The rock musician Kenna could’ve been a great artist if producers hadn’t relied too much on the listener’s opinions.

“But aren’t fans the backbone of every musician’s career?”, you’d ask.

Not if you pick the wrong one as your reference point.

Here’s a story about how decision-makers failed to recognize the greatness of their assets by listening to the wrong audience.

An artist loved by almost everyone

Kenna was raised in Virginia Beach, inside a family of immigrants from Ethiopia. The family wanted to show his son Kenna that a better life was possible, especially for him in the land of the free.

Kenna didn’t seem like the typical rockstar. He was so modest that when he got to open before the group No Doubt (with Gwen Stefani as their vocalist), he forgot to tell the audience his name. This and other qualities made him different from the rest.

His music couldn’t be categorized into one genre. Sometimes music platforms put him in the “alternative” category and some said his music was a clash of the new British wave from the 80s mixed with hip-hop.

His music ended up in the hands of Craig Kallman, co-chair of Atlantic Records. This guy was known for being obsessed with music and having a vinyl collection of around 1.5 million records. He received around 200 demos a week which he would listen to attentively over the weekend. One of those was Kenna’s demo which instantly caught his attention. He flew Kenna to New York soon after and was amazed by what he heard.

Other famous people from the music industry like Fred Durst (vocalist from Limp Bizkit) and Paul McGuiness (U2’s manager) were astonished by Kenna’s music. Even MTV showcased his music almost 500 times in a time whereas the average music videos are shown just around 200 times.

In other words, people who knew about the music industry loved him. Their gut told them that this artist would be loved by the crowd.

But things were going to change drastically.

“Fans” aren’t getting it

The New York executives who were studying Kenna’s album decided to survey potential customers. This is a common practice in the industry. Before you pour millions into an artist’s career you want to see if people will bite the bait. So they invest a couple of thousand bucks in market research to test his music.

An external agency from California sent Kenna’s music to 1,200 people filtered by age, gender, and ethnicity. 3 days later they surveyed the people and asked them to rank Kenna’s record from 0 to 4 (0 meaning people didn’t like it at all).

The results were disappointing. A 25-page report said the music was pretty bad with songs ranked between 0.8 to 1.3.

Chance of success? 0

Kenna’s career practically ended there.

Coca-Cola’s battle against Pepsi

Before looking at what went wrong with Kenna’s case, let’s look at another example of wrong choices leading to worse outcomes.

Coca-Cola’s battle with Pepsi has been legendary over the years, but there was a time when Coca-Cola thought they were going to lose it entirely. Pepsi was gaining a lot of market share over the 70s going from 6% to 14% of total U.S. soft-drink sales. By 1984, Coke was just 2.9% ahead.

The worst part was that they were ahead in every other metric: twice the vending machines, more shelf space, lower prices, and $100 million more in advertising than Pepsi.

According to Pepsi, customers preferred Pepsi’s taste in a blind-tasting experiment which they advertised across national TV in what they called the Pepsi Challenge. People would try two cups of soft drinks not knowing which one contained Pepsi or Coke and they would consistently prefer Pepsi’s flavor.

Coca-Cola replicated this experiment and got the same results. People simply liked Pepsi more.

They were devastated.

Their well-kept almost mythical secret formula was now failing to deliver good results.

In a desperate attempt, Coca-Cola changed the formula and made it more light and sweet (i.e. make it more like Pepsi’s). They branded it the New Coke.

Their market research conducted with hundreds of thousands of customers supported this new product and they launched it confidently in 1984. The CEO, Goizueta said this was a prime example of taking an intelligent risk.

But as with Kenna’s music career, it failed miserably.

As the Coca-Cola website recalls, thousands of consumers called to complain about the new product. Coca-Cola’s offices across the U.S. were flooded with calls, with over 1,500 calls a day compared to barely 400 before the taste change. Every Coke employee seemed to be held personally responsible for this change. Consumers were outraged.

Months after the “most memorable marketing blunder ever”, Coca-Cola relaunched the original Coke flavor as Classic Coke and they were back in business.

A blind man leading another one

In both instances, companies did their due diligence.

They asked hundreds or thousands of people and got promising results. There was no doubt that people were going to like what they heard and tasted.

But they didn’t.

Why?

Because of how the research was done.

The Pepsi paradox

In Coke’s case, tasters only drank one sip and not the whole can.

People have a natural tendency to like sweet flavors and the younger you are the more you crave intense sweet taste according to research. Since Pepsi’s formula is sweeter, people liked it more.

However, consuming a small portion of something sweet is an entirely different experience from consuming larger quantities of it. A higher intake of something sweet becomes unpleasant or overwhelming to our senses. Thus, consuming more Pepsi would feel like an overload compared to Coke. And since the research just tested for preferences over a sip of soda, Coke would lose every time.

And there’s also brand awareness.

A renowned researcher and marketing innovator from the 20th century called Louis Cheskin, coined it sensation transfer. He figured out that how people feel about a product after trying it can affect their perception of its value, price, quality, and emotion. This then shapes what they expect and whether they feel satisfied.

If a brand consistently provides products that create positive sensations, customers are more likely to associate the brand with positive qualities ultimately enhancing the brand’s reputation and increasing awareness among potential customers.

In the real world, people consume soft drinks knowing the brand and more than just a sip. So instead of artificial blind tests with just a sip, it’s more accurate to have people drink in their natural environment and base your decisions on those results.

Lack of music context awareness

Researchers in Kenna’s study thought that playing a song online would give them accurate data about what people like in music.

However, the study missed the context factor entirely.

The survey on Kenna’s album was based on playing short clips of songs online or through the phone, which might not fully represent the whole song. Playing isolated song clips doesn’t capture the full listening experience in different settings or moods.

Also, the survey also didn’t consider factors like the artist’s image and reputation, which can influence people’s perception of music.

Everyone who judged Kenna’s talent had that context in mind. Producers and other musicians knew the industry and have had years of experience dealing with fans. MTV’s audience reaction and No Doubt’s concert also hinted towards a good reception by fans.

Judging Kenna’s music with a lack of context is like relying on customers judging a Coke based on just a sip.

Final thoughts

Assessing a person’s potential or a product’s success based on faulty data can have devastating effects on both the individual and the company involved.

We can’t disregard the context and how people consume products.

Listening to short music clips over the phone or online, as well as taking a quick sip of a soft drink, are experiences that don’t replicate the natural environment where people typically enjoy these things.

Whenever we test to see if something is going to make it we should be aware of key factors and be cautious about how we test it before relying on the results.

A bad test not only harms profits but it can destroy a person’s career.

Question before making the final judgment, many people will thank you for it.