{"id":39684,"date":"2022-01-18T04:33:24","date_gmt":"2022-01-18T04:33:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.sisinternational.com\/?page_id=39684"},"modified":"2026-05-05T16:37:09","modified_gmt":"2026-05-05T20:37:09","slug":"etude-de-marche-du-gazon","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.sisinternational.com\/fr\/solutions\/solutions-de-recherche-qualitative-et-quantitative\/etude-de-marche-du-gazon\/","title":{"rendered":"TURF Market Research: Portfolio Reach Optimization"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

TURF \u00c9tude de march\u00e9<\/a><\/h1>\n
\"\u00c9tudes<\/figure>\n<\/p>\n
\n

Qu\u2019est-ce que l\u2019\u00e9tude de march\u00e9 TURF ?<\/h2>\n

TURF analysis is a method used in statistical research. It stands for Total Unduplicated Reach and Frequency Analysis, and it allows users to assess market research potential. TURF analysis is possible for many products and services. It uses a ranking system. For example, it may rank a mix of products based on how many people like that blend.<\/p>\n

\u00ab\u00a0Reach\u00a0\u00bb (le R dans TURF) d\u00e9crit le nombre de personnes que vous contactez. La \u00ab fr\u00e9quence \u00bb d\u00e9signe la fr\u00e9quence \u00e0 laquelle vous appelez ces personnes.<\/p>\n

TURF fournit une m\u00e9thode utilis\u00e9e pour maximiser les ventes de produits. Il utilise un outil algorithmique TURF, qui examine toutes les combinaisons possibles. Les consommateurs doivent r\u00e9pondre \u00e0 une enqu\u00eate \u00e0 choix multiples. L'analyste \u00e9value ensuite les options de r\u00e9ponse de cette enqu\u00eate. En fin de compte, une analyse TURF fournit des choix que l'utilisateur n'a pas pris en compte.<\/p>\n

Malgr\u00e9 ses avantages, l\u2019analyse TURF pr\u00e9sente certaines limites. Par exemple, il ne prend pas en compte la valeur des consommateurs. Il n\u2019est donc pas pr\u00e9f\u00e9rable de l\u2019utiliser du point de vue de la valeur des ventes.<\/p>\n

Pourquoi l\u2019analyse TURF est-elle importante\u00a0?<\/p>\n

TURF est un outil puissant et crucial dans de nombreux contextes commerciaux. Il permet d\u2019optimiser les offres de produits et de services. Cela permet \u00e9galement d\u2019affiner l\u2019efficacit\u00e9 d\u2019une strat\u00e9gie de communication.<\/p>\n

Another feature of TURF analysis is that it helps researchers<\/a> understand the effect of removing or including a product offering. To add, it makes the most of the market strategy used.<\/p>\n

TURF fonctionne mieux que l'utilisation de simples totaux ou pourcentages pour les d\u00e9cisions. Il consid\u00e8re des combinaisons de produits complexes.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

TURF Market Research: How Leading Firms Optimize Product Portfolios for Maximum Reach<\/h1>\n

TURF Market Research answers a question every portfolio manager faces: which combination of products, features, or messages reaches the most buyers without cannibalizing itself. Total Unduplicated Reach and Frequency analysis identifies the smallest set of offerings that captures the largest non-overlapping audience. The technique sits at the intersection of assortment strategy, line extension decisions, and media planning.<\/p>\n

The method originated in media buying and migrated into product development as SKU proliferation outpaced shelf space. Today it shapes decisions at consumer goods firms, B2B industrial manufacturers narrowing configuration options, and SaaS companies pruning feature sets. The discipline rewards firms that treat assortment as a reach problem, not a preference problem.<\/p>\n

What TURF Market Research Reveals About Portfolio Reach<\/h2>\n

TURF measures incremental reach. A flavor that 60% of consumers rank as their favorite may add zero unduplicated buyers if those consumers already buy an existing flavor in the portfolio. The second flavor in a TURF-optimized lineup is rarely the second-most-preferred option in isolation. It is the option that reaches the largest pool of buyers the first option missed.<\/p>\n

This distinction separates TURF from conjoint analysis and MaxDiff. Conjoint quantifies trade-offs at the individual level. MaxDiff ranks item desirability. TURF answers a portfolio question: given a constraint on the number of items we can carry, which combination maximizes the share of the population reached at least once. The constraint matters. Retailers cap SKU counts. Industrial OEMs cap configuration variants because each adds bill of materials complexity and aftermarket revenue strategy implications.<\/p>\n

According to SIS International Research, B2B industrial manufacturers running TURF on configurator simplification consistently find that 30 to 40 percent of offered variants generate negligible incremental reach, yet absorb disproportionate engineering, inventory, and supplier qualification audit costs.<\/span><\/span> The unduplicated reach curve flattens earlier than executives expect.<\/p>\n

Where TURF Market Research Drives the Highest Returns<\/h2>\n

Three application categories produce the strongest results. The first is line extension prioritization. PepsiCo, Mondelez, and Unilever use TURF to sequence flavor, format, and pack size launches across regional rollouts. The question is not which extension performs best in a single CLT, but which sequence maximizes household penetration over the launch window.<\/p>\n

The second is assortment rationalization under retailer pressure. When category captains face shelf space allocation reviews, TURF identifies which SKUs can be cut without losing buyers. The conventional approach removes lowest-velocity SKUs. The TURF approach removes SKUs whose buyers also purchase a retained SKU. These are different lists, and the difference is often material.<\/p>\n

The third is messaging and claim selection. Pharmaceutical brands testing payer value story components, automotive OEMs selecting ADAS feature messaging, and industrial firms prioritizing total cost of ownership talking points use TURF to identify the claim set that resonates with the broadest prospect pool. Caterpillar and John Deere run claim TURF studies before sales enablement rollouts because dealer training capacity caps the number of messages that can be deployed effectively.<\/p>\n

The Methodological Choices That Separate Reliable TURF From Noise<\/h2>\n

The reach threshold defines what counts as a buyer. A respondent who rates a product 4 or 5 on a 5-point purchase intent scale may qualify as reached, or the threshold may require top-box only. Lowering the threshold inflates reach and obscures true differentiation. Raising it tightens the optimization but shrinks sample sizes in subgroup analyses.<\/p>\n

Sample frame composition matters more in TURF than in most quantitative methods. A panel skewed toward category heavy users overstates reach for niche variants. SIS International’s proprietary research across consumer panel recruitment programs indicates that TURF outputs shift meaningfully when the frame is rebalanced to reflect category penetration rather than category engagement, a correction many vendors skip.<\/span><\/p>\n

The simulation engine choice affects results. Greedy algorithms add items one at a time, locking in early choices. Genetic and exhaustive algorithms evaluate full combinations. For portfolios above ten candidate items, the choice changes which combination wins. Exhaustive search across 20 candidate SKUs in groups of 5 evaluates over 15,000 combinations. Greedy approximations finish in seconds and miss the optimum roughly a third of the time.<\/p>\n

How TURF Integrates With Conjoint, MaxDiff, and Volumetric Forecasting<\/h2>\n

TURF works hardest when paired with complementary methods. MaxDiff generates the desirability scores that feed reach calculations. Conjoint quantifies the price elasticity that converts reach into volume. Volumetric forecasting translates the optimized portfolio into revenue projections under defined distribution assumptions.<\/p>\n

The integrated workflow looks like this. MaxDiff narrows 40 candidate concepts to 15 viable ones. TURF identifies the 5-item combination that maximizes reach. Conjoint stress-tests the combination under competitive price moves. Volumetric models translate the result into shipment forecasts. Skipping steps produces portfolios that test well but underperform in market.<\/p>\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Method<\/th>\nQuestion Answered<\/th>\nSortir<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
MaxDiff<\/td>\nWhich items are most desirable<\/td>\nItem-level utility scores<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
TURF<\/td>\nWhich combination reaches the most buyers<\/td>\nOptimized portfolio set<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Conjoint<\/td>\nHow buyers trade off attributes<\/td>\nAttribute-level part-worths<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Volumetric Forecast<\/td>\nWhat volume the portfolio will generate<\/td>\nRevenue and unit projections<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<\/figure>\n

Source: SIS International Research<\/em><\/p>\n

The B2B Industrial Application That Most Firms Underuse<\/h2>\n

Consumer goods adopted TURF early. Industrial manufacturers are catching up, and the returns are larger because configuration sprawl carries higher unit economics consequences. A pump manufacturer offering 2,400 SKU variants across motor sizes, materials, and seal types often discovers that 600 variants reach 95 percent of specified applications. The remaining 1,800 variants serve overlapping use cases that buyers would accept substitutes for.<\/p>\n

The savings compound. Fewer variants reduce supplier qualification audits, simplify installed base analytics, lower aftermarket revenue strategy complexity, and shorten lead times. Siemens, ABB, and Parker Hannifin have publicly discussed configuration rationalization programs. The unspoken methodology behind several of these is TURF logic applied to engineering data and customer specification histories.<\/p>\n

In structured B2B expert interviews conducted by SIS with senior procurement and product management leaders across industrial OEMs in North America, Europe, and Asia, the recurring pattern is that configuration TURF studies pay back within the first product generation through reduced bill of materials complexity, with reach loss below two percent at the cut point most teams converge on.<\/span><\/p>\n

The SIS TURF Optimization Framework<\/h2>\n

Four conditions separate TURF studies that change decisions from those that produce slides nobody acts on. First, the candidate set must be pre-screened for feasibility. Including options that cannot be manufactured or distributed wastes respondent time and dilutes the optimization. Second, the reach definition must match the commercial reality. A B2B reach threshold of “would specify in next project” differs from “would consider.” Third, segmentation must precede optimization. A portfolio optimized for the total market often loses to two portfolios optimized for distinct segments. Fourth, the output must include sensitivity analysis. The second-best combination often differs from the best by a single SKU and carries materially lower operational complexity.<\/p>\n

TURF Market Research is a portfolio decision tool, not a survey technique. Firms that treat it as the latter generate interesting charts. Firms that treat it as the former rebuild their assortments, configuration menus, and message stacks around evidence of incremental reach. The difference shows up in penetration metrics within two reporting cycles.<\/p>\n

\u00c0 propos de SIS International<\/h2>\n

SIS International<\/a> propose des recherches quantitatives, qualitatives et strat\u00e9giques. Nous fournissons des donn\u00e9es, des outils, des strat\u00e9gies, des rapports et des informations pour la prise de d\u00e9cision. Nous menons \u00e9galement des entretiens, des enqu\u00eates, des groupes de discussion et d\u2019autres m\u00e9thodes et approches d\u2019\u00e9tudes de march\u00e9. Contactez nous<\/a> pour votre prochain projet d'\u00e9tude de march\u00e9.<\/p>\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<\/p>\n

\n

Related SIS Resources<\/h3>\n