Archive for October, 2018



Mining the Depths: Unlocking System 1 Responses

Posted on: October 23rd, 2018 by doyle

When talking to clients, I continually hear concern that traditional qualitative research methods may not be helping them understand what really drives human behaviors. And it’s a legitimate concern.

Many qualitative (and for that matter, quantitative) methods involve asking questions and waiting for answers (“look at this, and tell me what you think”).  And what we get are rational, considered responses, but that is only a portion of what really drives human behavior.  It is therefore critical to use qualitative approaches that can tap into System 1 thinking in order to better understand the subconscious influencers and drivers of human behavior.

Here are three ideas to consider:

  • Utilize projective techniques. Personification exercises, brand obituaries, picture sorts, collages, word associations, deprivation exercises, and a whole host of other projective techniques are designed to get below surface responses to uncover subconscious attitudes, feelings, and behaviors. When thoughtfully incorporated into a group session or interview, they can break down barriers, foster communication, and mine emotional depths that simply wouldn’t surface with a basic Q&A approach.
  • Incorporate an observational component. This allows you to observe discrepancies in behavior between what someone says they do and what they actually do. Many behaviors, particularly those that are repeated day after day, are automatic and sometimes totally subconscious. By discussing what we have observed after the fact, more nuanced answers are elicited.
  • Capture “in-the-moment” behaviors using mobile technology. For example, we’ve used mobile intercepts with panel members whose location services are on and who enter a geo-fenced location. This allows us to capture respondents’ reactions to an experience as it takes place and before they’ve had a chance to consider their response.

It is our responsibility as qualitative researchers to continually seek ways to get below surface responses, uncover a more complete story, and gain insights that are grounded in consumers’ actual behaviors rather than their reported ones.

Decoding Disruption: A New Research Series from 20|20 Research

Posted on: October 2nd, 2018 by doyle

“A disruption isn’t an improvement or advancement, but a radically different approach to a consumer need.” – Female, 22-35

We can all think of some buzzwords we use without even thinking, whether we’re rattling them off during meetings or chatting with a colleague over lunch. Sometimes we use them and hear them so much they become almost meaningless – just filler. 

The word on the tip of everyone’s tongue these days is “disruption.” Which made my colleagues at 20|20 Research wonder – what exactly does “disruption” mean to consumers? Is it a meaningful term? Or is it just a term that we market researchers and marketers toss around among ourselves?

Being curious by nature, the 20|20 Insights team set out to do more than just define disruption – we set out to demystify it. The following is a sneak peek of the findings from our new research series Decoding Disruption, which will be released in phases over the next several months.
To kick things off, we asked 500 consumers from 20|20’s nationwide panel to weigh in on the topic of disruption. Our survey findings show that while consumers may not know the textbook definition of disruption, they know it when they see it, and it’s beginning to impact how they think about brands.

Initial findings reveal three key insights:

  1. Disruptive brands are here to stay. Nearly 7 in 10 consumers do not believe they are just fads, although they acknowledge that the majority of brands still do not rise to the level of being disruptive.
  2. The majority of consumers believe disruptive brands care more about creating products and services for “people like me.” Agreement with this statement is consistent across gender and income levels, making the case for brands to prioritize identifying and aligning with consumer needs.
  3. “Innovation” and “risk” are the key ingredients that signal to consumers that a company is disruptive. They believe that these elements, along with technology, are critical to a brand’s ability to think outside the box and build more customized solutions – particularly those products and services that meet the needs the consumer may not even know they have.

Our findings have also revealed that consumers value and have distinct expectations for both disruptive and traditional brands. Disentangling these expectations along with brand preferences will be the next focus of 20|20’s findings about disruption.

If disruption is here to stay and consumers have unique expectations for disruptive companies, what does it mean for your own brand or the brands you work with? Stayed tuned as we tackle this question and others in our research series, Decoding Disruption.