Innovating for global success: A client–partner perspective on product development
Editor's note: This article is an automated speech-to-text transcription, edited lightly for clarity. To view the full session recording click here.
CJ Foods, a popular Korean brand, wanted to expand their product offerings not just in Korea but in the U.S. too. The company partnered with FlavorWiki to make this expansion happen.
Kenny Brijder, head of client operations at FlavorWiki gave an overview of this collaboration during the 2025 Virtual Global. Brijder shared the goals, methods and findings of the nine month project that was conducted in two countries.
Then, FlavorWiki’s CEO, Daniel Protz, and YiXin Seow, formerly head of innovation acceleration, strategic innovation at CJ Foods, discussed the project. Seow shared personal insights on key learnings and the process itself.
Session transcript
Emily Koenig Hapka
Hello and welcome to the session, “Innovating for global success: A client–partner perspective on product development.” I'm Emily, an Editor at Quirk’s.
Before we get started today, let's quickly go over the ways you can participate in the discussion. You can use the chat tab to interact with other attendees during the session, and you can use the Q&A tab to submit questions for the presenters.
Our session is brought to you by FlavorWiki. Enjoy the presentation.
Kenny Brijder
Welcome and thank you for joining this FlavorWiki presentation with Quirk’s.
To begin, let me briefly introduce myself and some of the team members who play an important role in our work.
My name is Kenny Brijder and I serve as head of client operations at FlavorWiki. I'll be guiding you through today's session. Before joining FlavorWiki, I worked at Amazon. Today, I focus on building strong relationships with our customers and clients worldwide.
FlavorWiki itself was founded in 2017 by our CEO, Daniel Protz. What began as a one-person company has since grown into a global team of more than 45 experts. Together we support a diverse customer base across industries and geographies.
We're also fortunate to be guided by leaders with decades of experience in sensory and consumer science. For example, Marcia Young, our advisor, previously served as Global Head of Consumer Science at Mondelez International and before that, at Kraft and Cadbury. Her expertise in sensory and insights is a tremendous resource for us.
Alongside Marcia, we have Elli Alexandraki, our head of sensory and consumer science. With a background from Wageningen University, Elli leads all of our consumer and sensory projects, ensuring the research is both rigorous and actionable.
Now that you've met some of the team, let's take a quick look at what we'll cover today.
First, I'll give you a short introduction to FlavorWiki and the work we do.
Second, I'll walk you through a case study with CJ.
Third, we'll see a discussion between Daniel Protz and Yi Xin Seow from CJ, where they'll share their perspectives on the collaboration and key learnings from the project.
So, what exactly do we do at FlavorWiki?
The challenge most consumer goods companies face is that the innovation process is too siloed. R&D spends months perfecting a formula in the lab only to hand it off to marketing for consumer testing, often too late, too slowly and at great cost. And even then, there's no guarantee that the perfected product will actually connect with consumers.
FlavorWiki solves this problem by bridging that gap between R&D and marketing.
We provide a highly scalable global and controlled method to integrate sensory data and real consumer insights earlier in the innovation cycle. Helping brands develop products that not only perform well in the lab, but also succeed in the real world.
Our proprietary panel of over 2 million participants allows us to operate in more than 50 countries, speaking over 40 languages. This global reach enables us to run projects at scale while maintaining a standardized and highly effective methodology, ensuring consistent high-quality insights for multinational brands.
Our core focus is sensory and product experience research. Using our patented consumer profiling methodology, we help companies identify what consumers truly like about their products and how those products can be optimized. That could mean taste, texture or aroma, but also external factors like packaging, pricing, sustainability or even the shopping experience itself.
We then combine all of these insights into robust statistical models that reveal what really drives consumer preference and purchase intent.
Most of our projects are designed around the full consumer journey. This experience begins the moment we direct panelists to purchase a product, whether in-store or online. They capture short videos and photos and share impressions of the shopping and unboxing experience.
Then as they consume the product, they answer guided questions about taste, texture, aroma and overall appeal. This approach allows us to create a complete product experience map, connecting the purchase moment with the sensory experience.
Our studies are conducted in context, meaning participants interact with products naturally in their own environment and in their own way. This gives us authentic insights into how people really use products, what they enjoy and where potential friction points may exist.
In addition, we can ship product samples worldwide. This is particularly valuable for prototype testing, new formulations or ingredient changes. In every country where we operate, we partner with trusted local suppliers who blind and distribute samples to our panel.
Because we work with only our own verified community, we know exactly who is participating and can validate every result with confidence.
Beyond sensory testing, we also support qualitative studies, concept tests, in-home evaluations and even central location tests. But our real strength lies in capturing the entire consumer journey from purchase to unboxing to consumption, and ultimately to disposal.
That's a brief introduction to FlavorWiki and how we can help companies better understand their consumers.
Next, let's take a closer look at the CJ case study and see how these methods come to life in practice.
Let's explore how FlavorWiki guided CJ Foods, one of Korea's leading food producers through the development and launch of their wellness shots, a fermented probiotic drink.
This case study is more than a product story. It's about how careful testing consumer insight and iterative optimization can turn a bold idea into a successful product across very different markets. The launch was a strong success.
In fact, CJ highlighted it in their 2022 sustainability report as a benchmark for open innovation, a rare distinction for product development projects.
Our work centered on five critical dimensions.
We began by assessing awareness. Next, we measure acceptance of CJ's wellness shots concept. We then explored usage behaviors. Optimization followed where we refined product features, positioning and communication to maximize impact. Finally, we studied adoption, identifying what drives repeat purchases and long-term loyalty. Together, these dimensions created a structured framework for reducing uncertainty and supporting sustainable market success.
Each stage built the foundation for the next, ensuring every insight was tested, validated and put into action.
We began with fast digital, in-app surveys. Consumers could view product concepts directly within the FlavorWiki platform and respond instantly.
This method allowed CJ to gather structured real-time feedback in days instead of weeks, accelerating decision-making by identifying what resonated and what didn't. The team could prioritize the most impactful improvements early in the process.
This efficiency was key to maintaining momentum and aligning cross-functional teams around clear data back decisions.
Next, we layered in qualitative focus groups.
These sessions allowed consumers to share motivations, concerns and emotional reactions in their own words. For CJ, this added valuable depth behind the quantitative data, uncovering subtle factors that influence purchase decisions, perceived credibility and emotional connection.
This blend of quantitative precision and qualitative depth created a 360-degree understanding of how people perceive and relate to wellness beverages.
In Korea, the launch followed a carefully staged evidence-based process.
We began with digital surveys to measure initial appeal, then ran focus groups where participants tasted four prototypes. Finally, products were placed in coffee kiosks to observe purchase behavior in real life.
Each stage built onto the previous one forming a continuous loop of testing and optimization. This disciplined approach ensured that every adjustment, whether flavor, claim or packaging, was grounded in genuine consumer feedback.
For the U.S., we adapted the methodology to fit local expectations and market dynamics. Central location testing provided controlled environments for evaluating flavor, texture and packaging design. This was followed by in-home trials, which captured authentic usage behaviors after market entry.
The two-pronged approach ensured that the final product aligned with American taste, communication preferences and lifestyle habits without losing the essence of its Korean wellness roots.
CJ's journey unfolded in five clear steps, moving from early prototypes to full in-store validation. This iterative structure enabled rapid refinement while keeping every decision anchored in real consumer evidence.
By organizing the project in this way, we minimized uncertainty at each stage, transforming subjective opinion into measurable progress. It also gave CJ's internal teams visibility in how each insight informed the next round of development, strengthening collaboration between R&D, marketing and strategy functions.
In Korea, focus groups were pivotal in refining the liquid prototype.
70% of consumers found probiotic shots appealing with preferences split between immune boost and gut shot varieties. The top purchase drivers were clear; health functionality, price and nutritional value.
These insights directly informed how CJ framed the product's local positioning, emphasizing practical health benefits and affordability, two key motivators in this market. It also validated that probiotics had moved from niche interest to mainstream health relevance in Korean consumers' daily routines.
Next, visual concepts were tested through digital surveys. Results revealed which packaging designs, product names and unpacked claims generated the strongest first impressions.
This step ensured that the final design would attract attention on the shelf while clearly communicating value and benefits. By integrating visual testing early, CJ avoided costly redesigns later in development and ensured brand consistency across multiple SKUs.
Prototypes were then introduced into coffee kiosks for live feedback by observing real-world purchase behavior. CJ confirmed that price and health benefits were the dominant decision drivers.
This validation step bridged the gap between consumer intention and action. Reinforcing the importance of affordability paired with functional credibility. It also highlights how even subtle pricing adjustments could shift perception and sales performance in the competitive beverage category.
For the U.S., the same product required a different approach.
Visuals and messaging were refined to highlight modern wellness and convenience. Ultimately branding the line as a ‘probiotic shot,’ a contemporary expression of traditional Korean health concepts. Each two-ounce shot combined pressed juices with scientifically proven probiotics designed to survive stomach acid and support gut and skin health.
This repositioning aligned with U.S. consumer preferences for a clean label, functional beverages.
A U.S. prototype was tested in Los Angeles through central location testing. Here consumers evaluated taste, aroma and mouth feel. Providing CJ with the data needed to fine tune sensory performance before launch.
This sensory validation ensured that the final product not only met flavor expectations but also delivered a satisfying premium drinking experience. The testing also confirmed which flavor pairings, such as ginger or citrus blends, resonated most strongly among wellness-oriented consumers.
The final validation stage was competitive in-store testing by measuring actual purchase behavior against key competitors. We confirmed that all previous optimizations translated into tangible sales performance. This step bridged research and commercial execution, ensuring that insights truly delivered market impact.
The results exceeded expectations. Over 29,000 shots were sold in the first 12 weeks from concept to launch. The full journey took just nine months, much faster than standard beverage development cycles.
Even more importantly, the project was recognized publicly as a model of consumer-driven innovation. Showcasing how a lean insight-based process can achieve both speed and precision.
This case highlights FlavorWiki’s end-to-end capabilities from early-stage concept testing to prototype validation and market specific insights.
Our methodology supports every step of product development. Each layer of testing builds confidence. Enabling teams to make faster, smarter decisions that directly impact launch success.
Our proprietary paired question methodology reduces response bias and pinpoints true drivers of preference. Combined with our digital platform, it enables rapid, globally scalable fieldwork in over 50 countries.
Real-time dashboards integrate sensory concepts and usage data into one clear view. Helping teams stay aligned, efficient and consumer focused.
CJ's team accessed all results instantly through these dashboards, with exportable visualizations ready for immediate decision making. This transparency allowed marketing, R&D and strategy teams to stay synchronized. Maintaining both speed and rigor throughout the nine-month development cycle.
The evidence of product-market fit was undeniable. Repeat purchasers, strong sellout rates and a rising willingness to pay, confirmed that the product delivered meaningful value to consumers. Tailored packaging and messaging for each region ensured communication stayed relevant and effective.
To conclude, whether launching a beverage, snack or functional food, FlavorWiki provides the end-to-end testing and consumer intelligence that brands need to succeed.
Daniel Protz
YiXin, thank you very much for taking the time to be here today and discuss this case. The case was obviously gone through by the narrator, but I wanted to ask just in your own words, what were the objectives that CJ had in this research that you did together with us?
YiXin Seow
Yeah, thanks. Happy to be here and happy to speak about the case.
When we first started to look at probiotic beverages in the market, we really wanted to bring a new angle, a new concept, both to Korea and to the U.S. And we really wanted to know what could be very different about bringing the same product to different markets. How would we tweak it in order for us to bring value to consumers in these different markets?
So, coming to FlavorWiki was due to this idea that we needed to know the consumers better. We needed to know what sort of product we needed to bring and how we could then make sure that the value is communicated to each market.
Daniel Protz
And this was, I would call it, a multi-step approach project. I even had the chance to be in Korea during part of it and understand really the location specific nature of it.
Was there anything about the specific case and the execution that had to happen both in Korea and then in the U.S. and other things that made it kind of a unique need that you had either with us or in general for the research? Because we found it very interesting because we were working with both Korean consumers and U.S. consumers at the same time. And it took over a year to do the whole piece.
But, were there any sort of special considerations you had in that regard?
YiXin Seow
Yes. I think the fun thing for this project was that the category is new to CJ.
We didn't know probiotic beverages, so being able to start from a blank slate also allowed us a lot more flexibility to decide how to bring it to market or what sort of product would be best because there's no legacy. Therefore, there is no need for us to lock ourselves into any specific format, specific flavors or a specific concept. We were flexible enough to adapt ourselves to the market.
But we knew the value that we wanted to bring, or at least the least the value propositions that we could bring, and then we wanted to use that to bring to market. So that gave us a very nice starting point.
It allowed us to test with a lot more flexibility. It also gave us a bit more urgency because if we wanted to change a recipe, if we wanted to modify something, we really needed to take this multi-step approach in order for us to change the process parameters in time for us to bring the product to market, but still had the flexibility to do it.
I think that was a fun part.
Eventually, it was very unique because we had Korea as our starting point. So, somewhere that the company was more familiar with, we could start to test. We could start to look at the process. We could start to look at how to run this together with FlavorWiki.
Then when we brought it to the U.S., which is a newer market for us, we could then use all our learnings and the ways that we did it in Korea, did it in the U.S. compared it, timed it in the similar fashion, knowing that because it's so far away from us that the process could take a different timing, could take a different route.
Honestly, eventually thinking about the full project and how we brought both products from in Korea and in the U.S., to market. I think everyone in the team learned a lot because not only were we able to do it in Korea in a very new way for the company. But also for the U.S. being able to compare almost directly how the consumers would differ and what sort of products we could adjust it to, what sort of flavor profiles would be preferred and eventually what value are we truly bringing to each consumer market.
So, yeah, it was a really fun one eventually.
Daniel Protz
That's great to hear.
Yeah, I think that we run into cases like this with, I would call them companies that are very, very good understanding of their local market, and obviously CJ is really well known in Korea. You create a bunch of great Korean products, and I think you have a very healthy market share there.
So, oftentimes the organizations themselves are sort of in this situation where they understand their consumers so well that it's almost like an afterthought to even do any piece of research. And so, I thought it was a very forward-thinking way to look at what you were doing.
And maybe we can talk a little bit about just the Korean side of it is because we went out into these real life coffee kiosks where the consumer was really sitting. And even that was quite new, I think not just for CJ, but for just for the Korean consumer. They weren't used to doing these types of things in that sort of setting.
Can you talk a little bit about how doing the piece of work in Korea, which is not the target market. I don't think a lot of companies would think to start a research project in a place where it was not the target market and where, as we found out, there are probably quite a few differences in the consumers in those two different target markets. So, can you talk a little bit about the logic behind that and how it went and what you learned by doing it first locally and then moving to the U.S. piece?
YiXin Seow
Yeah, thanks for this question. Indeed, when we first conceived the concept, it was meant for the U.S. Bringing it to Korea first was an opportunity that allowed for the company, as well as the technical team, to unlock a few unknowns first before bringing it to a completely new market. Eventually having new technology, having a new product, a new category, bringing it to a new market could be quite challenging for everyone. I think de-risking or feeling a little bit more reassured was one of the reasons why it started in Korea first.
And to your point, indeed we know the consumers, but for a category that is new, we might not know them for this new category. They could be a very different consumer group. So, we wanted to make sure that when we were going to run it in Korea, it needed to be in a way that would still bring value to the company regardless of whether we would launch it as a retail product eventually or not.
The coffee kiosks were a new channel for CJ. Being able to bring it to a completely new channel allowed CJ to also evaluate if this channel would be possible for the company to continue to test new concepts, products, categories, even new brands potentially with partners. It allowed us to accelerate our learnings quite rapidly.
The great thing about coffee kiosks was also that they have very different consumers from your usual supermarket grocery types. So, then getting to know and gain more understanding of the motivations, the impulse or the reasons for them to visit a kiosk versus buying bulk in groceries also gave us more insights on who we could target in the future and how different the perceptions could be because of the way that they purchase a product in a kiosk versus a retail.
For us, it did more than test a product and a concept. It also allowed CJ to evaluate a new channel.
Daniel Protz
Yeah, that's great. And when you did the work in the kiosk in Korea, knowing that there would be some differences potentially in profile, sustainability or value drivers, when we got to the U.S., which we definitely found there were different need cases, how were you thinking internally in the company about remaining flexible in the product design so that we could potentially make some changes going to the U.S.?
I mean, I remember when we got to the U.S., there were a couple of prototypes that we were trying to decide between. Inside the U.S., of course, there needs to be a co-packer. So, it was a little bit less flexibility in creating absolutely new formulations in that environment, but still there needs to be some flexibility remaining in the decision tree to allow for some of the changes that we might needed to accommodate the U.S. consumer.
So, how internally, from an R&D perspective, as you mentioned before, it's very different for the company as well to do this. How did you think about remaining agile in that kind of R&D process to go to the U.S.?
YiXin Seow
Yeah, bringing it to the U.S. was indeed a whole new challenge, especially with how difficult it can be to bring a new brand or a new product type. We knew what we were looking for, which was to validate the concept and the way and the technology that we were bringing into the U.S.
Therefore, knowing that we did not embark on starting a completely new brand, starting a new product, we started to work with an existing partner so that the route to market would be more rapid, but also that they would have a clearer idea of consumer preferences to start.
So, we knew that having experts, having people who were already in the market gave us an advantage on flavor profiles that are known. Now it's a question of how do we ensure that the value that we're bringing is still part of the product, is still part of what we are offering?
With that, in the partnership with the company in the U.S.
Daniel Protz
The co-packer that you were working with.
YiXin Seow
I wouldn't call them that because they're also the brand, they hold the brand. We basically provided an ingredient to the brand, and then we made sure that the concepts and the validations were all clarified with FlavorWiki surveys and the work that we did together.
So, on our path, we knew what had to be there, and then everything else was flexible. Because, I think what was very clear for CJ was the value we wanted to bring to a new product.
We knew where our differentiation could be. Now it's a matter of how do we bring that differentiation into a product that consumers might not be familiar with or might not have seen in this category before?
Then, how do we bring it to market? How do we ensure that we communicate it without having to educate too much? How do we bring them the value of this new probiotic without alienating anyone? Because it could be challenging to understand or the flavor profiles might be difficult. So, eventually we had almost everything flexible except for the probiotic.
Daniel Protz
Okay, great. And I mean, I know that we did a bunch of work even once it was in stores.
The first distribution of the product, we also did some competitive testing at the various locations where it was distributed. And ultimately the product did quite well as a first launch.
Were there any things that you ended up tweaking between the product formulation, meaning in that first launch that you learned from really seeing people use it in real life, in the store, buy it against the competitor? Because sometimes you just don't know what's going to happen until it actually gets on the shelf, and you see whether or not you start having repeat purchases, which in this case did happen, which is great. But were there any sort of last-minute tweaks that you ended up seeing or reacting to in that final part of the research?
YiXin Seow
Yes, I think the final research was actually kind of critical. We knew we needed to adjust, not the prototype itself, eventually the product flavor profile was well accepted. But for example, having had the last part of the research done, we knew that the value was clear, the flavor was great, but it was still, for example, a surprise because there were parts of the product that just was unexpected to consumers. And even if some consumers regarded it to be positive, we knew that it was potentially going to affect other consumers.
Therefore, there were two tweaks, one in the recipe and one on the packaging. One, in order for us to communicate what the surprise is so that at least when they pick it up, it is already perceived to be a specific flavor profile. And then two, we adjusted it so that the flavor profile was potentially less potent, less strong.
Daniel Protz
Okay, great.
So, is there anything else that you could share just as a final thought about these cases where a company who is not U.S. or not in the market that they're targeting and trying to internationalize?
I mean, the world is internationalizing quickly. I think that a lot of brands like CJ, see opportunity to grow in some of these big markets, whether it be the U.S., U.K., Nigeria or other places that are really big growing populations.
And a lot of these considerations I think are important when it comes to developing a new product or adapting a product to another country. It might be working really well in your home country or an existing place, but then when you want to go to a different location, there are some considerations to make.
We do see a lot of cases where the brand doesn't do that research, They just sort of start distributing their product in the new market, and then it doesn't behave as they expected and they have to then be on the back foot a bit. So, is there anything as a final or capstone thought that you could give on the learnings that you had in transforming not just a product but also a company's way of thinking in a new market?
YiXin Seow
Yes, thank you, Daniel.
What I strongly, strongly believe in is that research allows for a greater chance of not being surprised in the market. Being able to know early on what consumers perceive about your brand, your technology, the name that you're putting on pack, the way that you communicate, the size of the font, those are all not highly challenging tests to run, but could very well inform you of how to position your product when you are in a new country.
As we discussed for Korea, the value proposition was very much on price and if the benefit was very clearly labeled and visible. But for the U.S. we always needed credibility.
Between the two markets, we found very different perceptions of exactly the same product and what they really asked for, because then eventually your product sits on the shelf with others.
So, in the U.S., we needed to make sure the credibility was clear. We needed to have more communication around, for example, the CFU in a product. We needed to have more communication around what exactly the benefit is.
As compared to Korea, where consumers are pretty pleased with a benefit because in the market there are already many other products that have been able to do so there is no learning curve. Whereas for a new market, there is a learning curve. In order to bring a certain credibility, you might have to adjust the way that you bring your message to market.
In the very same way, if you bring an existing product that you have, you bring it to a new market. What if the value that you found to be so important in your existing market has no part to play in the new market? Then not doing well could be less of the product flavor profile. It could be less about the way that the product sits on shelf. It could really just be that consumers didn't see that as a benefit that they would choose next to another product.
So, I think to your point, I really found that this research didn't require large CLTs. They didn't require large cohorts of people to come together to test your product. You could really do very basic or even short, small research just to better inform yourself on what to put on pack anyway. If the packaging needs to be changed because it's a new market, why not also do this additional research to find out what you should put on the pack.
Daniel Protz
Yeah, that's great. I think it's a great case for us because we are a multinational company. And we definitely see the opportunity of doing things quickly and effectively where you can make these key learnings, which can sometimes make a huge difference. I think that the effort of making a new product and putting a new product out to market, there's so many things that go on including arranging new suppliers and packers, and that's a huge effort.
But then there's that last little bit of really making sure that it's completely tweaked to fit the product market, fit of your consumer, that sometimes gets forgotten about because you've already done this huge amount of work. But at the end of the day, the consumer cues on things, as you say, like package, how does it taste? What is the value of the effectiveness of it? And yeah, different consumers perceive that differently, but there's different competitor sets as well.
I find it really interesting that a product like this was very new to the U.S. market, given how big it is. But as you said, I also noticed during my visit that there are a lot of these types of things already in the Korean market. So, the consumer knew it so they could evaluate maybe a little bit more critically, whereas for the U.S. consumer it was totally new. They didn't know what to think about it versus many other categories potentially.
YiXin Seow
Exactly. To your point, companies really invest so much in bringing something to market. The conversations, I think that take place the most have always been with buyers and retailers. And that is a big part of bringing a product to market, but forgetting consumers, it's one of the ways that could really not allow for all your efforts to be realized.
For example, one thing that we realized about the co-launch was being able to look at feedback from the coffee kiosk versus the surveys that we ran. There was also a lot to distill from that outcome. So, the survey, the research that we did allowed us to also bring two pictures into the same product, two pictures of the same product, and then that allowed us to evaluate if our initial hypothesis were correct or not. And eventually how, in the next version or in the next launch, how could we adjust our products such that it is just the right consumers or the consumers that were willing to buy it.
Daniel Protz
Thanks so much for being here. I really appreciate you sharing your experience with us in this case. I wish you all the best, and hope to talk again soon.
YiXin Seow
Thank you very much. It was a great collaboration with FlavorWiki. Really appreciate it.
Daniel Protz
Thank you. Thank you for saying that. Thank you. Take care.
YiXin Seow
Thank you.