Use case: an ad pretest of four films, in interviews and then a focus group

Four 20-second films, one promise: “Vos projets méritent un meilleur départ” (your projects deserve a better start). A sailboat that never leaves the dock, a skier on a seafront in midsummer, a cyclist in a suit lost in the desert, a surfer in a garden pool. Which one should speak to entrepreneurs? That is a pretest question, and we put it to synthetic entrepreneurs.

In short

• The campaign is already on air, but the personas had never seen it, so we ran it as a pretest.
• Each film was shown the way a pretest shows it: a shot-by-shot script and three or four key frames.
• Fifteen one-to-one interviews first, then a focus group of nine.
• Everyone gets the joke. The meaning of the promise only really comes out in the group.

The setup

What everyone gets

The fifteen entrepreneurs interviewed alone spot the twist in all four films and tie it straight to their own lives: slow financing, red tape, tools too small for their plans.

The full meaning, though, often stays implicit: a project held back, and a bank that moves it forward. Only 7 of the 15 put it into words. So we added one question for the focus group: “What is the film trying to say?” All nine participants then stated it, for each of the four films.

Verbatims are kept in French, the language of the interviews.

Film by film

Film A · The sailboat

Everyone gets it, but it hits the least. The grey quayside kills the opening energy, and a crew speaks less to entrepreneurs who feel alone at the helm. In the interviews it is the least convincing film for 8 of 15. And 4 of 15 see the setback, but blame the bank itself.

Film B · The skier

The strongest twist, and that is what hurts it: people read a bad call rather than a lack of means. Business owners and founders reject it most. In the group, it is the least convincing film for 5 of 9.

Film C · The cyclist

The truest metaphor: the suit, the bike, the desert, and the GPS voice announcing a right turn in 150 kilometres. It feels dignified and deep, close to how long a real project takes. It is preferred in 10 of 15 interviews and by 6 of 9 in the group. One minority voice finds it discouraging.

Film D · The surfer

The funniest and most memorable, with its blue-green sun cream and underwater shots. The youngest profiles and neobank customers love it; others feel slapstick does not suit a bank. The group does not settle it.

The test that makes the difference

Talking it through, the group comes up with its own test: does the film respect the entrepreneur? When the setting is wrong, as with the cyclist, the character keeps their dignity. When the character seems to have made the mistake, like the skier in midsummer, the joke is on them. That test, more than the humour, explains the choices.

The promise wants proof

The personas understand what the bank promises, but ask what it actually does. In the group, nobody mentions an offer for entrepreneurs; only the customer-service award badge reassures a few.

Why two methods

Interviews give each person’s reading, with no influence from others. They showed the meaning stayed implicit, so the focus group was built to bring it out, with everyone answering alone before the group reacts. That is how a real research programme works, one wave shaping the next. Here, it all fitted into a few hours.

What a pretest would have put on the table

The campaign is on air, and we do not know how it performs. But had these films been shown this way before the shoot, four leads would have come out:

• make the cyclist the lead film, while watching its discouraging reading;
• add a concrete proof point for entrepreneurs to the end card;
• rework the skier, so the joke blames the setting, not the person;
• ask about the English voice at the start, “You ready? Let’s go!”, which nobody mentioned: silence is not approval.

These are hypotheses, not verdicts. But they are exactly the questions you would rather ask before the shoot than after the campaign airs.

What this case cannot tell you