Please upgrade your browser.

We use cookies to improve your experience on our website. By continuing to browse this website, you agree to our use of cookies. For more information, please refer to our privacy policy.

Is Morning Fresh’s new formulation two good to be true?

August 2021

This is a self-funded case study using our Innovation Testing solution.

“Mash-up”, or two-in-one products always sound like a good idea at first; combining the very best elements of two individual products feels like a guaranteed formula for success, right? While they might initially spark intrigue and curiosity, when their drawbacks eventually become clearer they can start to lose some of their shine. The recent launch of Coca-Cola & Coffee highlighted that even when combining two of the world’s most consumed beverages, it’s no sure-fire guarantee to be a winner.

But, what about when it comes to a category where people actively seek out products which can help make their lives easier? Surely a two-in-one formulation which helps make cleaning simpler, easier, and quicker would have strong appeal? Enter Morning Fresh – a leading Australian dishwashing liquid brand – who recently launched ‘2-in-1 Dish & Hand Wash’.

Naturally, we wondered whether the product’s obvious advantages would make it an instant winner with consumers, or whether they’d be skeptical about the claims – having previously been let down by products which didn't deliver on their lofty promises.

To assess its in-market potential, we used our three C’s framework:

  • Captivate: Does it stand out and elicit a positive emotional response?
  • Connect: Is the brand instantly recognizable?
  • Compel: Does it pre-dispose people toward purchase?


The product’s dual functionality was well-liked for its convenience – saving both space on the kitchen counter, and time spent switching between different cleaning products. Some people interpreted the product as moisturizing and washing your hands at the same time as the dishes, laddering up to both functional and emotional advantages.

The concept also sparked intrigue with its “tough on grease, gentle on hands” claims, standing out as offering something unique amongst the crowded cleaning products category.


The sleek and elegant look of 2-in-1 reminded people more of a boutique brand like Aesop than Morning Fresh. While leveraging the brown bottle and rounded shape gave the brand a level of credibility in the hand soap space, it unsurprisingly lacked fluency with Morning Fresh’s uniquely shaped, all-white hero bottle. However, the label still featured the brand’s traditional colors, ingredient cues, and logo – the latter’s more recessive role another reminder that this was something different.

While the soft, gentle, and luxurious qualities of premium hand soap were a shift from more established connotations of Morning Fresh being ‘powerful’, by-and-large the concept remained a good fit with the brand.


The ‘2-in-1’ proposition aligned well with Morning Fresh’s established heartland around cleanliness and hygiene, presenting a highly differentiated offering, and leaving people feeling enthusiastic. Most people found the key benefits, particularly its convenience, relevant to their needs and expected it to be of a high quality – although the full retail price of A$7.00 was a barrier for many.

Some were also skeptical about whether the product would actually deliver as promised, finding the claims of effectiveness lacking credibility and questioning whether it might actually fulfill only one of the two proposed cleaning functions – or potentially compromise both.


Ease and convenience are enduring claims because they provide both rational benefits (more time in your day) and emotional advantages (more time to do things you’d rather do). Morning Fresh’s multi-function formulation succeeded because it effectively capitalized on this dynamic, providing a clear, credible, and relevant reason for the product to exist. This subsequently elevated it above existing alternatives and left people asking – “why didn’t they make it sooner?”, rather than “why was it even necessary?”.

Get in touch to receive the full report.

Thank you for subscribing!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form. Please try again.

Sign up to our effectiveness newsletter