The Market Research Insider

Thursday, May 29, 2014

Recap: The Future of Consumer Intelligence 2014

Imagine a line drawn in the sand that is filled with hot burning coals. To the left of the burning line stands a group of people. And to the right of the burning line stands another group of people. The group of people on the left are all directly facing the burning line drawn in the sand and are staring at the opposing group. The group on the right are also all facing the burning line drawn in the sand, staring directly at the group on the left.

The burning line drawn in the sand represents trust. The group of people on the left believe they are entitled to the right group’s trust because they are trying to help them. The group on the right believes trust is earned and will not easily give it to the group on the left. The tug of war between the two groups over trust causes friction and creates the burning line drawn in the sand that neither can cross without the right tools.

The above scenario is analogous to what was presented at the recent 2014 Future of Consumer Intelligence conference (#FOCI14). The group to the left was Big Business, the group to the right was the Public and we as attendees were willing and able to sit right on the burning line drawn in the sand and discuss how to bridge the gap between groups.

BIG DATA VS. BIG PRIVACY

As marketers and researchers we love to collect lots of data with the intention of using personal information to improve products, services, and lives. But at what point is it considered invasion of privacy? Do consumers really know how their data is being used, regardless of whatever they agreed to? At FOCI14 it was made evident that as marketers and researchers, we teeter on the brink of “Empowerment vs. Endagerment”. The path to maintaining the balance and bridging the gap on the subject of data between Big Business and the Public was made evident: provide clear, concise rules and guidelines for how consumer data is used that moves past legality and into the territory of morality.

MARKETING SCIENCE VS. PEOPLE

Clearly our industry is at a point of disruptive innovation as new technologies and methodologies allow researchers to get a clearer picture of consumer insights. But who are behind all of these insights? That’s right, people. In our industry we label people as consumers, customers, shoppers, respondents, target markets and more. But remember that behind all of our studies are people. And sometimes we can act as a barricade between companies, their brands, and their consumers in an attempt to remain unbiased and objective. So how do we bridge the gap?

For starters, John Havens, Founder of The H(app)athon Project, suggests we can begin by switching out the label “consumer” with “customer”. Whereas Elizabeth Merrick, Senior Customer Insights Manager of HSN suggests we consider research as another touch point of the brand, “We should allow customers to contribute to a brand, not just consume it.”

So it appears the segue between marketing science and people is essentially personal treatment and recognizing that customers are more than a data point within a spreadsheet.

From John Havens, The H(app)athon Project

TECHNOLOGY VS. HUMANIZATION OF DATA

The more I thought about it, FOCI14’s tagline of The Convergence of Technology, Marketing Science & Humanization of Data seemed unintentionally (or perhaps intentionally) dichotomous where both Big Business and the Public were descending upon the line is drawn in the sand. So it goes with technology & humanization.

There is no doubt that technology improves lives at blistering speeds. Ray Kurzweil, Director of Engineering for Google pointed out that, “Information Technology expands exponentially across time, not linearly.” But as we become more technologically advanced, do we lose a piece of our humanity and our identity?

As we discussed more and more about the subjects of technological advances, psychological habits, triggers, and touch points at FOCI14, it seemed the key to closing the gap between technology & humanization of data relied upon engagement. If new technologies enable to us to engage with customers in a more meaningful way and people are able to build stronger psychological connections with each other, then the gap is bridged. If on the other hand, the research community were to stand disengaged with customers and people, then technology & humanization in the field will stand diametrically opposed on a bridge that is about to collapse.

So the real question in all of this is, “Has your organization bridged the line drawn in the sand?”

Tom Krause, VP of Client Services, Gongos Research
"It's all about people"

Chris Ruby is an award-winning Marketing Research & Consumer Insights Executive with Fortune 500 consulting experience. His niche is the ability to turn complex data into compelling stories that induce a call for action among key decision-makers. His work has been featured by MRA, MRIA, IIR, Norstat Times, Chadwick Martin Bailey & the Optimization Group. Keep up with Chris Ruby by following him on Twitter @ChrisRubyMRX or by reading the Chris Ruby Market Research Blog.

Tuesday, May 13, 2014

The Endless Possibilities of Mobile Market Research

It's a camera. A microphone. An audio recorder. A video recorder. A phone. A web browser. A typewriter. A gaming system. A GPS system. A two-way audio device. An e-reader. And an instant messenger. What is it? Why a mobile device of course. And it is like a mini-focus group facility all in the palm of your hand.

For some odd reason, I really never thought of a mobile device in that capacity before. Until, I recently attended a research event that featured a Mobile Market Research Panel who brought this fact to light.

Since that moment, the capabilities and possibilities of Mobile Market Research have endlessly wandered in my mind. For instance, imagine a demographically and geographically prescreened customer approaches a retail store to do some shopping and ding...their mobile device presents an opportunity to participate in a real-time survey based on the store they are about to enter.

Remember, the mobile device is GPS enabled so when the customer accepts, their movement throughout the retail store will be tracked. As they proceed with their shopping experience, going down aisle per aisle, the customer can not only participate in a real time survey, but also record their experience in both audio and video format. And, take pictures of their experience along the way.

Therefore in theory, everything that would be part of the customer experience is fair game in Mobile Market Research. That would include product display, shelving, store format, parking lots, restrooms, employees, checkout and more. All collected in both quantitative and qualitative real time with no excuses.

This is only one mere example of what can be accomplished with Mobile Market Research. Some say Mobile Market Research is the next big thing. However, with up to 25% of respondents already using mobile devices to participate in market research, it appears Mobile Market Research is not the next big thing. It has in fact already arrived.

Wednesday, May 7, 2014

Do-It-Yourself Research is on the Rise

Roe vs. Wade, Gun Control, Immigration & Capital Punishment.

It wasn’t that long ago where a simple conversation about Do-It-Yourself Online Research (DIYOR) among the Market Research community felt like a heated debate with the same intensity of the aforementioned topics.

For all intents and purposes, let’s not debate the pro/cons and the validity/invalidity of DIYOR within this space. These topics and arguments are already well documented and discussed. Instead, let’s take a look at the industry’s past, present and future.

DIYOR began in the late 1990’s and moved past the introduction stage of the product life cycle in the late 2000’s. Its current fragmentation of companies resembles the fragmented Market Research Industry where a handful of major players are accompanied by a majority of smaller companies.

DIY Research is in the growth stage of the product life cycle

The DIYOR Industry, as well as the NewMR Industry in which it is a subset, is presently within the growth stage of the product life cycle as revenues are increasing year over year. Some suggest the industry is cannibalizing Traditional Research. However, relatively recent worldwide sales figures suggest that NewMR is supplementing Traditional Research, not cannibalizing it.

Some of the major players in the DIYOR market are beginning to behave as if operating within the maturity stage of the product life cycle and are buying competitors, forming partnerships and extending product lines. This behavior seems relatively quick as only a few years have passed since the industry outgrew the introduction stage. Though, perhaps the move to maturity for some isn’t so quick after all since first and foremost DIYOR companies are technology companies that exist in an ever-changing market.

In terms of present offerings, two key factors have yet to normalize in the DIYOR market: Service & Price.

Service and Research Design in the market range from truly unaided services to aided / self-guided services. DIYOR vendors in the unaided market provide the technology for customers to field quantitative and qualitative studies, but do not assist the questionnaire design process and provide the results of the survey as raw data without data analysis services. Whereas aided / self-guided companies provide a full suite of self-guided questionnaire design templates as well as data analysis applications. For an extra fee, some aided / self-guided companies can provide an experienced researcher to help design customers’ quantitative and qualitative projects. And of course, there are DIYOR companies that exist somewhere between both ends of the spectrum.

Both services and prices widely vary in the DIY Research market

The relative price of service in the DIYOR market increases or decreases relative to the amount of service provided and overall price points display a fairly wide variance in the DIYOR market. Charges range from free, to charging per respondent, to charging per month, to charging per year, to charging with sliding-scale credits, to charging for a basic user profile, to charging for an intermediate user profile, to charging for an advanced user profile, to charging for enterprise services, etc., etc. Get the picture?

It's going to be a challenge for consumers to truly evaluate all the different price points, at all the different offerings, for all the different users, at all the different levels of service. Without a doubt, the rising DIYOR industry is in need of a solid pricing study that will ultimately optimize and ease consumers' purchasing decisions.

So what lies in store for the DIYOR industry? My humble prediction is within the next 5 years, larger full-suite, self-guided DIYOR companies will continue to purchase smaller DIYOR companies that display attractive technology and operate within a niche of the market, in order to add to their portfolios of services. Customers by this time will have determined for themselves which product offering at particular price points makes the most sense. This combination of vendor consolidation and educated pricing from a consumers point of view will ultimately streamline the DIYOR industry as a whole and normalize its product offerings and prices.

In your opinion, where is the DIYOR industry heading in the next 5 years? Please comment below.

Thursday, April 3, 2014

A Millennial Problem in Market Research

When you talk to colleagues in Market Research and Consumer Insights about how they started in the Industry, how many times have you heard the phrase, “I just kind of fell into it”? Honestly, I’ve heard this phrase more often that I would have liked throughout the years. I recently attended a Market Research event and heard the same phase repeated again. So I just finally had to ask, “Why?”

Is it perhaps because for lack of better terms, a defined career path for Market Research in college? Universities have Accounting, Math and Science departments, but the overwhelming majority do not have Marketing Research departments or offer degrees in Marketing Research.

Maybe it’s due to a general lack of awareness of our trade among the public? Or perhaps it’s due to the nature of the work and the skill set required? Whatever the reason, the “just fell into it” phenomenon is a foreseeable problem for our industry that is expected to add 32% more Research Analysts over the course of the next decade. And who are likely to fill these roles? Why, Millennials of course.

“Intense interest and behavior of young people can improve our research." ~ Martin Sorrell, CEO, WPP

And Millennials are a perfect fit for our industry. They are the first generation that has lived with the internet since birth. They are technically savvy in so many aspects and have a fantastic set of interactive, adoptive & digital skills. With such a set of appealing traits, are we as an Industry expecting them to “just fall into” the trade as well? Or are we recruiting and training the brightest, most intelligent, most curious young individuals that we can? If we are participating in the former, our industry is in for quite a shock.

A recent poll among Millennials revealed they want to work for prestigious online / tech firms like Google, Apple, Facebook, & Microsoft. These firms are likely perceived to be creative, innovative and push the technological envelope. Likewise, these same firms want Millennials to work for them for similar reasons, and are recruiting top talent among the best colleges throughout the nation.

So if Millennials want to work with top tech companies, and these same companies are recruiting top talent like crazy, where does that leave our Industry in obtaining top talent? According to Martin Sorrell, Chief Exectuve Officer of WPP (parent company of Kantar, TNS, Millward Brown & Added Value) we are desperately in need of this talent. “Intense interest and behavior of young people can improve our research and make it more accepted. And right now our industry has the need for more skills in programming, data, & digital.”

It’s evident we have a need for Millennials, but do they have a need for us? Is our Industry perceived as innovative, creative, and technologically savvy in the eyes of Millennials? Enough to join? Only time will tell since not a single Top 50 Honomichl Company made their preference list. (Please comment below)

Thursday, March 27, 2014

The Best Time To Post On Social Media is...?

We've all been there before. We are about to post across Social Media (SM) and that foreboding question finally hits us. “When is the best time and day to post on SM?” I mean, we want as many relevant (maybe even irrelevant) people to see our postings and content, right?

This ever evolving digital social process is called “The Science of Timing” (SOT). If we get it right, everyone lives happily ever after. If we get it wrong, no one gives us a second thought.

The "Science of Timing" predicts the optimal time to post on Social Media

SOT (a.k.a. the optimal time to post) revolves around 5 different paradigms and approaches otherwise known as: The Common Sense Approach, The Segmentation Approach, The Best Practices Approach, The Auto Scheduling Approach, and the Contracompetitive Timing Approach.

Huh? Keep reading.

The Common Sense Approach is based on an intuitive sense of when people would or would not be on SM. For example, when people are asleep, at work, or at school, they are probably less likely to interact with SM. Whereas, if people are awake and the timing is before, after, or outside of work or school, their likelihood to use SM increases on average.

The Segmentation Approach involves timing based on the SM habits of your targeted audience, which coincidentally, you've collected over time. For example, if you and your organization are targeting teenage gamers during the upcoming summer, you've likely monitored their SM patterns over time, and will run a campaign based on the SM idiosyncrasies they've displayed. In all likelihood, their SM behavior will be different when compared to the entire online population as a whole. Hence, the Segmentation Approach.

In contrast, The Best Practices Approach is based on how the entire SM audience acts as a whole and provides optimal timings based on aggregate online behavior. You can think of it in terms of talking at a cocktail party, where there is a lot of chatter at its peak attendance point.

The optimal time to post on Twitter is late in the weekday, between 2pm – 5pm EST

Dan Zarella, SM Scientist for Hubspot, recently addressed the SOT Best Practices Approach for both Twitter and Facebook. “The optimal time to post on Twitter is late in the weekday, between 2pm – 5pm EST, as this maximizes ReTweets. Coincidentally, we’ve found there is no significant difference in clickthrough rates according to the time of day or the day of the week, so it’s okay to experiment with your Tweets on the weekends and during late hours.”

Zarella further explains, “We've discovered clickthrough rates dramatically reduce, the more you post within an hour. The clickthrough rate for a second post drops to 50%. The clickthrough rate for a 3rd post within an hour is almost nil.” Zarella is not suggesting to Tweet less as he points to a strong relationship between the number of tweets per day and total followers. Instead, he suggests not to “crowd out” your tweets per hour.

Zarella also suggests three key timing points for Facebook: (1) post every other day as mainstream pages that did this displayed the most likes, (2) post content on the weekends since it elicits the most amount of shares and (3) post content in the morning as shares tend to do marginally better than those published at other times.

Don't "crowd out" your Tweets per hour

But if everyone uses The Best Practices Approach, wouldn't the SM landscape become overcrowded during those specific times and diminish the likelihood of anyone hearing your message?”

Great question. Keep reading.

The three previous methods require someone from within to personally determine optimal timing. Whereas with The Autoscheduling Approach, 3rd parties determine optimal posting times. But what are these 3rd parties’ optimization practices you say? And how do they measure up to yours?

After investigating Autoscheduling practices, two unique terms surfaced: static vs. dynamic. A static Autoscheduling system optimizes timing based on The Best Practices Approach, not on individual behavior. While a dynamic system optimizes timing through individual / follower behavior, and gets better over time. So which method would you prefer? Find out which method your provider utilizes.

Last but not least, there is The Contracompetitive Timing Approach. This approach is actually the opposite of The Best Practices Approach and circumvents its downside. This territory lies at the beginning and tail-end of the cocktail party, where crowds are smaller in number, thereby improving the odds of individual engagement. By utilizing Contracompetitive Timing, smaller crowds are more likely to hear your voice that would otherwise be lost in the chatter of a full-swing cocktail party.

So which SOT approach is the best? The Common Sense Approach of when people are online? The Segmentation Approach that profiles your specific target audience? The mega-blast to a crowded room, Best Practice Approach? Perhaps the best is The Autoscheduling Approach which leaves it in the hands of the experts? Or maybe the Contracompetitive Timing Approach seems like a valid alternative, so your messages aren't lost in the masses? Perchance it is a combination of all the above?

In your personal experience, the best SOT approach is _________. (Please comment below)

Wednesday, March 19, 2014

Recap of SoCal MRA Education Event 2014: How Technology, Big Data & Cultures have merged in MR

At no other time in the history of the United States has there been such an introduction and growth of new technology that has infused itself into our community. And what is the purpose of new technology you say? The purpose is meant to improve the lives of people and to add greater value to everyday experiences. And people who use new technology have different values, different beliefs, different principles and different cultures that they live by on a daily basis. And mind you, the keyword here in all of this is PEOPLE. People invent new technology. People use it. People manage it. People tweak it. And people stop using it once it has become obsolete.

The relationship between technology, people and pop culture exists everywhere, including within the Market Research industry. If this is the case, then it seems natural to ask, “Is there a better, faster, more efficient, more experiential way to conduct Marketing Research & Consumer Insights studies?

This underlying theme was addressed last week at the Southern California Marketing Research Association’s Annual Education Event (SoCal MRA), held March 14^th & 15^th, 2014 at the gorgeous South Coast Winery Resort & Spa in Temecula, CA.

Advantages & Disadvantages of Location Based Mobile Research

The event opened with a Mobile Research panel that discussed the new advent and technology of Location Based Mobile Research. Imagine, reducing the lag time between the customer experience and their report of the experience by weeks. Imagine instead, the customer experience is reported in real time, as they enter a retail store per se. With mobile device in hand, their movements and shopping experience is tracked, all the while submitting pictures and responding to real time survey questions or phone calls (remember, many mobile devices also act as phones!) Well no need to imagine anymore because the technology already exists and the segmentation possibilities and data collection opportunities for Location Based Mobile Research seem endless.

But not so fast. There are a few barriers to Location Based Mobile Research at the moment. The biggest seems to be client acceptance of the new technology. Surprisingly, some clients are hesitant to add Mobile Research to their portfolio because the new data interferes with their current reporting systems. And someone at their company spent many hours to perfect that system and doesn’t want to change it. But are resistances to change a legitimate and understandable reason not to implement it?

Paul Johnson, Director of Analytics for SSI, believes it is not a valid reason. “Respondents are already involved in Mobile Research, but you just might not be treating them well. Up to 25% are entering online survey portals through mobile devices!” So if a client is hesitant to implement Mobile Research because it interferes with their reporting system, then in all likelihood, they will not design their surveys to address the special needs of mobile devices (smaller screens, smaller fonts, etc.) Would this hesitancy affect respondents overall survey experience? Would not addressing it affect the quality of data gathered? Does resistance to change still seem a viable option given what’s at stake?

Multicultural Values - Different Cultures Do Exist

Another interesting facet of the educational event was the discussion of Multicultural values within the marketplace. And let’s face it…surprise…different cultures do exist in the United States. Ultimately, the research we conduct is with living people with different emotions & different values that are based on different cultures. But are companies properly addressing the multicultural differences that currently exist in our society? Carlos Garcia, Multicultural SVP of GfK, suggests there is room for improvement. “Companies still have a tendency to blanket general marketing communications to a general audience (customers), without giving a lot of weight to the different nuances of culture that exist between Caucasians, Hispanics, African-Americans, etc.”

Because of this gap of identification between multicultural communities and their unique experiences and perceptions, in comes the service of a company like RMS Communications and Research who’s President, Rhonda Scott, primarily conducts research in the African-American community. “Traces of the Black culture exist all throughout mainstream America. And even in our own Black culture, there exist subcultures, so you cannot simply categorize everyone as Black. It is just not that simple.”

So if companies on average tend to send out targeted messages to their audience that are not culturally specific, does this leave room for Market Research opportunities within a Multicultural marketplace?

Dr. Jung, Professor of Marketing at Cal Poly Pomona believes there is. He delved into the concept of multicultural predictability and opportunity. “Typical corporate America values independent culture, such as independent achievements, opinions & activities that pertain to one’s self. On the other hand, Asians value interdependent culture, where their actions revolve around the concerns of the group, where they don’t want to stand out and where silence is equated with wisdom. These differences in culture yield lower success rates of Asians in corporate America. So if you can predict one’s independent or interdependent culture, you can predict one’s behavior & success”

So technology leads to advancements that improve people’s lives. And people have different values, beliefs, and cultures. And these values, beliefs, and cultures allow one to predict behavior. So in market research, we gather consumer’s opinions that are full of Multicultural influence, with upcoming new technology, that improves the market research methodology which leads to…you guessed it…the advent of BIG DATA!

Challenges of Synthesizing Big Data

Our industry’s ability to collect tons of data on consumers often leaves us with the challenge of insightfully synthesizing the data and turning it into useful marketing intelligence. For example, Karen Manne, Vice President of Research for ABC Studios shared with the SoCal MRA, the obstacles and challenges of utilizing Big Data in the world of media measurement. “With the dawn of new gaming platforms, Video on Demand (VOD), DVR playback, & online playback, synthesizing proprietary and syndicated data to answer a simple question like, ‘Who and how many people watched last night’s premiere’ can be a daunting challenge.”

It’s a daunting challenge because each new form of media has its own individual set of viewing metrics that are not necessarily compatible with each other. Now add the fact that not all media is readily consumed (e.g. VOD & DVR playback) and not all new media collects detailed demographics, and you begin to understand the dilemma that the studios and networks face.

So does experiential research, cultural identification and Big Data leave room for opportunities in the market research industry? Has new technology in our industry improved or hindered methodology? Has it improved or hindered respondents survey experience? And has it provided our community with more insightful results? The answer is ____________. (Insert comments below)