Archive for the ‘Qualitative General’ Category



IIeX 2017: A Qualitative Recap

Posted on: June 21st, 2017 by doyle No Comments

iiexgeneral

Once again, I attended what I have come to consider the premiere event for MR’s who are interested in staying abreast of trends, the IIeX Conference in Atlanta.   A combination of excellent presentations as well as a very robust exhibit experience – often with vendors I have not yet seen at another conference – makes it a “must” on my annual conference list.   Here are a few of my takeaways:

  •  There is a sense that the industry has swung too far in our focus on technology at the expense of insights.   It’s not enough to have whiz bang, gee whiz technology unless it is helpful in producing strategic insight.    As one panelist stated, technology should be assisting us in freeing up our intellectual capital, so that only 20% of our time is spent on analysis, and the remaining 80% is on the storytelling.
  • Qualitative seems to be making a comeback, as the antidote to  overwhelming amounts of data that are lacking insight. As a qualitative research consultant, it is both gratifying and a very welcome trend.
  • We have reached the point where there is no longer much meaningful distinction between online research and mobile research. Even when respondents are participating using an online platform, they are highly likely to be accessing it on their smartphone.   Essentially, we have moved into an era where research has become “device agnostic”.  I heretofore resolve to refer to Doyle Research’s online and mobile capabilities as our “digital” methods.
  • The panel and recruitment segment of our industry is struggling with the fact that screeners and surveys are becoming longer and longer, sharply increasing the cost to complete a study. Some vendors are considering charging for Q’s above a certain number; others are taking the approach of refusing to accept more than a certain number of questions.   Clearly, as researchers and clients, we must question the need to ask so many questions.   Do we really think the quality of the insights is going to be improved by surveying respondents who are impatient and fatigued?
  • One thing I heard that disturbed me: some clients reported that they receive deliverables from their MR partners that they need to rewrite before issuing them.   In some cases, they have defaulted to asking only for the raw data and writing it from scratch themselves.   We cannot let that happen!   Our long-term value—the value that cannot be replaced by technology — lies in our ability to deliver insights, as well as the strategies for acting upon those insights, in a clear and compelling manner; and to engage our clients in co-creating solutions.

Once again, I left IIeX exhausted (did I mention that it took 15 hours to fly home from Atlanta to Chicago?) but inspired.    Keep up the good work Lenny and crew!   I’ll see you next year.

Garbage in. Garbage out. The Need for Concept Optimization.

Posted on: June 1st, 2017 by doyle

From the desk of Carole Schmidtsusana-fernandez-56313

I’m just going to say it. We see a lot of bad concepts.

Look, we fully understand that it’s not easy to create a compelling new product and seemingly impossible to carve out real brand distinction in crowded categories. And rocket speed-to-market means you’ve got six months to get this thing on shelf!  But, sheesh, too often we are handed concepts that are still being written as we’re performing participant introductions during the research.  In other real world scenarios, waves of team review, and legal’s approval, have created some real concept doozers, delivered to us researchers either diluted to mush, with the core idea buried in euphemisms, or wholly lacking a reason for being.

I’m just going to say it. Spending time getting the “test” concepts right is worth its weight in gold.

Checking in with your customer along the way, while you’re crafting those concepts, reduces the misses on the back end, saving valuable time and money. Several “presearch” avenues are inexpensive and fast and they will help you get to great concepts, faster.

Relate to a need: The most successful concepts address a real customer’s unmet need or compensating behavior. How do you discover those? Get out of the office to observe your customer in situ by going in-home or in-car.  Tap mobile journals or geofenced intercept interviews to capture and understand the customer experience at the point-of-purchase or use.

Reflect the language of the target to increase relevance: Yogurt eaters are particular about thick vs. Greek. Gearheads know what a four-banger is. Tap qualitative social media analysis to get a handle on the language your customers speak.

Understand concept-product fit: When you have a product in mind as well as a concept, go both ways. Explore your concept first among some and probe for product expectations. Investigate your product first among others, then probe how to communicate about it.  This is where your internal employees/staff can be of great help, formally, with a series of moderated on-site or webcam interviews, or informally, discussed around the water cooler or lunchroom at the office.

 Consider exposing the concept unbranded, too: Probe, “Is there an idea here?” independently of revealing the brand behind that idea to better assess the concept’s strength and the power of your brand as part of that concept. Branded and unbranded concepts can be rotated in online boards just as readily as they can be in focus groups.

Communicate as intended: “Gives you energy to take on the day” was meant to be a sustaining and satiety benefit, but in research it was also incorrectly perceived as a telltale sign of high carbs or sugar to many. Communication checks for concept clarity are efficient and inexpensive; they can be done in a day, in–person or online.

 I’m just going to say it again. Take your concepts as seriously as you do the rest of your research spend. Get your customer involved in optimizing your concepts before testing them. We look forward to your future successful concepts!

Qualitative Design: Utilizing Positive Affect Techniques

Posted on: May 8th, 2017 by doyle

From the desk of Laura Duguid

Positive AffectTraditionally, positive affect techniques have been used in the context of brainstorming sessions, helping to free minds and encourage divergent thinking. Often overlooked however is how inducing positive affect in qualitative design can be beneficial.

Positive affect refers to the extent to which an individual subjectively experiences positive moods such as joy, interest, and alertness. Research shows that by inducing positive affect, one can improve a person’s verbal fluency.1 What’s more, positive affect has been associated with generating increased dopamine levels in the brain, which in turn has been shown to improve cognitive flexibility.2

Practically, inducing positive affect is all about establishing and maintaining an affirming, comfortable environment where respondents feel relaxed and completely free to express their thoughts and opinions. Telling them is not enough. The moderator, the room set-up, and the discussion guide all must contribute. For example:

  • A comfortable, living-room type environment rather than a formal conference table set-up
  • Ease into the discussion more slowly by doing an extra ice breaker, going beyond only respondent introductions
  • Humor! One idea is to find an appropriate yet comical video on YouTube that’s related to the discussion topic as a means of inciting laughter. Humor is one of THE most powerful, efficient ways to induce positive affect.
  • Incorporate movement. Halfway through the group, direct respondents to get up and move around or change seats. This helps literally and figuratively change their perspective, alleviating stale, repetitious responses.
  • Integrate highly engaging, respondent tasks into the discussion guide. Think of creative ways to garner information that require respondents to draw, assemble something, get up and walk to images posted in the room, do brief creative writing exercises, etc.

For research purposes, it’s important to understand that respondents can express negative opinions about a discussion topic without putting a damper on the positive affect. How? Through positive reinforcement from the moderator. Once a respondent has shared information – positive or negative – complimentary encouragement by the moderator (for ALL respondents) is key. In fact, according to Professor Norihiro Sadato, study lead and professor at the National Institute for Physiological Sciences in Japan, “To the brain, receiving a compliment is as much a social reward as being rewarded money. We’ve been able to find scientific proof that a person performs better when they receive a social reward after completing an exercise.”3

While it’s highly unlikely respondents will trade their participation honorarium for compliments, the power of the two together, along with other positive affect influences will certainly assure rich, prolific qualitative results.

 

1 Science Direct, L.H. Philips, R. Bull, E. Adams, L. Fraser, Positive mood and executive function: Evidence from stroop and fluency tasks

2 Psychological Review, 106 (3) (1999), pp. 529-550, A neuropsychological theory of positive affect and its influence on cognition, F.G. Ashby, A.M. Isen, A.U. Turken

3Forbes Online, November 9, 2012, David DiSalvo

Loving the List: A Qualitative Perspective

Posted on: April 27th, 2017 by doyle


Reading-a-list-225x300From the desk of Natanya Rubin

Recruiting qualitative respondents from a database can be a challenge when the target is very specialized.  The solution is sometimes a list provided by the client.  But list recruits come with their own challenges and it’s important to face them with creativity and realistic expectations.

Factors to consider when determining the viability of a list include:

  • The type of contact information available: Does the list provide the full name of the respondent?  Does the list provide an e-mail address, home phone number, and cell phone number?  Often, e-mail is the most efficient way to reach respondents, but the subject line and body text must be very compelling to break through the general bulk of spam that people receive.
  • The accuracy of the list: How current is the list?  The longer ago the information was collected, the less likely it is to be accurate.
  • The size of the list: Conventional wisdom in the recruiting sphere says that for a “good” list—that is, one with full, current information—there should be 30 names provided for each desired recruit. But that number can go up to 70 or 100 depending on the factors above.
  • The ability to reveal the sponsor of the research: Can the sponsor of the research be identified, or is it a blinded study?  Often, there are compelling reasons to obscure the origin of the study.  But in a world where people are trained not to click on a link from an e-mail address they don’t recognize or pick up a call from an unknown number, it’s an uphill battle to get a reply from respondents not primed for research.

So how to break through and make a list work harder?  It’s important to consider the pitch that you’re going to deliver to potential respondents.  Thought needs to be put into a catchy subject line, a clear and compelling explanation of the study, and an appeal that makes it clear why they, personally, are so important to the study.

It’s also necessary to understand that even with a brilliant pitch, a lot more unprimed respondents are going to say no than yes.  Allowing more time for recruiting and considering sweetening the deal with a higher incentive are both ways to improve the possibility of a favorable response.

Sometimes a qualitative recruit can’t be completed without a list, but the challenges can be considerable!  Knowing the difficulties in advance can prepare you for success through careful planning, patience, and making the best case possible for a respondent to join the study.

What do Millennials, Procurement, and Mobile Qualitative Have in Common?

Posted on: March 28th, 2017 by doyle

5 Micro-Trends We Are Noticing at Doyle Research

From the desk of Kathy Doyle

It all started with a question from a marketing consultant we hired to work with us on targeting and positioning.   “What’s happening in the market research industry that could have an impact on your business, and why?”trends

As I began trying to answer that question, I noticed some “micro-trends” emerging.   Not the biggies, like automation and big data, but some smaller ones with a day-to-day impact.  Here are five I noted:

  • The Millennial effect. As Millennials become a greater proportion of our clients, we have noticed two trends emerging:  1) they are far more likely to find us via an internet search than a referral from a friend or colleague.    This is completely opposite of what business looked like 10-15 years ago.  And necessitates changes in how we market and sell our services; and 2) “bigger is decidedly NOT better” when it comes to deliverables.    The days of 100-page reports being a tangible sign that a client has gotten their money’s worth are long gone.    Millennial clients are far more likely to want a handful of slides that are clear, concise, and highly visual.  I can’t blame them.   Information is coming at us all at top speed.  But as a researcher, this is difficult to accept much less deliver!
  • The resurgence of qualitative research.  For a while, clients were reporting that they were relying more on big data, social media research, and desk research.   Now we are hearing that there is simply no substitute for observing and engaging with customers first hand.   The pendulum has swung again.  And “why” is where it’s at.
  • The dominance of mobile research. Almost any method or technique we’ve used over the past 30 years is now being “mobile-ized”.   And should be.  It’s the way our customers are communicating in 2017.   We are using mobile for virtual shopalongs, virtual ethnography, in-the-moment intercepts (incorporating geofencing technology), mobile diaries, mobile homework assignments.    Mobile allows us to get closer to our customers when and where behaviors are occurring and decisions are being made.
  • The rise of procurement. As procurement departments become more common, they are impacting us in two ways:  1) delaying the start of projects, just when the trend is toward faster turnaround; but also 2) challenging us to better explain our value, since apples to apples pricing comparisons are difficult to achieve in qualitative research. Learning to understand the procurement mindset, and how best to work with them to achieve mutually acceptable outcomes, is of increasing importance.
  • The need to deliver faster, cheaper AND better. I wrote a blog post about this a year ago.   It used to be standard wisdom that you could only deliver two of the three, but never all three.   That is rapidly changing.  The emergence of machine translations, text analytics, video management software, DIY recruiting, automated incentive payments, among others, are making it not only possible, but imperative, that we strive to achieve all three.

The times, they are a changin’.    And we are learning to change with them!