What are a target group’s values and vision?
Explore your target group’s values, beliefs and vision. Make abstract words concrete through interview questions, real trade-offs and a practical example.
‘Quality, trust and innovation.’ Many target group profiles contain words like these. They tell you little unless you know what people mean, when these principles matter and which takes priority when interests conflict. The Values and vision field describes the principles through which a target group considers choices. It becomes useful when you show what someone values, which beliefs are involved and which developments they consider desirable. That requires research into the target group, rather than copying your own brand's values.
What are values and vision in a target group profile?
Values and vision describe which principles a target group considers important and how it views desirable developments within a relevant choice context. Make supporting beliefs explicit: what does the group think is true or works?
Values indicate what matters or is desirable. Beliefs here describe what someone holds to be true. Vision connects principles to a broader desired direction. Record these elements only where investigated; this combination is a practical profile classification, not a separate psychological test.
How do a value, belief, vision and goal differ?
| Element | Core question | Fictional supplier-selection example |
|---|---|---|
| Value | What should carry weight? | Openness about limitations |
| Belief | What does someone think is true or works? | A supplier who acknowledges uncertainty helps us weigh options |
| Vision | Which development does someone consider desirable? | Decisions should become more traceable over time |
| Expectation | Which development does someone think will occur? | Automated recommendations will become more common |
| Goal | What does someone specifically want to achieve? | Compare two options before the next meeting |
This distinction is a writing convention. In value theory, values can themselves be beliefs about what is desirable. In this profile, ‘belief’ mainly means a statement about how the world works. Do not suggest that these concepts are psychologically independent.
An expected future is not automatically a desired one. Someone may expect more automation while wanting people to retain greater control. Preserve both statements with their own meanings.
Where does the concept of values come from?
Values have a long history in the social sciences. One important research tradition for this profile is Schwartz's work on value priorities. His 1992 publication addresses value types and their relationships, drawing on research in twenty countries. Schwartz, 1992
In his 2012 overview, Schwartz describes values as guiding standards that transcend specific situations and are ordered by importance. Schwartz, 2012
For beliefs, Ajzen's theory of planned behaviour is relevant: it distinguishes behaviour-related beliefs from attitudes, intentions and behaviour. Ajzen, 1991
These sources provide conceptual background. The combined Values and vision field and the interview approach below are Neurofactor applications. Here, vision means a broader desired direction within the researched domain, not a standardised scale from these theories.
How do you make an abstract value concrete?
Ask what a word means in the situation in which someone chooses. ‘Quality’ might concern durability, accuracy, personal attention or something else. Do not choose the meaning that best suits your offering.
Ask, for example: ‘When did you find the quality inadequate?’ and ‘What did the supplier do that gave you confidence?’ Then investigate the principle behind that evaluation. A stated product feature is not automatically a value. Repairability might matter because of thrift, independence or avoiding waste; research must establish which explanation applies.
Keep the original answer alongside the summary. If a researcher interprets a statement as independence, label that as an interpretation. A polished label does not strengthen the underlying evidence.
Why are trade-offs more useful than a list of appealing words?
Show what takes priority when not everything is possible at once. Ask what concession someone accepts to scrutinise a supplier more closely: reading additional explanations, waiting longer or something else. Do not force choices between options that are not genuinely incompatible.
A practical formulation is: ‘Values traceable decisions and accepts additional preparation when it makes important uncertainties visible.’ This is a fictional example. It becomes a target group insight only when supported by the underlying statements or choices.
Record exceptions too. Time pressure may produce a different trade-off. Do not infer from a single decision that someone possesses or lacks a value. Describe the choice, circumstances and interpretation separately.
Whose values and vision are these?
| Perspective | What you can document | What you cannot automatically infer |
|---|---|---|
| Individual | Expressed principles and personal trade-offs | That colleagues share those priorities |
| Researched target group | Recurring patterns and differences between participants | That every member shares every pattern |
| Organisation | Formal values and documented vision | That employees personally act accordingly |
| Supplier or brand | Its own positioning and promises | That these are customer values |
Several perspectives can be involved in a business purchase. A user may want independence while the organisation requires standardisation. Both matter, but should not be attributed to one imagined decision-maker.
If a website is the source, record ‘formally communicated organisational value’, for example. A statement about target group values needs appropriate evidence from that target group.
How do you research values and vision?
- 1Define the domain and decision-maker. Which choice is involved, and from which role is the person speaking?
- 2Ask about a concrete choice. What made an option suitable or unacceptable?
- 3Clarify meaning. What does someone mean by freedom, reliability or sustainability?
- 4Explore trade-offs. What could receive less weight, and what did the person want to preserve?
- 5Ask separately about beliefs. Why does someone think an approach works? Which experience supports that view?
- 6Ask about direction and expectations. What should change, and what does the person expect will actually change?
- 7Check the interpretation. Ask whether your summary captures the intended meaning and preserve differing answers.
What an interview does and does not provide
An interview can reveal principles and reasoning. It does not automatically constitute a standardised values assessment. If you use an existing questionnaire, follow its measurement and interpretation instructions. Do not assign test scores to your own interview labels.
Example: from ‘transparency’ to a useful profile sentence
Fictional illustration; not a customer quotation or research finding. A marketing lead compares research providers and says: ‘I want to see what the recommendation rests on, even when the result is not entirely clear.’
The analysis is separated into three elements:
- Value: openness about what has and has not been established.
- Belief: insight into the evidence helps assess advice responsibly.
- Vision: marketing decisions should become more traceable for the whole team.
A compact profile sentence is: ‘Values openness about evidence and uncertainty, sees verifiable support as a basis for responsible advice and wants marketing decisions to become more traceable.’
The initial statement does not establish the whole interpretation. In real research, the belief and vision also need to have been discussed separately or labelled as interpretations. Do not add a future direction simply because it fits the narrative.
Nor does this example demonstrate that the person wants to purchase a particular measurement tool. It describes a framework for weighing options; method preference and purchase intention remain separate questions.
What does this tell you about an associative target group?
Neurofactor uses associative target group as a working definition for a bounded group of people whose similar associations guide decisions within a specific choice context.
A shared value may help explain a pattern, but it is not the same as a shared association pattern. Two people might both value reliability while one associates it with a familiar brand and the other with transparent evidence. This contrast is illustrative; investigate which links actually occur and how they relate to choices.
Treat values, beliefs and associations as distinguishable data. Do not infer an unconscious belief, BIS/BAS score or neurological profile from one value, interview statement or group label.
How do you complete the field concisely?
Use: ‘Values [researched principle], believes that [researched belief] and wants [supported desired direction].’
Omit any element that has not been researched. ‘Vision not yet established’ is more informative than an invented future outlook. If different directions occur within the group, document the differences instead of presenting a shared position.
Link the sentence to its source, date, researched role and evidence status. Keep the normative statement ‘believes X should matter’ separate from the factual claim ‘X works’. A belief held by the target group does not thereby become a verified fact.
A useful values profile shows meaning and trade-offs
Values and vision become useful when you move beyond isolated labels. Describe what the target group values, which beliefs are involved and which direction it considers desirable. Investigate meaning, priorities and differences. The profile can then show the framework through which people choose while preserving the limits of the evidence.
About the sources
For Schwartz (1992), the abstract and publication details in the university research record were consulted; for Schwartz (2012) and Ajzen (1991), relevant passages in the full publications. Our profile definitions and examples are not validated measurement instruments or established customer profiles.
Sources checked on 22 September 2026. Examples and their statements are fictional. Field distinctions and interview guidance are Neurofactor applications.
Discuss your target group question
Would you like to understand the principles and associations guiding your target group's choices? Discuss with Neurofactor how to investigate them.
Key terms
- Values
- Guiding principles indicating what a target group considers important or desirable within a choice context.
- Beliefs
- Statements about what someone holds to be true or thinks works; distinguished from values in this profile.
- Vision
- The broader development a target group considers desirable, distinct from an expectation about what will actually happen.
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between values and goals?
In this profile, values are guiding principles; goals describe a more specific intended result within a choice context. They can be related. This distinction helps organise the fields and does not mean value theory never describes values as broad goals.
Are values and beliefs the same?
Values can be normative beliefs about what is desirable. For this field, value means what someone considers important, while belief means what they think is true or works. This keeps the distinction practically useful.
Is vision the same as a prediction?
No. Here, vision means a desired direction. A prediction or expectation concerns what someone thinks will happen. Investigate them separately where relevant.
Can I use organisational values as target group values?
Only as formal organisational values, with that source identified. They do not establish that customers or employees share the same personal priorities. Research the target group separately.
Does a shared value establish one associative target group?
Not automatically. People can value the same principle while linking it to different signals. Investigate association patterns and their relationship with decisions in the same choice context.
What should I write if values or vision are unknown?
State which elements have not been investigated. Keep possible interpretations as hypotheses linked to research questions. Do not insert universally appealing values merely to complete the field.
Sources
- 1.Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the Content and Structure of Values. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 25, 1–65. DOI: 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60281-6. - Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (1992)
- 2.Schwartz, S. H. (2012). An Overview of the Schwartz Theory of Basic Values. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), article 11. DOI: 10.9707/2307-0919.1116. - Online Readings in Psychology and Culture (2012)
- 3.Ajzen, I. (1991). The Theory of Planned Behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. DOI: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T. - Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes (1991)
Related topics
Reviewed by: Martijn den Otter · Last reviewed: 9/22/2026
Martijn den Otter
Oprichter van Neurofactor. Expert in neuromarketing en consumentenpsychologie.
LinkedIn →