Skip navigation
The Insight Scoop: January

The Insight Scoop: January

By Charlie Gill

In this January edition we will explore:

  • What behaviours are shaping shopping?

  • How is digital technology impacting the charity sector?

  • Why do one in three Brits feel like they’ve been judge for how much effort they put into their looks?

  • 5 things you need to know about Veganuary and Veganism

  • How to move beyond demographic segmentations?

  • Why Gillette’s ad had the biggest impact with women?

Shaping shopping

Everyone shops – it’s part of the national consciousness – but it’s in a constant state of evolution and research suggests there are three key behaviours set to reshape and refine retail in the coming years. There has been a shift in the mindset as people adopt a “conscientious consumerism”. Ethical shopping is one of the fastest growing sectors in retail today trends like Fairtrade and organic are growing as people want to know more about the provenance of their food, fashion and jewellery and the people who produce it. Almost half of UK shoppers (40%) feel more positive about brands that publish their ethical standards.

Secondly the experience economy has hit the mainstream as spending – by all age groups, not just millennials – overtakes more traditional discretionary spend, like leisure or entertainment. “The major change here however is seeing the behaviour come almost full circle with people once again starting to view the act of shopping itself as an experience. Far from killing the high street, these “social capitalists” are giving it whole new meaning. Two in five (44%) will search or wait for a discount code or voucher before purchasing– but higher social grades (ABC1) are up to 20% more likely to do so then any other demographic.

Takeaway: Almost half of UK shoppers today (40%) feel more positive about brands that publish their ethical standards – and the internet makes it easier for people to discover the credentials of manufacturers and retailers alike.



Charities and digital


According to a recent study by Tech Trust, 59% of UK charities still do not have digital strategy in place. The majority lack the tools and training needed to implement it. The same report suggests those with a digital strategy are in a far better position than those without. 92% of digitally focused charities expect to increase their measurable impact due to investment in technology, also cited increased donations, increased productivity, and efficiency as a result.

1.Technology to tackle homelessness Homeless charities are using contactless to help those affected by the decline in cash usage. TAP London is an example.

2. Apps to streamline operations Mostly in the form of apps, which are used by employees and volunteers to help speed up and simplify administrative tasks.

3. The benefits of blockchain Homeless charity St. Mungo’s now allows people to track the impact of their donations. The blockchain platform, Alice, allows donors to request a refund if they felt their donation did not result in the promised end goal.

4. Tech to teach those in need Paper Airplanes is a charity that provides peer-to-peer language and professional skills to young people in conflict areas through Skype and other communication platforms.


Takeaway: As Tech Trust’s report states, charities have the potential to improve almost every aspect of their operations – from internal efficiency to online user experience – with a greater focus on digital strategy.





Being judged

Women are 3x more likely than men to prioritise ‘making their body look more attractive’ when deciding what to wear.

Women are twice as likely to think they’ve been judged for how much effort they put into their looks – but men are twice as likely to say it was their partner who judged them. 1 in 3 Brits feel they’ve been judged for how much effort they made with their looks. Women are twice as likely as men to have felt judged for putting too much effort into their looks (12% vs 6%). They are also slightly more likely than men to feel they’ve been judged for putting in too little effort (26% vs 21%).

Still among those who felt judged for their appearance, mean are almost twice as likely as women to say it was their partner who judged them (29% vs 17%). Women are slightly more likely than men to feel they’ve been judged by a strangers (44% vs 37%). Younger respondents are significantly more likely than older respondents to feel they’ve been judged by every given option, except for a partner or date. Women are three times as likely to prioritise making their body look attractive when choosing what to wear (10% vs 3%). 48% of women say they want people to notice when they make an effort with their looks, compared to 32% of men.

Takeaway: Younger respondents are significantly more likely than older respondents to feel they've been judged by every given option, except for a partner or date.




1. Flexitarian diet is more common than vegan or vegetarian diets 17% limit their meat consumption, also known as flexitarian. Excluding people who cite religious reasons this still leaves 14%.

2. Health motivates meat reduction, animal rights motivate meat exclusion Those who cut down on their meat intake mostly cite their health. Vegans/Vegetarians are more likely to cite Animal Welfare for eliminating meat.

3. Awareness campaigns do matter – to some Motivations mean people respond differently e.g. Flexitarians more influenced by expert opinions & personal connections.

4. Veganuary attracts a diverse crowd Men & women equally likely to participate. 57% of those doing Veganuary are under 35. More likely to be university-educated, especially to a postgraduate level. 83% of those participating have done a monthly challenge before (general population 37%).

5. There are clear differences of perception Those who’ve heard of Veganuary, 43% either support or strongly support it, whereas just 25% don’t support it or are outright against it (6%). 37% of 55-64-year-olds don’t support/against Veganuary, compared to just 14% of younger audiences.

Takeaway: Brands need to be aware that different demographics widely differ in their opinions on veganism.





A person’s demographic form just one part of their makeup, and are just one set of data by which marketers can segment consumers. While important, they’re not the be-all-and-end-all of understanding the way consumers behave. These demographic details won’t necessarily mean that your product satisfies the consumer’s wants and desires, because their wants and desires aren’t solely dictated by their demographics. While demographics are objective, true or false facts about your consumers relating to who they are, psychographics are subjective, fluid attitudes and interests that tell you more about why they buy. Psychographics are defined as:

“The study and classification of people according to their attitudes, aspirations, and other psychological criteria, especially in market research.” As such, psychographics are often also referred to as IAO variables; cataloging consumers’ Interests, Activities and Opinions. Also personality traits, values, attitudes, lifestyle choices, goals, motivations, and cognitive biases.

Traits identified by psychographic analysis are fluid and can be felt more or less strongly at different times/situations. Separate out their ‘aspirational’ traits from their fundamental ones, the former are often overshadowed by the latter.

Takeaway: Psychographic segmentation is often referred to as the ‘Dark Arts’ of marketing.



The Gillette ad


Gillette recently launched “The Best Men Can Be”. The ad generated strong reactions on social channels, and they are facing backlash. Data about the social conversation focused on Gillette confirms that their branding primarily targets men. In the past year, 56% of Gillette conversation has been generated by men, majority over age 35. This demographic has discussed Gillette’s brand optimistically, with 66% being positive conversation. But, broader conversation about shaving is dominated by young women. The shaving conversation online is 62% female and 75% are <35. Women’s razors are more expensive, society expects women to shave everywhere and this frustrates them. Engaging women positively is neglected; only 21% of women’s online  conversation about shaving is joyful. Gillette’s ad sparks controversy & engages a new audience at the same time. Women who engaged in the conversation about the ad, 51% expressed joy, which is a significant departure from women’s sentiment about shaving in general. While 28% of women exhibited disgust about the ad, most was targeted at toxic masculinity and not about the ad itself. Women’s response was incredibly positive, and some of the most retweeted posts were made by women.

Takeaway: The data behind Gillette’s ad shows it had the biggest impact with women. The broader online conversation about the topic of shaving in general is actually dominated by young women. Gillette may be missing an opportunity.




The Author

Charlie Gill

Charlie Gill

Insights & Planning Executive

Charlie is part of the Planning and Insights team here at twentysix. Using her BSc in Psychology, Charlie's work involves researching customer's behaviour and motivations, as well as their world around them. From going out and speaking to consumers in their natural habitats to conducting research in our in-house biometric lab, Charlie uses multiple techniques to become an expert on your customer.