Lego

questionnaire
analysis

In this presentation, I will analyse the results of my questionnaire about my advertisement to see if it
matched with the target audience and if it successfully reflected the brand.

Questionnaire
To get as many results as possible, I uploaded my questionnaire on the social media site Tumblr to get
as many wide range of responses as I can. Based on the results of the age I realised that my
questionnaire was not a stratified example as I had hoped to aim for the age group of adults who
were above their 30s, and had children as they would be more likely to understand whether a certain
technique would make them buy the product for their child. However the results of my questionnaire
only consisted of a younger demographic (from the ages between 17-18), which shows that I couldve
uploaded it on a better website where mostly parents would go on instead.
My questionnaire consisted of closed questions, open questions, multiple choice questions, check
box questions etc. The closed questions gave me more direct and solid answers, and open questions
allowed me to view the audiences opinions more.

Demographics
At the beginning of my questionnaire, I asked questions about the viewer
themselves. This would allow me to see which age group theyre in and
whether it appealed to them or not.
To see my audiences demographic is important so I can find out whether they
are in the specific age group/demographic I was targeting at, and to see if my
advert was successful in reflecting my branding to them.
Also, if they were in the specific age group I was searching for/appealing to
then I could easily have an insight of their opinions.
Besides the question where I ask for their name, I used closed questions to ask
them for their age and gender rather than using an open question. Using
closed questions are more direct and allows the viewer to answer it quickly
rather than typing it out themselves.

Gender and age

From my questionnaire I found out that mainly females viewed my
advert. However, because my brands target audience doesnt
generally target a specific gender, it doesnt prove or disprove
whether or not it reflected my brands ethos or not.
However, the results of the age goes against my target audience as
my target were middle aged parents. My questionnaire shows that
the results were all done by teenagers which doesnt correlate to
Legos mission statement of targeting childrens parents. However
the rest of the information, or answers, could help with
improvement of my advertisement as teenagers would probably
have an eye on how to improve the aesthetic qualities of my advert.

Branding and ethos

In my questionnaire I also asked the viewer what their

thoughts were on the target audience, so I could find out if it
was successful in targeting the audience I wanted. 62.5%
(the majority) answer replied that it appealed to both which I
was going for. 25% also chose that it primarily targeted
children, which is also a good thing as the idea of the advert
was to capture the childrens attention so they could tell
their parents. This question, which is closed, would allow the
viewers to quickly choose an answer so they could spend
their time thinking on the open questions which are more
important as it shows more of their opinion and thoughts.
Even though the demographics of my viewers didnt exactly
correlate with my target audience, the majority (being
87.5%) said that they would purchase the product after
watching the advert.

Branding and ethos

An example of a media
specific question I
couldve done

I created a linked question, between a closed question

to an open question, to find out why the viewers would
want to buy the product after watching the advert. I
used an open question as it allowed more thoughts and
opinions which may have not even entered my mind.
For the question where I ask the viewers what would
make them buy the product, using qualitative data is
much better than using quantitative data. The use of
qualitative data for this question will allow me to
gather more detailed information, but most
specifically the successes of my advert, and what I
have done well.
From my results I can see that some responses used
media language such as personal success, nostalgia
etc. It made me think that I shouldve added a few
more extra questions for people who are aware of the
media language to answer, so I can be more specific in
my findings.

Aesthetic qualities
For my questions about aesthetic qualities, I wanted my answers to
be very direct about how well I did in that aspect of my advert. This
lead me to using closed questions and scale questions which could
allow me to easily see the majority of how many people thought
the aesthetics were well done. I asked three questions about the
aesthetics.
One of which everyone answered that my shots were effective.
This result tells me that the range of shot types I used were all well
done.
However, I couldve done this question using a semantic type
question instead where the viewer would answer using a scale
from great (1) to poor (5) so I could have an even more specific idea
of where there opinion lies rather than a vague yes or no.

Aesthetic qualities
In these last two questions, there is a particular divide within the
answers which made me unable to decide whether or not these
things were done well or not. For the editing, 50% said it was good
(4), and 12.5% great (5) which is the majority in comparison to the
ok (3) which is 12.5% and the 25% poor (4). Even though the
positive opinions were the majority, there were still quite a bit of
people who didnt like the editing.
Looking at the results now, it would have been better for me to
follow up with a qualitative question to find out the specific
reasons why the viewer gave it the score they did.
The product placement question is the question with the most
divide as 50% said that it was great/good, and the other 50% said it
was poor/very poor. Similarly to the previous question, if I had
followed up with an open, qualitative question then I couldve had
more specific and clear results.

Familiarity

Yes 33.3%
No 66.7%

This closed question is also relevant to the questionnaire and

the opinions of the viewers as it would allow me to see
whether or not they have seen the Lego brands advertising.
Seeing whether they are familiar with a previous Lego
advertisement would help me into knowing whether they
would understand what the brand is trying to reflect.
However from these results it is clear that the majority (being
66.7%) have not seen a Lego advert before which may have
been a hindrance to finding out their opinions about the Lego
brand. This is a could have been a hindrance because most of
the results will not have come from people who are familiar
with the marketing or branding of the Lego product, and may
not understand what I am trying to achieve. For the
questionnaire I couldve perhaps created other questions for
people who havent watched Lego adverts before, or linked an
example of a previous Lego advert so they couldve gotten
more familiar with the brand.

Improvement

For this question, I wanted to make the viewer very expressive in their opinion and observations, which is
why I made it into an open question. Since this is also a qualitative question, these comments were all very
helpful, especially in terms of aesthetic quality and content (idea/suggestions while filming the scenes). Im
satisfied that I put this question last as it gave an overall comment about my advert, and more suggestions
on the improvement of my advert to give me more insight. Based on the comments I couldve edited my
advert so that it had flowed better (since it was stop motion, it probably looked too choppy), used more
variety of actions with the Lego product (building more things with the Lego) and improving on the lighting
and clearness of the advert.

Rachel

Visual of the presentation are nicely presented and reflect the brand, its easy to read, clearly laid out. The points made are all
correct but lack examples and further exploration, more depth needs to be added to really reflect the result of the question and
why the question type has really supported or hindered an answer.
The main problem with the results is due to the structure of the questionnaire. Errors like not giving a closed question to asking
someone age means you havent placed thought into the questionnaire for the persona answering it, closed questions should
generally come first, you need to define the demographic of the people answering the the questionnaire quickly so they are more
like to put thought into the qualitative answers later. You also need to establish if the sample is correct which in your case it isnt,
you have a student audience answering your questionnaire. When the correct demographic sample is obtained this is known as
stratified sampling, dont worry if you cant get the adults to answer it, but you must justified that your sample wasnt stratified
and as representational as you had hoped to achieve.
I think it might be best to recreate your question, fill in the answer you got from the others already as if it was them answering
how ever asked some extra questions to support some of the closed questions you got towards the end and if you want, perhaps
think about asking specific media question - I know I deliberately told you not to which I stick by to a certain extent, but some of
the answers you have received are quite media, its not wrong to include them, but having a deliberate gap/ divide so those
media types can skip straight to the end may be more beneficial.
Also use some of the fancy terms for question types like I have put in the marking, although if you accidently delete this, just look
at page 30 on the Research book on the Research page of our website. You might also want to summarise at the end how you
would improve your work based upon your findings from the questionnaire.
I would reward you a Pass, though the visual and presentation is definitely in the Merit.