tag:www.qualblog.com,2009-01-23://1 2010-09-09T14:07:21Z Research From Both Sides of the Glass Movable Type 4.23-en tag:www.qualblog.com,2010://1.124 2010-09-08T16:49:09Z 2010-09-09T14:07:21Z

It's September 2010, so the numbers are finally being tallied on 2009. The findings confirm what we all knew, 2009 was a bad year. In fact, it was the first down year for market research in the past 15 years....

Jim Bryson
ESOMAR reports that the worldwide research industry was down an inflation-adjusted 4.6% in 2009, the first decline since 1988. Still, our industry billed $28.9 billion last year. In case you are keeping track, qualitative accounted for 13% of worldwide research spending. When I do the math, qualitative research is a $3.75 billion industry worldwide. 

23 of the top 25 countries showed a decline. Every major region was down -- Europe down 5.9%, North America down 3.5%, Asia/Pacific down 2.2%, Latin America down 4.6% and Middle East and Africa down 10.2%.

Similarly, the American Marketing Association released a Honomichl report detailing the performance of the top 25 research firms.  As a group they showed a revenue decline of 4.5%.

Goodbye 2009. Welcome 2010.


]]> tag:www.qualblog.com,2010://1.123 2010-09-08T16:00:26Z 2010-09-08T16:03:55Z

Inexperience with hybrid research wasn't the issue for Susan Saurage-Altenloh when she came to us earlier this summer with a problem. She had been combining quantitative and qualitative research for decades. Her problem had to do with logistics. Specifically, what...

Lena Anthony
The answer: QualLink, our patent-pending system that allows seamless integration of a quantitative survey and a qualitative bulletin board.

Before trying out QualLink, Saurage-Altenloh and her staff at Saurage Research were going to tackle the opt-ins manually, which would have opened the door to error. But making mistakes wasn't really an option: "We had to be very careful about the way we treated them, because we were talking about someone's valued customers, and their brand was associated with this," she says. "That's a problem with sorting through respondents manually--it's not foolproof."
But Saurage-Altenloh knew QualLink would be. "We have a lot of confidence in 20|20 Research," she says. "You never have to worry about something going wrong. There are no glitches. Everything always runs the way it's supposed to--all the time."

Read more about this online research software solution and how it can help you.



]]> tag:www.qualblog.com,2010://1.122 2010-08-31T17:37:53Z 2010-08-31T18:09:56Z

Earlier this week on Twitter, some folks following the #MRX conversation had some strong reactions to a BNET article, "Why Social Networking Isn't Customer Research." One comment read, "I pity the fool who thinks social media leads to customer insights."...

Lena Anthony #MRX conversation had some strong reactions to a BNET article, "Why Social Networking Isn't Customer Research." One comment read, "I pity the fool who thinks social media leads to customer insights." Really? Then why did Quirk's Marketing Research Review dedicate an entire issue to the topic last month? In the August issue, you could read about sampling social media data, best practices for surveying niche social media members and more.

Geoffrey James, author of the BNET tirade, gives some good reasons why you can't understand what's going on in a customer base through social media. Here are two that stood out to me:

• Commenters are self-selected: "Real research involves statistical sampling of a random group," he says. "People who comment are pre-disposed to comment, making their inputs statistically worthless."
• Paid commenting is endemic: "PR firms frequently 'stuff' comments with fake endorsements," he says. "Contrariwise, competitors stuff comments with fake criticism."

But Andrew Wilson, author of "When your consumers are talking online, here are some tips on how to listen" (registration required) in the August issue of Quirk's, makes some valid points as well. Wilson says user-generated content (like that posted on Twitter, blogs, review sites, etc.) "should be viewed as a series of unstructured conversations that, when used appropriately, can add depth to and expand your understanding of who your customers are and their experiences with your products and services."

Wilson recognizes social media's limitations but still sees its value in qualitative research. No, it can't replace your research - you still need to do that bulletin board focus group to understand your customers - but it can, in some situations, enhance your research efforts.

Throughout the article he provides examples of how one wrongly can interpret user-generated content - and tips for maximizing the validity of your findings.

]]> tag:www.qualblog.com,2010://1.115 2010-08-30T14:57:06Z 2010-08-30T15:04:09Z

Have you noticed that the meaning of the term "online focus group" is changing?When we started doing online qualitative research in 2000, there were two basic types -- the bulletin board focus group and the online focus group. At that...

Jim Bryson
When we started doing online qualitative research in 2000, there were two basic types -- the bulletin board focus group and the online focus group. At that time, the online focus group was clearly defined as real-time, text-chat focus groups. The definition was clear and unambiguous.

Today, the term is evolving and creating confusion. Though one online moderator might use the term online focus group in the context of a text-chat focus group, another online moderator might use the term to refer to a webcam focus group. 

Today, the only consistency in the term "online focus group" is that the speaker is referring to a virtual focus group in real time. So, the next time someone asks you about an online focus group, you might want to ask for a bit more information before moving forward.

]]> tag:www.qualblog.com,2010://1.121 2010-08-24T14:50:47Z 2010-08-24T14:56:27Z

When we talked to online qualitative research veteran Liz Van Patten of Consumer Advisory Panels last week about tips for engaging a bulletin board focus group, she brought up a great point that we thought deserved its very own post--the...

Lena Anthony Consumer Advisory Panels last week about tips for engaging a bulletin board focus group, she brought up a great point that we thought deserved its very own post--the biggest mistake beginner online moderators make when conducting a bulletin board focus group.
 
(Drum roll, please...)
 
They ask too many questions!
 
If you recruit participants based on a 30-45 minute time commitment each day, you have to really deliver on that promise," Liz says. Otherwise, she says, you can expect engagement, participation and ultimately your results to suffer. Plus, that negative experience can spread by word of mouth, thus making recruitment more of a challenge for future projects. "It's really about earning the participants' trust by being truthful with them," she explains. "If they feel they can trust the moderator and the process they will be more willing to open up and share their thoughts and feelings, which is the moderator's goal."
 
So how do you know how many questions you can ask in your bulletin board focus group? "It comes down to the math," says Liz, who explains that you should allow 2-3 minutes to respond to the average online question--3-4 minutes (or more) if you want them to read and react to other participants. For a 30-45 minute daily time commitment, that works out to 10-12 questions each day. To make sure you're on target, consider doing a run-through of the board yourself as you develop the discussion guide.
 
When creating your discussion guide, aim for a reasonable number of questions based on the time commitment you've asked for. If you find that you're going over, consider combining repetitive questions or rethinking questions to be broader in scope. Liz also suggests asking a more general opening question and following up throughout the day with specific probes.
]]> tag:www.qualblog.com,2010://1.120 2010-08-19T18:26:39Z 2010-08-19T18:33:04Z

Engagement in a bulletin board focus group can be a tricky thing to gauge. For starters, you can't see your participants. Plus, you're not necessarily interacting with your participants in real-time. But those barriers don't make engagement in a bulletin...

Lena Anthony bulletin board focus group can be a tricky thing to gauge. For starters, you can't see your participants. Plus, you're not necessarily interacting with your participants in real-time. But those barriers don't make engagement in a bulletin board focus group any less important--or impossible to achieve.

We talked with veteran qualitative research consultant Liz Van Patten, who runs Consumer Advisory Panels, to find out some of her secrets to engaging participants in a bulletin board focus group.

Manage their expectations from the beginning: Be real when talking up participation. "I tell them it should be engaging and entertaining," Liz says, but doesn't try to oversell the experience. "The message is 'Let's have fun with this, but I need to hear your sincere answers.'" She also stresses the importance of being truthful about time commitments. She says 30-45 minutes a day equals about 10-12 questions.

Remember, it's a conversation: Liz starts a bulletin board by greeting each participant individually and asking them to post something about themselves, like where they live. "Then, I'll comment on that," she says. Liz explains another secret is to use "I," instead of "we" (as in the online moderator and the client). "Responses are more open and honest when I talk about myself as an individual," she says. She also pays attention to how she speaks when having a casual conversation and tries to communicate in a similar way as an online moderator.

Reward desired behavior: "It's like training a child or a pet," she says. "You reward behavior that you want to see happen and gently discourage behavior you don't want to see." Liz says if she wants participants to interact with each other, she'll include it in the instructions, but that when she sees someone do it, she'll deliberately thank them.

Be visual: Liz has found that incorporating visuals into the process helps keep participants engaged. She relies on colors and images of things like sticky notes to draw participants' attention to certain areas, and she prefers inserting pop-up pages to writing "walls of text."

Switch up formats: Liz suggests using different techniques to keep participants engaged over longer projects. "One week you might have them do a projective exercise, and the next week they keep a diary," she says. ]]> tag:www.qualblog.com,2010://1.119 2010-08-16T13:38:20Z 2010-08-16T15:44:40Z

Jim Bryson I posted the following on Next Gen Market Research Linkedin Forum. The discussion is a great read. 

I'm intrigued by Tom's contention that brands are becoming more innovative than agencies. I must admit that is our experience as well.

I agree with the comments about institutional conservatism and that the personality of the researcher is to avoid risk. After all, a very valid definition of market research is to reduce the risk of a decision. However, the greatest barrier to innovation that we encounter is that research firms have "tried and true" methods for making money. Therefore, research firms are VERY risk averse so innovations have two major hurdles, effectiveness and profitability. These are huge hurdles for innovation.

Brands, on the other hand, have different hurdles. Though they can be risk averse, their hurdles are more likely to be effectiveness and cost. Cost is hugely different than profitability. Since we are in the online qualitative research arena, we are seeing brands coming directly to us more now than in the 10 years we have been in this space. Brand innovators are pushing their research firms to deliver, but when they don't, they are bypassing them with increasing frequency.
]]> tag:www.qualblog.com,2010://1.118 2010-08-13T20:02:57Z 2010-08-13T20:05:43Z

Online concept testing shares many similarities with face-to-face testing-- from the way they're recruited to the type of concepts shown to participants. Going online also boasts many advantages over face-to-face: You can test more concepts before worrying about burnout, the...

Lena Anthony
But online concept testing isn't foolproof. At 20|20 Research, we've helped hundreds of clients execute online concept testing projects using QualMeeting, our webcam focus group software, and QualBoard, our bulletin board focus group software, and we've learned a lot about what can make or break an online concept testing project. Here are three keys to successful online concept testing:   

1. Have concepts ready and test them first. It's better to delay your online focus group than show up with no concept or one that doesn't render correctly for participants.

2. Create professional concepts. Typos and sloppy concepts scream "I didn't work very hard on this" to your participants. If it's clear your team didn't put much effort into the concepts, your participants won't put much effort in their feedback to you.

3. Consider burnout. With online testing, you can show more concepts than F2F--but not that many more. Keep burnout at bay by limiting your concepts to five or fewer each day. If you have more concepts, it's better to test across smaller groups than one large one.

Find more keys to successful online concept testing at 2020research.com. ]]> tag:www.qualblog.com,2010://1.117 2010-08-11T19:36:48Z 2010-08-11T19:41:39Z

Countless companies, including 20|20 Research, are experimenting with ways to reach current and potential customers using social media tools like Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn, and in many cases they're succeeding. So what does that mean for market researchers? Can we...

Lena Anthony 20|20 Research, are experimenting with ways to reach current and potential customers using social media tools like Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn, and in many cases they're succeeding.

So what does that mean for market researchers? Can we add social tools to our online qualitative research toolbox? Yes and no, explains Tamara Barber in this week's Quirk's enewsletter. "While social market research is not a replacement for more traditional research, it can serve as a valuable complement to other insight-gathering techniques."

A couple of her ideas for using it in online qualitative research:

To add a new recruitment channel: Hard to reach certain participants? "Think of tapping into open-affinity communities or LinkedIn as a way to do observational research or in-depth interviews with specific groups of people, such as certain types of business executives or enthusiasts," Barber suggests.

To listen in on what consumers are already saying: Barber explains that consumers are already talking online about brands and that it's easy to listen in. "Mining social media channels allows market researchers to understand, in the consumer's own words, how well their -- or their competitors' -- new product or campaign is being received on a real-time basis," she says. "This can then inform future campaigns; be used to tweak messaging in the short term; or be a catalyst for further messaging research."

The article also addresses the challenges in social market research, like dealing with information overload and unrepresentative samples.

]]> tag:www.qualblog.com,2010://1.116 2010-08-10T12:53:12Z 2010-08-26T11:01:26Z

Is face-to-face any better than online qualitative research when it comes to quality? That's what one of my LinkedIn groups was mulling over last week. This is a very complex question because there are many, many online qualitative research methods...

Jim Bryson Is face-to-face any better than online qualitative research when it comes to quality? That's what one of my LinkedIn groups was mulling over last week.

This is a very complex question because there are many, many online qualitative research methods and many, many combinations of research objectives. And this doesn't even begin to address the definition of "quality." Since there is no easy answer I'll just toss in my 2 cents on a couple of items:

There is no doubt that the "data" from viewing people as they talk is largely missing from most online qualitative research methods. Viewing participants in person can reveal powerful insights, and the experience is insightful and memorable for the client viewer as well. This deficit is being overcome by online research software but, frankly, it is still a downside to online. So, when a direct comparison is made using this criteria, online qualitative research often comes up short.

On the other hand, online offers many opportunities that F2F does not. I love the opportunity to do longitudinal qualitative that several online methods facilitate (e.g., bulletin board focus group). Longitudinal studies are very difficult and very expensive F2F. Online provides greater opportunity to go into the lives of a participant for a 360 degree view of their interaction with a product or service. Online also gives us tools that allow people to be totally open with anonymity. There are other advantages, but you get the idea.

So, at the end of the day, the question to me is not which is higher quality, but which methodology best fits my needs? ]]> tag:www.qualblog.com,2010://1.114 2010-08-05T13:19:00Z 2010-08-06T19:27:23Z

Jim Bryson bulletin board focus group is a terrific online qualitative research methodology if the  moderator keeps participants engaged; otherwise, it can become a series of open-ended questions. So how does an online moderator turn this methodology from hum-drum to WOW?  3 ways.

1. Set expectations upfront. During the qualitative recruiting process, be sure that participants understand what you expect. They need to know log-in expectations and participation expectations. Set the rules early and be sure they agree to them.
2. Create Engaging Discussions. Ideally, the discussion itself is an engaging, high involvement topic for the participants. However, often the moderator must take the lead and model the desired behavior for participants. This is especially important on Day 1.  Create a lot of probes and generate discussion among participants.  An online moderator who works hard on Day 1 will reap the benefits throughout the project.
3. Proper Incentives. The incentive should be relative to participant expectations. Doctors expect more than consumers. Experienced panelists from the major panel providers generally expect less. Also, be sure participants understand that they receive their incentive after the discussion concludes and only if they fully participate.

]]> tag:www.qualblog.com,2010://1.113 2010-08-05T12:11:15Z 2010-08-06T19:34:47Z

The current issue of Survey Magazine features an article I wrote on the growing capabilities of "hybrid" research design, particularly with the explosion of online research software.In the research industry, "hybrid" research is quickly being defined as the integration of...

Jim Bryson The current issue of Survey Magazine features an article I wrote on the growing capabilities of "hybrid" research design, particularly with the explosion of online research software.

In the research industry, "hybrid" research is quickly being defined as the integration of quantitative and qualitative research.  There are several options available in the market, including:

• Chat Intercepts during an online survey
• Webcam intercepts during and online survey
• "Smart" open ended questions with automated probing
• Bulletin Board focus groups following an online survey

Each of these is optimal for different research objectives and problems to be solved.  A researcher who uses these methods should be aware of 3 keys to an effective design when picking a hybrid methodology.

1. Depth. Some hybrid methods do not provide the depth of true qualitative research.
2. Speed. Adding a qualitative "phase" to a quantitative project can push the schedule past an acceptable deadline.
3. Integration. Is the quantitative and qualitative research truly integrated or pieced together

At 20/20 Research, we have answered many of these questions with QualLink, a simultaneous hybrid that creates a direct link between virtually all survey platforms and a QualBoard bulletin board focus group. The method is deep, fully integrated and can often be completed before the survey closes.

]]> tag:www.qualblog.com,2010://1.112 2010-08-03T13:26:39Z 2010-08-04T19:27:42Z

The following was a post I made in response to the above question on the Linkedin Groups forum called The Market Research Event.Technology advancements in the past 10 years have been terrific for the MR industry. Years ago, there were...

Jim Bryson The following was a post I made in response to the above question on the Linkedin Groups forum called The Market Research Event.

Technology advancements in the past 10 years have been terrific for the MR industry. Years ago, there were a few accepted methods of collecting data and the industry generally followed those methods without a lot of creativity. Technology has created an explosion in at least three areas:

New techniques. No one can argue the fact that we have seen an explosion of research techniques and methods related to technology.

New capabilities. Social media, longitudinal qualitative (e.g., bulletin board focus group), biometric analysis, etc, have given us capabilities to research people as never before. We are getting closer and closer to truly immersive research that is a 360 degree 24/7 understanding of our customers because of the techniques technology makes available to us.

New understanding. The capabilities mentioned above give us a deeper understanding of people, how they relate to our products and services and how those relationships are inter-related.

Any research team that is not getting deeper understanding than ever before is not utilizing the new research tools at their disposal. ]]> tag:www.qualblog.com,2010://1.111 2010-07-29T14:33:06Z 2010-07-29T14:43:10Z

Longtime 20|20 client Pat Snyder of What They Think Research was in a bind when she contacted us about a month ago. Faced with a client's tight deadline and tiny budget, Pat needed to do a quantitative survey and an...

Lena Anthony What They Think Research was in a bind when she contacted us about a month ago. Faced with a client's tight deadline and tiny budget, Pat needed to do a quantitative survey and an in-depth bulletin board focus group ASAP.
 
We introduced her to QualLink, our patent-pending technology that seamlessly integrates a quantitative survey with our online focus group software, QualBoard. QualLink automatically recruits for the online focus group using data from the quantitative survey, so there's no downtime (or extra cost) for re-recruiting.

Pat was sold on QualLink, which works with the majority of survey software platforms.

What would have taken two months to complete took just two weeks, and Pat reports that the responses she got from the QualBoard were some of the most in-depth ones she's ever seen in her 14-year career. She was thrilled, her client was thrilled, and we were thrilled--so much so that we wrote a case study about it.

Read more about this online research software solution and how it can help you.
 ]]> tag:www.qualblog.com,2010://1.110 2010-07-26T14:48:01Z 2010-07-27T16:08:10Z

People have been telling us that business is pretty good everywhere. At 20/20 Research, we concur. We have seen increases across the board and a virtual explosion in our online qualitative research software business. Today, I read "confirmation' of all...

Jim Bryson online qualitative research software business. Today, I read "confirmation' of all the anecdotal evidence.

Research Business Report quotes RONIN President and CEO Harry Bunn that there is "a glimmer of light at the end of the tunnel." Their industry survey showed the number of market research firms negatively impacted by the recession down to 43% from 49% in September.  That is still a pretty high number, but things are looking up. Kantar Media reports that ad spending was up 5.1% in Q1, the first increase in 2 years.

Lets hope all this talk of a double dip recession is just that, talk. Here's to a steep growth curve for all of us.
]]>