Prof. Dr. Frank Wimmer accompanied the institute through an eventful past, which included a meeting with Ephraim Kishon.
Professor Wimmer, how did you come into contact with the NIM, formerly GfK e. V.?
Professor Wimmer: That was 40 years ago. The institute, then the Gesellschaft für Konsumforschung e. V. and now NIM, was the publisher of the “Jahrbuch der Absatz- und Verbrauchsforschung” (GfK Yearbook), which was established by the founders of the association back in 1954. When I took over the Chair of Business Administration, in particular Sales Management, at the University of Bamberg in 1985, I observed the GfK Yearbook and its contents with great interest. As I was already in contact with GfK e. V. at this time, I offered them my professional expertise in the selection and editing of articles, particularly in the search of contributions from the academic world. From 1991 to 2008, I took over responsibility for editing the yearbook. And what makes me particularly happy is that the successor to the GfK Yearbook still exists today – in 2008, the yearbook was replaced by the marketing journal Marketing Intelligence Review.
For decades, you were then involved in the development of the institute as a board member, member of the executive board and member of the board of directors. What were your most important stations?
I have accompanied the eventful and exciting development of the institute in various positions. In 1990, I was elected to the board of the association and five years later, I was the sole board member until 1996. In the same year, the “board of directors” and “presidium” were combined to form the new executive board, which in terms of law was the association’s board, so to speak. From 1996 to 2004, I was vice president of this committee alongside Peter Zuehlsdorff and Helga Haub. In 2004, I stepped down from the executive board in accordance with the Articles of Association due to reaching retirement age. I was then a member of the administrative board until 2014, a body made up of high-ranking executives from member companies that no longer exists today.
What were the most important decisions in the association during this time, and what were your most memorable experiences?
Many crucial decisions had to be made over the decades – I would like to mention just one of the milestones here. After the commercial activities were spun off from the institute in 1984 to form a limited company, later GfK AG, a fundamental decision had to be made. The association urgently needed a new self-image and a new mission. This topic fell within my remit as chairman and later as vice president. What should be the core task of the association in the future? What should the institute use the financial resources it received as a shareholder of GfK for from now on? There were long and controversial debates on these questions. In the end, it was decided that GfK e. V. should support the operational business with its objectives but act completely independently regarding its management. It was also decided that the institute in the future would concentrate on basic research about consumer trends. At that time, for example, the study series “Challenges of the Nation” was launched, which still exists today and is being continued in an expanded form by the NIM.
Is there an experience or event that you particularly remember?
There was an important event in 2008 for the preservation of GfK AG’s independence and, indirectly, for the institute as its founder and main shareholder: At that time, the GfK Management Board and Supervisory Board were pursuing concrete plans for a merger of GfK and Taylor Nelson Sofres (TNS). The majority of GfK’s management team – and also the executive board of GfK e. V. – were in favor of this step. However, there was increasing resistance to these plans among the members of the institute, and considerable doubts arose as to whether the merger really made sense for GfK AG. As a member of the administrative board, I had privately consulted with external experts and come to the conclusion that a merger would not be advantageous for GfK AG or its employees. I therefore worked hard within the institute to persuade people against the merger. After many discussions, the committees finally came to the conclusion that the conditions were not in the best interests of either GfK AG or the institute, so the merger plan was no longer submitted. GfK therefore remained independent, and the institute continued to be the majority shareholder in the company.
The Gesellschaft für Konsumforschung e. V. was founded 90 years ago by Wilhelm Vershofen, Erich Schaefer and Ludwig Erhard. Even back then, the aim was to better understand consumers and analyze their needs according to the guiding principle “Making the voice of the consumer heard.” This guiding principle still applies today. Real milestones were the re-positioning in 1996 and the renaming as the Nuremberg Institute for Market Decisions, or NIM for short, in 2019. For an even more clear separation into a commercial and a non-commercial organization, the rights to the GfK logo, which the institute still partially owned at the time, were transferred to GfK, and a completely new image was created. The research content of the institute has adapted to current trends: Today, as an independent, internationally oriented nonprofit institute, the NIM researches how consumer decisions are changing as a result of social trends and new technologies.
Is there a personal anecdote about the institute that you have experienced and would like to share with us?
In 1996, it was my job to look after the famous Ephraim Kishon. He had been invited as a keynote speaker at the GfK annual conference and attended the banquet the evening before. During these two days, a very personal contact resulted from extensive conversations, during which Kishon told me his exciting life story as a Hungarian-Jewish author in a vivid way and, despite all his adverse experiences, with a good dose of humor. It was a very impressive experience for me that I still remember today.