Narrative analytics in Japan skincare: An introduction
(Maps viewable on desktop only)
We took a small sample of 2,308 product reviews for skincare essence products in Japan, and ran them through narrative analytics to demonstrate how this new technology helps us quantify and contextualise the “landscape” of customer reviews.
The maps can be built with any type of unstructured language: Research verbatims, social media, news, and more. This technique does not pre-set the categories: The axes and clusters are based on the original Japanese reviews, and are unique to this dataset, from trillions of possible combinations. This customized clustering helps to avoid the bias and blindspots of pre-set categories. English backtranslation is not necessary - it is only shown here to help non-Japanese readers
Every dot in the map below represents a single review. Hover over the dots with your cursor. Note the slider on the lower right of the map. The 5-cluster view shows the high-level axes of the map. Discovery versus iteration. And experiential outcomes versus product attributes.
Move slider to adjust level of detail
Detailed narratives - in context of the full narrative landscape
Now move the slider to the right, to the 19 cluster view in the map above
The narrative clusters are more than functional/rational ‘topics’ – they are experiential. Clusters like “comfort/convenience – deciding to rely on it” and “desireability” capture strong experiential drivers which can not be captured through existing text analysis tools or topic models.
Some functional clusters in the map like “niacinamide” can be captured with keywords – most tools can detect this cluster. But beautycare is complex and experiential, which is why narrative analytics better captures the true consumer experience. It also correlates more strongly with behaviors and business outcomes.
​
The location of the clusters – and the dots within each cluster – are important. Product Desirability and Product texture & sensorial impression are next to each other, because they are related concepts.
Explore “narrative footprints” by brand. (based on selected clusters in the map)
The graphs below show the distribution of reviews across selected narratives. By brand. SKII has a higher proportion of reviews in the "learning how my skin responds" narrative, whereas Kiehl's is more concentrated in"solving skin problems". This an outside-in brand equity measurement. This type of brand comparison can be based on any open-text data: Reviews, news, social media, research verbatims, competitive ad tracking, focus group transcripts, and more. (note: below includes only a few selected narratives from the 19-cluster level, for demonstration)
Facial Treatment Essence
FTE Mask
Genetics Ultra Essence
Capture Snow Light Essence
Capture Total Intensive Essence
On Skin Essence
DS Cleary Brightening Essence
Moisture Mild White Perfect Essence
Review scores by narrative cluster: overall drivers of advocacy vs detraction
The below shows the distribution of review scores across selected narratives. This is a valuable way to understand what is driving detraction versus advocacy in a particular category of product, such as skincare essence. From this, we can see that the confidence in long term impact is a driver of strong advocacy. On the other hand, product texture and sensorial impression is more negative. Value in context of the moment an interesting cluster. The low rating scores suggest that reviewers struggle to justify the value of the product in particular moments and occasions.
Based on review scores, where are brands comparatively strong or weak vs competition?
SKII: polarized scores on skin response? For the reviews within "Learning how my skin responds", SKII's reviews are more polarised than the reviews of other brands. SKII reviews are at the same time more positive - with 69.6% earning review ratings greater than 83 versus the all other brands wherein only 60.2% exceeded an 83% review score. Meanwhile, SKII scores within this cluster were more negative. 19.6% were in the lowest band of reviews (below a score of 31) versus 0.8% for all other reviews. (This is not a large sample, thus it is intended as an illustration of analytical capability, rather than a robust analysis or an opinion about skincare products)
Kanebo: Higher ratings for skin texture during trial?: For the reviews within "trial experience/skin texture" Kanebo's ratings are higher than the reviews of other brands with 57.5% earning review ratings greater than 86 versus the all other brands wherein only 48.8% exceeded an 86% review score. Meanwhile, Kanebo has fewer detractors in the lowest rating score band within this cluster. 6.8% of Kanebo reviewers were in the lowest band of reviews (below a score of 57) versus 10.1% for all other reviews. (This is not a large sample, thus it is intended as an illustration of capability, rather than a robust analysis or an opinion about skincare products)
Quantifying the equity and experiential impact of specific products within a brand portfolio
How Genoptics changes the SKII portfolio: The below map show SKII reviews only, broken out by product name. Facial Treatment Essence is in red, comprising the majority of the reviews. From this view, we can see that Genoptics Ultra Essence has significant impact on SKII's share of the "product desirability" reviews (36% of all SKII reviews in this cluster are from Genoptics) as well as "Belief/confidence in impact over time" (56% of all SKII reviews in the cluster)
​​
Masks are about"feeling": The majority of FTE Mask reviews appear in the "My feeling" cluster where they comprise 25% of all the reviews in this cluster. Though counts are too small to make strong empirical conclusions, it seems consistent with the refreshing, renewed feeling people get after using a mask.