Frequently asked questions
The questions brand teams ask most before they spec a comp to the decision.
Higher fidelity means cost that’s appropriate to the decision. A production-matched comp for a pre-tooling validation isn’t expensive relative to the cost of tooling an incorrect structure. A production-matched comp for an internal hierarchy check is expensive relative to what a label wrap would have cost for the same purpose. The comparison is always between the cost of the comp and the cost of the decision it informs.
Start with the three questions. What decision does this comp inform? Who handles it and under what conditions? What would make the result untrustworthy? Those answers will identify the scenario. The framework above maps scenarios to fidelity levels. If there’s ambiguity, name it in the brief and ask your comp partner to advise. A vendor who understands fidelity as a specification will scope accordingly.
Sometimes. A production-matched comp built for pre-tooling validation can also serve as stimulus for a buyer review. The reverse isn’t true. A comp built for a leadership presentation can’t serve as research stimulus, regardless of how well it was executed at the fidelity level it was designed for. When one comp needs to serve multiple decisions, scope to the highest fidelity required by any of them.
Then the research should be rescheduled, or the research methodology should be reconsidered. Running an in-context shopper study on a low-fidelity stimulus doesn’t save time. It produces data that will need to be revalidated, often after a decision has already been made on the basis of it. A delayed study with correct stimulus costs less than a confident launch built on wrong answers.
It will eliminate the back-and-forth that slows it down. A vague comp request produces a vague scope, which produces a range quote, which requires clarification, which delays the build. A fidelity-specified request produces a precise scope on the first pass. The quote is faster. The build is right.