24 / 04 / 2025 — 15 / 05 / 2025 (Week 01 — Week 04)
Kim Seoyoon / 0357755MER 60104 / Packaging and Merchandising Design / Bachelor of Design (Hons) in Creative Media / Taylor's University
Exercise / Case Study – Packaging Design Analysis
INSTRUCTIONS
EXERCISES
FEEDBACK
REFLECTION
INSTRUCTION
Module Information Booklet
EXERCISE– Packaging Design Analysis (20%)
Timeframe: Week 01 – Week 04 (Deadline Week 04)
1. Overview: Choose FOUR (4) products in the market that you believe have poor packaging design. Ensure the product is readily available for purchase.
2. Product Analysis: Conduct a thorough analysis of the existing packaging design. Identify the specific shortcomings and challenges in the current packaging. Consider factors such as functionality, aesthetics, sustainability, target audience, and branding.
3. Market Research: Investigate the target market for each product and assess how the current packaging aligns with the expectations and preferences of the target audience.
4. Competitor Analysis: Research and analyze the packaging designs of competing products in the same category. Identify trends and best practices in packaging design within this product category.
EXERCISES – Packaging Design Analysis
For this module's first exercise, Mr Shamsul instructed us to carry out a visual analysis on 4 chosen products' packaging design over the 4 weeks. The analysis are to include product analysis, market research, and competitor analysis. Below are the four products I have chosen to study with:
Week 01 – 999 Chlorophyll Soap
Fig 1.1 999 Soap's Packaging Design, Week 01
Product Analysis:
Overall, the packaging design of 999 Chlorophyll Soap isn't at its best at conveying its product benefits. There are too many types of fonts used on each side of the box packaging, causing an overwhelming experience when looking at the packaging. The logo being formed only with the number 999 also dilutes their brand identity in terms of originality and functionality. The use of strong primary colours of yellow & red with the combination of black does not provide the impression of a soap brand. While the product description promotes soothing and skin refreshment benefits, the use of bold colours in this packaging design does not complement the product's key strength. Furthermore, the overall style of its packaging design seems outdated and does not reflect the current design trends or what consumers expect in visual attractiveness. With the use of multiple typefaces, the product information is not delivered clearly towards the consumers nor complementing its benefits. The use of normal cardboard material for the box packaging seems less eco-friendly and does not support the product's natural ingredients.
Market Research:
999 Chlorophyll Soap is valued for its affordability, effectiveness, and natural ingredients, making it popular among consumers seeking traditional remedies and value for money, usually targeted towards the older generation. However, the packaging design emerges as a significant factor influencing its broader market potential.
Competitor Analysis:
Fig 1.2 Competitor Brand's Packaging Design, Week 01
One of 999 soap's competitor brand, Dettol soap's packaging design use bold and clean colours with the use of a prominent logo that secures Dettol's visual brand identity. The use of a variant set of colours and clear labels increases visual attractiveness and quick product identification, while 999 soap lacks visual emphasis on its natural and herbal properties, which misses out on their opportunity to connect with health-conscious consumers. 999 soap's outdated and inconsistent design is also one of the factors in diluting its brand recognition.
Week 02 – Fish Mosquito Coil
Fig 1.3 Fish Mosquito Coil, Week 02
Product Analysis:
Fish Mosquito Coil’s packaging has several significant visual and functional shortcomings that undermine its appeal and effectiveness. Firstly, the design lacks visual impact where instead of using bright, eye-catching colors and engaging graphics commonly found on competing products, the packaging appears dull and uninspired. This makes it easy for customers to overlook the product on crowded store shelves. Additionally, the branding and messaging are unclear. The brand name, logo, and product function are not prominently displayed, which can confuse potential buyers about what the product is and who makes it, ultimately reducing brand recognition and trust. Another major issue is the absence of clear product information. Modern consumers expect transparency regarding ingredients, usage instructions, and safety warnings, especially for household items. Fish Mosquito Coil’s packaging fails to provide this essential information, which can lead to mistrust or hesitation to purchase.
Market Research:
The market for mosquito coils like Fish Mosquito Coil comprises mostly domestic households in tropical and subtropical regions where mosquito-borne diseases are prevalent. The consumers of these products prefer well-working products that are reasonably priced and easy to use, with safety and convenience being of special concern when the products are intended to be used inside homes. There is also a growing segment of environmentally conscious consumers who choose coils made from natural ingredients and those with scents, and commercial customers in food service and hospitality sectors who require constant mosquito protection for customer comfort.
Competitor Analysis:
Fig 1.4 Uzumaki Mini Mosquito Coil, Week 2
One of Fish Mosquito Coil's competitor, Kincho Uzumaki Mini Mosquito Coil, have a signature round can design which demonstrates how unique packaging and heritage can create a strong brand identity and emotional connection with the customer. This type of packaging not only protects the product but also utilizes as a collectible, offering value beyond basic utility.
Week 03 – Single-Handle Garbage Bag
Fig 1.5 Garbage Bag, Week 03
Product Analysis:
Mr DIY's Singlet Handle Everyday Garbage Bag is lacking in a number of important areas of packaging design that are both counter to functionality and consumer appeal. While the singlet handle design itself is functional, the packaging itself is not convenient through resealability or a built-in dispenser, rendering storage and use of the bags once opened highly inconvenient. In terms of visual appeal, the package is too dull and boring and relies on pale green colour and dull graphics that are not at all attention-grabbing or communicating any aspect of the lemongrass scent being of high quality and freshness. Further, the box is primarily plastic with no seeming reference to environmental friendliness or earth-friendly materials, which is growing to be a high priority concern to consumers now. The brand is not well presented, with minimal size and messaging, resulting in poor recognition of the brand and poor communication of the point of differentiation of the product. Overall, the packaging does not align with consumers' needs nowadays, particularly those that prioritize convenience, beauty, and environmental care as key elements, thus constraining the potential of the product as far as competition in the market is concerned.
Market Research:
The prime target market for garbage bags like Mr DIY's Singlet Handle Everyday Garbage Bag Lemongrass is basically residential consumers, who constitute the largest segment in the world's garbage bags market. Residential consumers require garbage bags to dispose of daily waste, including food scraps, packaging, and garden refuse, promoting constant demand on account of convenience and affordability. Urbanization and changes in lifestyle have increased the demand for hygienic, long-lasting, and user-friendly waste disposal products. Garbage bags are today not only required by consumers to be functional but also to offer qualities such as pleasant fragrances like lemongrass, durability, and ease of use. Moreover, environmental awareness has established a new market segment of environmentally conscious consumers to purchase biodegradable or recyclable packaging materials and has opened communication of sustainability.
Competitor Analysis:
Fig 1.6 Glad Garbage Bag, Week 03
One of Everyday Garbage Bag's competitors would be Glad. They lead the market with tough, easy-to-handle packaging, advanced closure technology, and robust branding. Its packaging will be convenient, tough, and clearly express its benefits, such as sustainability initiatives. On the other hand, Everyday Garbage bags typically offer average performance at a low price but fall short in packaging quality, convenience, and sustainability. They come with plain packaging and omitted features that take away from their attractiveness to consumers who seek reliability and ease of use.
Week 04 – Sweet & Sour Plum Powder
Fig 1.7 Plum Powder, Week 04
Product Analysis:
The packaging design for the above Plum Powder lacks clear branding. Not only is the overall style of design outdated, but there is no outstanding branding logo design on the front of the packaging– having no clear logo that works as the face of the product and represents the whole brand makes the consumers feel confused when purchasing the products. Furthermore, it is also hard to maintain consistent sales on the product without having clear branding on the packaging design, as it makes the product hard to recognize at first glance. The placement of the logo along with the fruits in the same size does not strengthen their brand identity and is easy to overlook. Functionally, such a packaging style provides little protection against water and contamination, which is essential for powdered foods in Malaysia's warm and humid environment. The absence of resealability also further undermines freshness and convenience for consumers who cannot or will not use the contents of the product in one sitting. Aesthetically, the pack looks standard and lacks visual appeal and uniqueness. There is little trace of bold branding, unique colour schemes, or fascinations in the form of appealing visual elements that can grab eyes amidst chaotic retail shelves. The design doesn't reflect premium quality or cultural heritage, nor does it provide effective cues regarding the country of origin of the product, ingredients, or uses. In terms of sustainability, the likely use of single-use plastic is a drawback since modern consumers are increasingly choosing to use recyclable or eco-friendly packaging. Overall, the packaging fails to effectively convey brand identity or appeal to consumers who want either retro authenticity or new-age ease of use.
Market Research:
The consumer base for this type of plum powder in Malaysia is fruit enjoyers who like mixing fruit with sour, salty, and sweet spices. The demand for traditional as well as high-end, health-oriented options has been growing over the last few years. However, the current packaging fails to appeal to these evolving expectations. Modern shoppers, especially younger consumers, are drawn to packaging that is informative, convenient, and attention-grabbing. They also prefer open labelling on health benefits and ingredients. This product's generic plain packaging fails on these counts, potentially losing it wider or younger consumer appeal.
Competitor Analysis:
Fig 1.8 Graz Powder, Week 04
Competitors in the Malaysian market, such as Graz's gourmet premium assam powder, already have advanced packaging strategies.. Graz also uses jars with clear labelling, upscale aesthetics, and informative content that highlights unique selling points like flavour profiles and use suggestions. Internationally, firms like Plum Organics have introduced innovative features like flavour scales, QR codes for transparency, and uniform colour schemes that enhance brand recognition4. Other category best practices for spices and seasonings are resealable packets, environmentally friendly materials, and culturally relevant graphics68. These design trends focus on convenience, sustainability, and a strong visual brand, all aspects that the existing packaging of the Sweet & Sour Plum Powder lacks.
Exercise / Case Study – Packaging Design Analysis 
Comments
Post a Comment