The Swiffer: Mass Appeal, Mass Control

It began as a quest for a better method to clean floors. It turned into Proctor and Gamble’s second most profitable consumer product—one that has generated over $300 million dollars in the past eight years alone. As a society of obsessive germaphobes, clean-freaks and brilliant, greedy CEOs, it was only a matter of time before conventional floor-washing was targeted and exploited. Therefore the history of the Swiffer exists as both an intriguing and frightening story from the standpoints of research, innovation, and marketing.

When a sponge is plunged into a bucket of soapy water and slathered around a soiled floor, it appears that the dirt disappears with every swipe. Wrung back into the bucket, the dirty water from the sponge finds itself mingling, hobnobbing, and finally contaminating the clean water. This process is repeated until the water becomes so visibly dirty that it requires replacement. However, on a microscopic level, the soap acts as a substrate, bonding to both the polar molecules (water) and nonpolar molecules (grease and oil). Once attached, it suspends both the dirt and water off of the floor. By spreading the sponge around the floor, the molecules remain suspended and intact, and merely slide around each other. After wringing all the dirty water back into the bucket, the floor remains just as dirty as it was prior to the washing. Researchers at Procter and Gamble liked to call it “a complete waste of time”.

So in 1999, P & G developed a quick, simple method to effectively clean floors. Dubbed a “dipey wipe on a stick”, the product they initially created projected a low user-acceptance analysis. The technology, however, used thousands of microfibers on an absorbent cotton cloth to collect dust, dirt, and hair. It was also statically charged so the particles stayed attached and didn’t spread around. A wet version of the cloth was also developed for tougher scrubbing, yet possessed the same properties as the dry cloths. With the technology employed and a catchy form designed, the Swiffer needed testing.

The target user group consisted of homeowners with a huge emphasis on women (ages 25-45, specifically). P & G conducted both open and closed surveys as well as focus groups of women to sample the product. As a result, they responded well to its usability and also its price. Yet the critical selling point emerged in how the product was used after the floor cleaning. The act of removing the dirty cotton pad from the stick and throwing it away exemplified a very satisfying action. Women could see the dirt and then effectively rid their home of it with one swift action. They felt more control over the cleaning process, and therefore more control over their home’s cleanliness, keeping them revered in society.
Once the Swiffer moved into production, it utilized a common P & G marketing cycle called the “razor cycle”, where the product began with a starting kit that included the Swiffer stick along with a package of cotton pads (either wet or dry). Additional cleaning pads were then sold separately, thus keeping the consumer engaged and addicted.

Here the designers and engineers created an extremely profitable product based on effectiveness and simple sensory satisfaction. The Swiffer cleans well and also gives users a feeling of control. Women who normally wouldn’t get on their hands and knees to wash a floor suddenly sweep and wash it multiple times a week. The Swiffer manipulates users into becoming more conscious of the dirt on their floor (due to societal expectations and trends), and with its addicting process and affordability, keeps them hooked on it. By making the user feel in control, designers have effectively controlled the users.