrous Usability Survive For Ages?

 To be successful in business you need to have a damn good product or service.

Recently while shopping - it was a week prior to Halloween and we were raising candy begging kids preparedness - I bumped into a huge bag of Carambar.

Memories from my childhood came up. Usually we got these at the local swimming pool in summer, or in winter when ice skating.

I immediately remembered how this mixture of caramel was sticking between the teeth. Always a bit afraid that it would never get off. It was so damn sticky but exceptionally delicious.

We bought the bag - it was a blend of different flavours. I could not remember that Carambar would come in flavours different than caramel. Maybe I just can not remember any more, or they've been adding in efforts of innovation initiatives some other flavours to the portfolio.

Halloween came, and unfortunately no kids were ringing the bell at the door. This led me to test this awesome product on my own.

I opened the bag and started to pick some of the bars and started to open them. - Immediately I had another very strong memory. The fact that you could never remove the packaging in one piece. Even worse, the fact that there were always - no matter how sophisticated your strategy of unpacking was - little pieces of the packaging material left sticking to the very sticky Carambar. 

Yes - in terms of unpacking usability, one of the worst products ever seen. And this for decades!

Now, since innovation is new flavours instead of making the original even better, I tested all versions in the bag.

They are all delicious. The innovation initiative obviously has been optimised for the right endpoints.

But packaging, ... total disaster!

I hope they did the testing of the packaging paper in terms of toxicity well, since I do not see kids being patient enough and having the right surgical skills to unpack a Carambar correctly getting access to clean and pure Carambar. 

Doing a bit of research. Carambar was invented in 1954. As it seems the product has been around eversince. The brand changed ownership which is nothing but uncommon for candy products.

One thing which is specially mentioned is a fact about the packaging. It's not the usability which sticks to consumers minds but another feature. - A special feature and French tradition is the packaging, which is printed on the inside with jokes or wisdom to amuse the consumer.

So, as it seems to consumers, the tricky unpacking is off set with some humour and jokes. - I just never got the paper staying in one piece for me to read the jokes.

Reading about importance of usability, there are numerous studies that proof that poor usability results in customers not buying from you.

Nevertheless, there are poor usability products surviving for decades.

What is usability? - It's when you don't get frustrated about the product you are interacting with?

Now in terms of Carambar? - The struggle in unpacking might increase the desire for the delicious sweet. And the sweet flavoured sticky Carambar is tasting so good that all the pain in getting to the point of tasting it is forgotten. - Is this the success of a product surviving already almost three quarters of a century?

What do you think? - With seven decades of success, would it be time to invest into packaging innovation? Or would this even destroy the authenticity and originality of the product?

A gardeners struggle - the soil bag

During spring and early summer, in the time of the year when plants start growing, everything is sprouting, nature in bloom, people start working in their gardens. According to statistics a habit two thirds of people in Switzerland share (reference).
The current COVID measures seem to drive this statistics even more in favor of sales of gardening supplies (reference).

Everybody is buying soil in various quantities. Many different flavors of soil. And, all packaged in laminated plastic bags. Bags, usually 80 - 100cm long, 40cm wide, and 8cm thick. Filled with premium soil at volumes of few liters for plants on terraces, up to 50 liters of garden soil for big projects. In any case, the package has a certain weight.

I never understood this packaging format! Why would you choose such packaging?
Obviously the responsible designers for these products have never been working in the garden. Or, they are extremely resilient to handling inconvenient products.

Every time I have to carry such a package I get upset.
If I grab the package with two hands on one of the short ends, it is difficult to carry the package and it risks constantly to slip out of my fingers.

If I grab the package with my hands along the longer dimension, then the package - given its weight - is bending through, slips out of my hands, and falls down on the ground.

If I grab it in the middle along the shorter dimension, it is bending through equally and it becomes difficult to carry.

When then loading the packages into the car, the next struggle starts. The dimensions of soil packages are not really fit for purpose. Obviously I need to pile the packages into the trunk of my car. And this is not an easy job. Virtually impossible if you are not Olympic weight lifter. Unloading is the same struggle in reverse order.

And then when ripping them open and trying to dose the amount of soil to be scattered into the plant bed. As soon as a certain amount of soil is missing in the package, the laminated bag becomes unstable. If not emptying the entire bag at once it becomes difficult to handle the package in controlled manner.

  

My practical experience with such packages is repeatably negative leading to higher levels of frustration.

How could one decide for this packaging format? What have been the requirements to come up with such package design?

One reason might be the possibility to pile many packages on a standard palette for transport and storage. 

Obviously an important argument and requirement. Efficient transport and storage is essential for a economically viable product. But, does it need to come at the price of modest customer experience and usability.

What I wonder is, if this packaging format has ever been put at a test with real day to day users.

Apart from the described scenarios above, many users can barely carry such packages given its dimensions and weight. I don’t want to know to how many serious back problems of people struggling to handle such packages the lack of customer centricity can lead.

Another interesting observation is the fact, that all manufacturers of packaged soil products use the exactly same packaging design. Why is that?

I can imagine several hypothetical reasons.

1. Nobody cares about the user, given the fact that there is no alternative and people still are buying.
2. Every producer is copy pasting from his competitor. Nobody is searching for differentiation. Nobody believes in consumers paying a premium for improved usability.
3. Even tough there are many different vendors and brands there might be only very few producers of soil.
4. There is only one serious manufacturer of respective packaging and filling systems. This would explain why there is almost no alternatively packaged products available.
5. The packaging design experts are only doing me-too. With complete lack of usability exercises or user research.
6. The cost requirements for packaging of garden and plant soil are so incredibly low that no other packaging is affordable.

There might be many more reasons ... And, are we as consumers willing to accept these?

What price would we be willing to pay for a better packaging design allowing acceptable handling of soil bags in the shopping, the transport, and use process?

How would a better package look like? What would be the features of a more ideal soil bag? Is there a format that could meet most of above requirements?

Some internet research gives already some hints. There might still be some products which are packaged in other format. Formats which might be more convenient to handle.

The package here to the right for sure has several advantages over the standard laminated bags. 

The handle on the top - foldable for being able to staple them on a palette (transport and storage requirements) - seems key to me. Only with a handle one can carry packages in a serious way. And depending on other dimensions and weight of the package it would even allow me to carry two packages at once, one with each hand. A much more balanced and more efficient way of carrying them.

If the package is less of a slim long bag, but more of a cuboid shape the usability of carrying them by the handle on the top becomes even better. A cuboid shape also fulfills the requirements for stapling the packages on a palette. They could be better organized into the trunk of a car, and could be better stored around the garden.

Also when using them in the garden; cutting the cuboid package open at one corner would allow to much more keep the shape of the package and dosing soil for use.

So, pretty simple and obvious to come up with a packaging format that might lead to much better customer acceptance. 

I am not a packaging expert. And I can well imagine that a packaging system for a cuboid product with a handle requires to manage some more degrees of freedom. But, given the quantities of soil being produced and sold in that business, and given the fact that such packaging and filling can be highly automated I would assume there is a case for such scenario. I could well imagine that going for such packaging could be a differentiating factor.

If you had the choice? Which package would you buy? And, would you pay a price for more convenience?