Market research is undergoing an exciting phase of change – the survey is under attack as a shallow method of accessing people’s real opinions; many new tools are being actively promoted to provide different, more authentic angles.

Innovation is all around us, which is a healthy sign.

But are we in danger of assuming that just because something is new it’s better? Similarly, are we in danger of ditching the “MR baby with the bathwater” when we engage in what sometimes feels like radical renewal?

Here’s my take: 

• We neglect methodological rigor at our peril. That’s what we’re respected for. Validation of any new technique is critical. To quote Andrew Ehrenberg (http://bit.ly/I2LwcF): “A result can be regarded as routinely predictable when it has recurred consistently under a known range of different conditions.”

Research-on-research is essential to understand what differences new data collection modes – such as mobile – make. I applaud those who engage in such efforts.

• It’s generally recognized that MR needs to shift from being a data provider to insights advisor, with an ability to create a compelling data narrative. This new skill set means that we are attracting people from outside the core industry – folks from marketing, PR and advertising are increasingly occupying senior MR positions on both the agency and client sides.

This is great. However, none of us should forget that a great narrative is only as powerful as the robustness of the data and the methodology behind it. Better be perceived as boring than wrong or misleading.

• There is a huge pressure on budgets on the one hand but on the other a recognition that gaining a balanced understanding of a given perceptual situation might well actually require more budget to handle a mixed-modal approach.

The onus is on us all to find ways to carefully reduce unnecessary cost and manage the understanding of risk.

• DIY research is a trend that’s in all likelihood here to stay. I view this positively – it allows more companies to do more research. However, bad DIY research can be very misleading.

Understanding what good research practice is versus bad is important and educational efforts such as those done by Kathryn Korostoff, Annie Pettit and Ray Poynter are to be applauded. I miss Jeffrey Henning’s excellent blogs from his time at Vovici.

• Many of the existing arsenal of tools in MR rely on direct questioning. Done sensitively, there’s definitely a role for that in my view – customer satisfaction, brand tracking, concept testing, for example. Access to historical databases and norms allows one to upweight or downweight sensitively and accurately as required.

As it becomes increasingly possible to introduce context into this equation – via mobile, for example – and we embrace ways of using visuals as a counterbalance to words in our survey design, then direct questioning becomes potentially even more powerful.

• Experts may not always (or often) be right – neither is an amateur perspective. It’s modish to attack expert opinion – it’s blinkered, doesn’t move with changing circumstances, narrow in focus. I’m indeed a fan of boosting the role of intuition, gut reaction and referencing broader audiences early on in any MR process – but as a basis for forming a hypothesis that requires validation, not as a substitution.

It’s commonplace to say that MR tools are becoming commoditized, that we should concentrate on the impact, not the method.

Yes, the days of black-box modelling seem largely behind us. But that doesn’t mean the role of advanced analytics is finished – on the contrary. The people who have the expertise and experience in helping marketing folk (and many in insights as well) leverage the power of sophisticated analytic techniques are extremely valuable.

I enjoy refreshing my fundamental understanding of both basic and advanced statistical and sampling techniques as much and as often as I can – it’s empowering and invigorating. It’s just not something I talk about much, in the interests of maintaining my current circle of friends…;) – which in a way is one of our conundrums as an industry.

Curious, as ever, as to others’ views.

French novelist Marcel Proust wrote, “The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes, but in having new eyes.”

I recently attended an energizing and thought-provoking conference titled “Capturing Deep Insights to Promote a Consumer-Centric Innovation Process.”  I wanted to share a few takeaways that build on thoughts about innovation.

Use new research tools to uncover trends. Market researchers who want a “seat at the table” in their organizations need to think about how to uncover growth opportunities and potentially disruptive market trends. Several speakers talked about how small-scale exploratory projects and fast iterative approaches allowed their team to use new research tools and make mistakes that led to learning – without the onus of an expensive research project. A shout out to Tom Van Aman at Allstate, Nina Mills at Fidelity Investments and Ann Semeraro at Ask.com for sharing case studies that demonstrated how being a risk taker is not diametrically opposed to being a researcher.

Apply a new framework – use a different lens. Look at your industry and your business model using a new construct. Instead of competing within your market to gain a few more share points, create new, uncontested market space by changing the value proposition.

As suggested in Blue Ocean Strategy by W. Chan Kim and Renée Mauborgne, one way to do this is to think about the six conventional boundaries of competition and how to break them or change them for your company or product (industry, strategic group, buyer group, scope of offer, functional vs. emotional orientation and time). Researchers need to think about existing industry norms and then find ways to conduct research that asks “what if” and “why not” to uncover opportunities. Michael Wynblatt at Eaton Corporation offered a fascinating look at how his B2B company uncovered that the primary value of a new wireless sensor technology was not the technology itself, but how it would disrupt the existing norm for installing traffic monitoring equipment.

Get your hands dirty – a starting point. Break down the customer experience into discrete steps and then conduct exploratory, observational research to see if there are pain points or workaround behaviors that are signaling that users are just waiting for a market innovation to make their life easier and help them get a job done better.

Clayton Christensen, professor of business administration at Harvard University, said it best: “You can’t outsource your eyes – get into the field to get in touch with your users, potential users and non-users.”

It’s important that researchers question the status quo. Be curious, take risks and remember to apply all of the research tools at your disposal. Not every project needs to be academically rigorous to produce valid learning that can help your organization compete more effectively.

Businesses across the world use third-party market research firms to provide them with objectivity of results, among other benefits. However, even businesses that are equipped to do a project in-house are still forced to look outside of the organization in order to gain an unbiased perspective. Think in terms of employees evaluating their own company’s television commercials. Will these employees really have a fresh and untainted perspective of their company’s marketing campaign? Probably not.

Market research needs to be objective to be effective. This objectivity could relate to a price for a product being way too high or way too low; objectivity to state that this location is the worst or the best place to put your business; or even objectivity to state whether consumers will buy your product because the packaging is purple. This topic was also covered in a past blog post that discussed  five cautions of doing market research in-house. Market research without objectivity is nothing more than artificial data and fluffed numbers.

There often comes a time as a market research analyst where you have to deliver unfavorable findings to a client. With the variability of market research, the results could rain on your proverbial parade. If you are in this situation and forced to deliver unfavorable findings to the client, just keep in mind that by doing this market research up front you may have saved your client thousands, if not millions, of dollars. This would not have been saved if the market research project was passed on. Successful market research projects will also point businesses in the right direction and give them the flexibility to change course to create a more profitable venture.

Market research and objective information minimizes risk. With the new data you gained from market research, it will help you better evaluate your business ventures and optimize your product or service line. So even if your results come back negative, keep in mind that you not only avoided a poor business decision but you also have the information you need to make a better decision.

Nevertheless, some businesses avoid market research at all costs. Many key decision makers will make marketing or management choices based on a hunch or internal team consensus. Not to say that this approach does not work sometimes but it’s always better to have statistical data from real customers to back these decisions up. Market research either supports your hunch or tells you that your hunch needs to be reworked. Objective data is critical.

So the next time you are wondering whether market research is the appropriate next step for your business, keep in mind the glass is 50-percent full rather than 50-percent empty (or half-full for our non-market research readers). Even if the market research study doesn’t tell the story you were hoping, you’ve ultimately saved your company money and gathered vital information to ensure the venture will be successful.

The recent New York Times article about people’s exhaustion with customer satisfaction surveys made the CMB email rounds in record time. The gist of the article is that people are tired of being asked to fill out customer satisfaction surveys before, after, and during every minor transaction they have with a company. They especially don’t like being pressured by a pleading cashier to “please help me out” and take a survey.

As a company with specialties in customer experience and loyalty – analysis that is dependent on customer feedback – the piece hit a nerve. And the takeaways from the article are worth discussing in a bit more detail:

Surveys that are too long exhaust and annoy people

On the surface there’s not much news here, asking screen upon screen of questions is going to negatively impact more than just response rates, it makes people cranky. The article mentions an excellently titled blog post Infant Who Begins Babies “R” Us Customer Satisfaction Survey Dies of Old Age from a woman who wrote about her displeasure at being asked to complete a questionnaire of more than 45 questions. And it certainly matches up with our findings that ideal survey length is three to six minutes – any shorter and you may not be giving the respondent enough time to answer, too much longer and you risk making them feel like you don’t value their time.

To incent or not to incent…

…that is the question. The answer is a bit more complicated than the Times article suggests. The article quotes Vanderbilt University Management Professor Robert Oliver: “The frequent requests to fill out these surveys, especially with no incentives, have been so annoying that people just stop doing it.” And while it’s true that a subset of survey takers are motivated primarily by monetary incentives or free gifts, the top motivation for more people is a desire to improve the company, its products or services. Saying thank you and letting people know that the collected information will improve service is an effective incentive in itself.

Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should

As the article says, the availability of online surveys, free apps and mobile platforms means anyone can administer a survey pretty much anywhere. This is problematic, not only because good questionnaire design and data analysis requires specialized skills, but because a constant barrage of questions can feel like harassment.

I love surveys and I will take one any time I can, but even I don’t like the feeling of being pressured by cashiers, or forced to answer questions before I complete a transaction. There is a difference between asking people for their time to help improve the company and browbeating them into providing data. A moratorium on forcing customers to answer questions before their card goes through at the register would be an excellent start.

Make a plan before you survey

One of the problems we see, that the Times article doesn’t cover, is the distressing fact that two-thirds of companies report problems with managers not knowing what to do with the data.  Many companies are collecting data with no idea how to apply it or improve the customer experience. Without a focused plan for addressing and applying customer feedback, companies are just going through the motions, and that’s a loss for customers and companies alike.

Below is a quick overview of some of the things Facebook page administrators should know to prepare for and manage their Facebook Page with Timeline. (But first, start with a quick quiz to test how much you know about Timeline and what it means for your page.)

1. It’s not optional.  That’s right, effective March 30, with a few hiccups, Facebook started migrating all company/brand pages to Timeline – a switch that it had started with personal pages several months ago.

2. Facebook pages look different.  There are all sorts of new things with Facebook Timeline:

– Pages sport a cover photo, which is a great way to set up the page personality, feature a close-up of a product, etc.  Just be aware that there are rules about what can and cannot be included.

– Your brand’s profile picture has a new size. If you try to use your old one, it probably will end up off-center, with random cropping, etc.

– Tabs are now near the top of the page and feature icons. You can have 12 at a time.

– Pinning and starring are a new way to highlight important posts.

– You can no longer set a default tab for first time visitors – bye-bye “like-gating” your page. However, you can still like-gate tabs.

3. Private messaging is here.  This means brands can respond directly to fans or visitors with the caveat that only the visitor can initiate the conversation. This is a huge opportunity for companies but make sure your business has a strategy for dealing with a possible flood of inquiries and comments – positive and negative.  If you aren’t ready, you can turn this feature off; if you welcome a flood of inquiries, this is your chance!

4. Interaction is more important than ever. Timeline provides new opportunities for companies to interact with and engage their audience. A great way to take advantage of these opportunities is with engaging, interactive content. Videos, quizzes, surveys, sweepstakes, contests and coupons are the type of content that is most often interacted with, liked, shared and otherwise consumed. Your best bet is to fill your Tabs/Favorite Apps slots with quality, interactive content and update it frequently. For more details on why interaction is so important, read up on EdgeRank, Facebook’s algorithm for deciding which posts appear at the top of News Feeds/ Timeline.

5. New admin panel and Facebook Insights. Use the tools available to you to manage posts, post milestones, keep track of likes, networks, people talking about this, etc. To get deeper analytics on how your individual apps are performing including impressions, share rates, responses to calls to action, etc., make sure that you are choosing a solution that offers this information.

Last summer at the Market Research in the Mobile World conference in Atlanta, I offered up our top 10 predictions as to how mobile technology will significantly transform market research over the next few years. Included on the list was a prediction that “apps will be a mostly transitional phenomena in the industry.”

This prediction likely did not sit well with the market research software providers who have built their entire mobile offering on an app-based model. Some of these companies provide an app solution that is specific to one type of smartphone, while others provide multiple versions of their app to cover the most common smartphone OS platforms (Apple iOS, Android, Blackberry, etc.). Regardless of which smartphones their apps support, they all probably disapproved of my position. They were also probably quite happy to learn that the one-millionth app milestone was achieved in December, that the apps market more than doubled in 2011 and that mobile users now spend more time using apps than mobile browsers.

Given last year’s explosive app development and predictions for further app growth in 2012, do I still believe that apps will fail to sustain prominence as a major mobile research tool in the coming years?

You bet. While apps continue to be developed at a furious pace, in reality the vast majority of them are used by a very small number of mobile subscribers. Additionally, app usage seems to be reaching a peak. The fact that app usage time surpassed mobile browsing time last year is largely attributable to only one company – Facebook – and recent data from app analytics firm Flurry indicates that app usage now appears to be slowing. A study last year by Localytics found that one in four smartphone apps is downloaded but never used again. For market research, respondents may very well download an app for a one-time project or to join a panel, but continuous respondent use is required in order to provide ongoing value to the researcher. And in order to maintain continuous use (aka “the engagement factor”), ongoing development is essential. Both initial and ongoing app development can be a substantial endeavor. According to Deloitte, to reach more than 90 percent of all apps users, a developer may need to create versions for five different operating systems (plus HTML5), five major languages, three different processor speeds, and four different screen sizes. In other words, 360 variants of a single app may need to be created in order to fully cover the global market.

Since most research studies require a diverse and representative sample, multiple versions of the app must be maintained to accommodate a diverse group of mobile subscribers. And even for the research companies that have these necessary development capabilities, another significant challenge exists in how to deliver the app’s functional enhancements to users. There is no assurance that respondents will download updates and their failure to do so may result in significant usability and performance issues.

For these reasons and others, I stand behind my prediction. App solutions simply have more inherent limitations than mobile browser-based solutions. It is true that today’s mobile browsers have their own set of limitations, but with the advent of HTML5, mobile browsers continue to close the gap on desktop browsers. Over the next few years, the capabilities of mobile browsers will become increasingly powerful and will ultimately replace the need for the majority of research apps. I am not claiming that ALL market research apps will become extinct – there will continue be highly specific and targeted research initiatives that are better suited for custom app delivery – however the advantages of mobile browsers will result in their dominance for mobile market research. Further, since the browser-based approach has the ability to support all mobile devices, any market research company that spends money developing device-specific apps for solutions that can be more readily supported via a browser will be at serious financial disadvantage.

It will likely take another few years for HTML5 to roll out its complete feature set and gain wide adoption, but it will happen. Benefits in terms of device flexibility and cost, as well as factors such as lower battery consumption and ease of delivering functional updates, will ultimately win out.

Research is simply a process to get information and insights you don’t have that you need.

After you have reviewed all of the information you do have and you find you still have unanswered questions, you may need research. In the initial stages of a product or service offer, focus groups are often conducted.

Consumer-driven insights can move your business forward because your customers and prospective customers want to help you provide a better product or service. And, people love it when you ask their opinion! Think about it: If a company selects you from hundreds of other people and offers to pay you for your opinion, wouldn’t you feel pretty special? I’m just saying – don’t be afraid to ask your customers for help.

Whatever your reason for conducting them, here are 15 tips for getting the most out of your focus groups.

1. Keep an open mind. If you have already made up your mind and there is nothing that can make you change your mind, you don’t need focus groups.

2. Teach internal stakeholders (your boss, the advertising agency, the CEO) the benefits of exploratory research with customers. It is an opportunity to listen. Companies that listen to their customers are companies that win.

3. Define who you really want to talk to and learn from. Is it your current customers, is it a new market segment of customers or is it your competitor’s customers?

4. Define your key objectives. If you can only learn one thing from your customers, what do you want to know?

5. Ask objective questions and don’t lead the witness. A leading question will get you a predetermined answer in most groups. “Hey, how much do you all like this great new product?” versus “Here is a potential product that Company XYZ is considering offering to people like you. What are your thoughts?” I could write about how to ask questions forever – and that’s a long time. Perhaps another day.

6. Don’t be afraid of negative feedback. If you get negative feedback it doesn’t mean the moderator or the participants suck (to use a marketing term). It means you now have the opportunity to know that your idea, concept or advertisement may be polarizing or even poorly received by your target audience. With this comes the chance to make it better.

7. Don’t take it personally. If you get too attached to the creative or the idea you will miss the opportunity to have a winner. If you conduct a number of groups and your creative does not resonate with the consumer, be ready to make changes. It is always better to spend a few dollars on research versus spending the big bucks developing a campaign and having it bomb. Most clients do not allow their advertising agencies to have many in-market disasters. And the post-mortem on the campaign that bombed will likely be conducted by another agency.

8. Don’t be afraid of losing control (within reason). If your focus group participants are really taking an idea and running with it, let them talk! You will learn more than if you asked the questions. Just watch your time.

9. Be polite. Always say thank you. Be considerate of participants’ time – they don’t have to do this.

10. It’s OK not to say please. You are in control and a trusted guide, and most focus groups are paying gigs for focus group participants. Your participants are there to do what you say and help you. If you say please, it makes not helping or doing a particular exercise an option – and it’s not. This is not impolite. Really. It assures your participants that you have a plan for the next two hours and they will know what is expected of them. You are there to guide them and make it easy.

11. Dress for the front room – not the back room. If you are moderating in-person focus groups and you have people watching and helping in the back room, don’t dress for them! If your participants are showing up in jeans and tennis shoes, wear jeans and tennis shoes. You’ll blend in, which is what you want to do. For most people it is easier to talk to people who are like them. If you want to impress the back room, focus on doing a good job.

12. Have a great discussion guide. Not a good discussion guide – a great discussion guide. Why is good not great enough? Because this is where the guts of the discussion are. You should spend a significant amount of time thinking about the best ways to introduce your topics and get the most relevant and insightful information possible from the people who showed up to help you get the answers.

13. Ask for clarity. If you don’t understand participant feedback during a group, ask clarifying questions. “Can you give me an example of how that works?” Don’t fill in the blanks. You will be wrong.

14. Say it twice. Not everyone thinks the same way and if a concept is abstract or difficult to grasp, say it once, then say it again a different way and use an example.

15. Determine the type of group you want to conduct.

a. Online: These are fast from start to finish, featuring a high degree of sharing due to anonymity, with more data collected. Less expensive than in-person groups.

b. In-person: Use when it’s important for your respondent to physically touch and/or use a product or when you have everyone in one location.

c. Hybrid (a combination of in-person and some online groups): Often used when people are getting comfortable with using online groups. Then they often switch to online groups for the next project.

Well, the idea of hyper-personalization seems to be bedding in nicely but there are some important lessons for brands to learn when seeking to use this as a new marketing tool. Indeed, even researchers should be
mindful when considering to utilize this trend in market and consumer research.

First of all, we really need to remember to keep the customer at the very center of the equation. Hyper-personalization, by its nature, means that it is individualized and the consumer feels it’s “just for me.”

Customizing a brand or research project takes a degree of effort on
behalf of said customer, so the reward factor needs to be noticeably
heightened when compared to the mass of mainstream, one-size-fits-all
approaches. There are brands that have used customization in a
gimmicky way and have fallen off the hyper-personalization bandwagon.

It pays to check out those brands that have been quietly personalizing
for years – Interflora for one, and of course Dell computers. Although
it’s arguably easier to construct a made-to-order, beautiful, fragrant
bouquet than to build your own computer, both are good examples of hyper-
personalization and of which other brands can use as benchmarks.
Another great example is Jones Soda, which has for years hyper-
personalized with its “Your Photo, Your Soda, Your Brand” campaign –
encouraging consumers to personalize their soft drink.

One of my current favorites in the U.K. has to be Heinz who, via Facebook,
invited customers to mail a can of Heinz tomato or chicken soup bearing a
customized get-well message to an under-the-weather friend. Heinz has
built on the accepted consumer belief of providing soup when people aren’t
well and has given an easy way for Heinz soup to be offered. Nurture and
warmth are solidified as brand values and the connection with the
consumer feels personal and positive.

Coca-Cola too has taken the plunge – for the first time in 125 years
it has started playing with its packaging by launching a “Share a Coke with…” campaign
in Australia with 150 of the most popular Australian first names. The
message here, however, is, “We have taken a stab at guessing your name.”
Can this be deemed true personalization or are they just pretending?
Only time will tell if this will deliver hyper-personalization or just be
perceived as gimmicky.

In research, particularly qualitative research, this is a fairly easy
trend to ride. In our conversations with consumers we listen and make
them feel important (they are important!). In quantitative research,
more could be learned. Trying to “fit themselves” into the four or five
answers provided can make consumers feel disconnected and is
one of the burnout-inducing factors on long questionnaires.

Because of consumer need, and the ability for technology to help
deliver it, hyper-personalization seems to be here to stay, in
marketing and in marketing research. We need to find ways, though,
to truly bring it to life so that it does not seem to be just another fad.

Last year at this time, I had a little fun with all the predictions about important marketing research tools coming in 2011 and posted my own prediction. In case you don’t want to read that post (or read it again), I’ll tell you that I suggested brains are the most important tools for the future of the marketing research and insights world.

I’m not backing down on that prediction. I still believe the greatest tools we have at our disposal are our brains. I will, however, add one twist to this for 2012: the addition of effort to the equation. That is, brains plus effort equals the most important tool for the future.

I’ve been reading some interesting work on the role mind-set plays in performance and achievement. It is an oversimplification, but much of the research indicates praising effort (with employees or students, for example) instead of or along with praising ability is key to continued success and greater achievement. Here is a good introduction that includes a quote I love: “We are what we work to become.”

So, what mind-sets stand in your way? Our profession is full of very capable, intelligent people – there are lots of good brains out there and I am going to assume you own one – but what kinds of thinking limit your effort? How does your mind-set limit your employees, your colleagues, your suppliers?

Technology, economic conditions and turbulent business environments add up to some interesting challenges for marketing research and insights pros – now and for the foreseeable future. But with all this change and turbulence come many opportunities. What will we make of them?

What will we work to become in 2012 and beyond?