One area where we disagree is the relevance and utility of Tracking.  While I appreciate that Stan dedicates 50% of the Global Coke budget to tracking, it feels more out of obligation/addiction than desire. So rather than paint all tracking with the same brush, I’ll use Stan’s imagery of the “rear view mirror”, to consider different types:

Perhaps Stan’s dissatisfaction with tracking is that he sees the world through the same mirror all the time, and he can’t act on what he’s learning.

Let’s call this, the “Stagnant Mirror” … when you don’t need the mirror, because the road ahead looks exactly the same as the road behind.

In effect, tracking is boring because the road never changes, and end-clients don’t derive sufficient value relative to the investment (this is where we are align; the kiss of death for tracking is when someone says “nothing has changed”).

I would argue that there are firms out there who try to apply Tracking in a more insightful and relevant way than perhaps Stan is experiencing.  Maybe if his Tracker had a Backup Camera, he could ‘Look Ahead, while Looking Back’. Advertising Tracking is a passion of ours, and we do it well. In addition to all key client stakeholders, we include Creative and Media agencies in our learning sessions, and we build collective knowledge and experience so great advertising is nurtured & evolved, and the “weak” is not.  Go beyond the numbers, and align Tracking learning to specific and proactive client decisions. This is why our projects are renewed each year, and a VP Marketing attends with anticipation and delight.

So perhaps the issue is not whether there is a rear view mirror or not, but how you use it, and whether the driver of your Tracker knows how to look back, in order to look ahead.

With all the recent talk about “DIY” and industry protectionism, let’s focus on how to leverage best practices and industry learning.  The opportunity to shine are those instances where a potential DIY user has marketing savvy, but is relying on their software provider for market research discipline.  As we have advocated in “Sexy Questions, Dangerous Results?”, the notion of RESPONSIBLE INNOVATION is key.

As an example of low hanging fruit – hopefully we can all agree that an error message that does not highlight where the problem is on the screen, is more likely going to lead to the changing of answers and the risk of questionable data.  Here’s a quick example from a recent survey – the error message reads “Please complete the question”, but does not highlight where the problem lies (click on image to enlarge).

DIY is here to stay.  Let’s make it work.

Here are element54 perspectives:

HOT:

Quality really is Job #1; with the plethora of SM/DIY solutions, we will renew our focus on quality and best practices. Traditional MR buyers still expect this from us.

Old Dogs Must Learn New Tricks; some ‘old school researchers are realizing their skillset is in need of sharpening (granted, they’re likely not reading this).

Next Gen BI; text analytics and data mining from social sites to interpret consumer insights across multiple touch-points.

Mobile; convergence of insights at the ‘moment of truth’ are huge.  GPS is enabling targeted insights (both active and passive).

Silos Be-Gone; client side organizations are seeing their traditional silos collapse with more cross-organizational functions.  MR firms will need to understand more about their clients’ businesses then they used to.

COLD:

PowerPoint; smaller and more focused strategic documents travel further up the food chain. Try it.

Trade Associations; this is a curious one. While we wish all Trade Org’s much success, some seem to really understand how the evolving role between clients-suppliers can be leveraged for success. I believe we will see some consolidation in this space within the next 2-3 years.

Privacy; as much as we might care (and we should), most people don’t.

Offshoring; other than a few large MR Org’s who have shifted entire teams offshore, most small-medium size firms will leverage already available software to live ‘better, faster, cheaper’.

Paper Newsletters; I confess, I do like getting a newsletter on real paper.  But a tree didn’t need to be cut down so I can get outdated information.  Save the nostalgia for Christmas cards.

Best wishes,

Bernie.

No … but we should be grateful to live in times of data abundance, where the wise will craft meaningful insights from multiple sources, and add value to client businesses in ways that were unimaginable a few years ago.

Happy Thanksgiving to all our US colleagues, clients and friends.

The purpose of this, is to encourage our community to reach out to those who would benefit from joining the conversation, and in so doing, ensuring the future of insights is well represented by our industry.

Here’s my take on each of the Segments:

AVOIDERS: this segment is rooted in traditional survey techniques, be they Qualitative or Quantitative.  They are bright, articulate, and have no interest to “do Social Media”.

OBSERVERS: this segment recognizes the importance of Digital, but is still cautious about their role in helping to bridge experiences with new data streams. They are sitting on the cusp and have ideas.

EXPERIMENTERS: curious researchers with creativity, they put a toe in the water, but are waiting to make sure it’s safe to swim. One or two successful attempts will give them the confidence to dive in.

ADVENTURERS: these researchers have whole-heartedly embraced Social Media research and are actively mining data and creating models.  They are charting the future, and we should be grateful for their courage.

So what segment are you in … and what is it going to take for you to put a toe in the water, and then dive in?

PS – Annie Pettit (AKA @LoveStats) also wrote about her meeting with some industry elders here.

element54, for those who haven’t heard the story, was chosen as our company name for a reason.  If you remember your high school chemistry, element54 is the periodic table number for “Xenon” – an enabler that helps us create brigher and more efficient light (think about those bright headlights on cars).  As aspirational brand characteristics, we chose element54 because we wanted the company to help our clients find brighter, more efficient answers in an increasingly complex business environment.

We are incredibly grateful to the clients who have made element54 part of their consumer insights roster.  Select clients include Aeroplan, CIBC Bank, Paladin Labs, Cadre CMI, Maple Leaf Foods, Dine & Associates, the Government of Canada, Saputo, Ontario Lottery & Atlantic Lottery. And, we wouldn’t have reached this point had it not been for the support of our strategic partners ResearchNow, MBA Recherche and Templar Research Services.

We are also proud of the “Sexy Questions, Dangerous Results?” research-on-research that has shaped industry conversation around the benefits and risks of leveraging new survey interfaces. We’re grateful to The Market Research Event, MRIA, CASRO, The ARF and the MRA for providing the opportunity to share this powerful learning with our industry.

2011 will bring a host of new products/services, and an ever-expanding team to serve our growing client base.  To reach us/learn more, please see the “contact us” section above.

Best wishes, and thank you! Bernie

The above headline appeared in a recent newspaper article.  A few days later, there was a letter to the editor about polling, and the art of asking “the question”.

How the pollster asked the question: “Do you believe decriminalizing euthanasia and assisted suicide is the right way to help people die with dignity?” (as an aside, I wonder how many people actually understood the question).

How the reader suggested asking the question: “Do you support killing people who are old or sick”.  Without any intention to make light of such a significant and emotional issue, the reader simply suggested that their question would have resulted in a dramatically lower percentage agreeing to this question (and hence less newsworthy).

In our research capacity, the fine art of “asking the question” is the outcome of:

• Knowledge of the client and business issues,
• Previous experience with similar categories/brands/situations,
• Considered, tested & validated survey language.

With all the complexities surrounding today’s survey design process, let’s remember that it all starts with a good question.

LEARN:

Make a pledge to learn something new, by reaching out across departments, and/or taking a professional development course via any of our trade associations (MRA, MRIA, CASRO etc).  Many offer online courses, and many firms hold regular expert webinars (eg – Vovici, Peanut Labs, Communispace).

TEACH:

If you possess subject matter expertise, share it with others within your organization, and/or with your industry peers.  Sharing knowledge is a rewarding experience on so many levels.  Take it a step further, and seek out teaching opportunities at your local colleges/Universities, which helps us inspire the next generation of Market Researchers. I frequently guest-lecture at McGill University on Research/Marketing issues, and was thrilled to see Annie Pettit from Conversition Strategies guest lecture at Georgian College last week.

So beyond the earlier wake-ups and after school homework, how will you “Go Back to School?”

The core message of “Sexy Questions, Dangerous Results?” has been the importance of understanding when and how to leverage rich media survey technology (see previous posts on this site for other examples).

In recent presentations, I’ve shared some examples from our Eye Tracking survey, where survey participants were asked to complete the same question, in either a “1.0″ or “2.0″ format.  What is clear from both, is the importance of better understanding the role of Usability in designing the survey interface, and the new complexities of the survey toolbox.

To illustrate the point, I’ve shared 2 videos below (click on 2.o Survey … and 1.o Survey to see them play).

2.0 Survey In the first video (a “2.0″ or enhanced survey interface), our survey participant tries in vain to complete the task of a complex question, but keeps getting messaged “Please select 9 Answers”. What results is a series of errors, an almost random assignment of answers just to try to get out of the question, and needless to say … questionnable data.  This in turn raises additional issues around how to treat data from a multiple error survey (more on that in another post).

1.0 Survey In the second video (a “1.0″ or basic survey interface), our survey participant is faced with 3 unanswered questions.  The error messaging with this interface shows  a RED ARROW message saying “<—– Your Answer is Incomplete”, which in all 3 error messages, our participant assumed meant “you should now click on the closest answer to this message”. Another clear issue of not knowing how to respond to an error message, and picking up on a visual cue.

IMPLICATIONS:

The digital divide in our industry has created opportunities to engage and excite survey participants who we rely on to complete online surveys.  However, the Market Research toolbox is filled with some new power tools that not everyone is familiar with, and for which it is incumbent upon all of us to develop best practices and standards. Thoughts? Email bernie.malinoff@element-54DOTcom with any thoughts.

After a fascinating call today with a client, I was intrigued by their question “Do Norms Matter?”

As we talked about the issue, I was struck by how ingrained the “norms” were as milestones that were either missed, on-norm, or achieved. For this client, norms have become a crutch – where corporate intuition, experience and judgment are secondary to the “normative” threshold.

As an example of their concern, “norms” are rarely challenged, and more likely to be taken as gospel.

Question #1: do the norms always make sense? eg: for a Cheese client, are all the norms from a Category Leader, or is there dispersion amongst the cases – to include other brands in the category.  What if you’re a smaller share marketer, and all/most of the norms are from the category leader (who is more likely to invest in repeat-type methodologies that sustain normative databases than the smaller brands anyways). Are norms as relevant/applicable if you’re being compared to the category leader?

Question #2: how are the norms actioned? Meaning, is the Norm Bar set at 50% (ie an average of the cases), or higher (eg. Top 25% of Cases).  Hopefully, your brand is being compared to some higher standard as a success threshold.

Question #3: have you asked for recent validation? Many of the “norms” quoted today source from the 80′s and 90′s.  In some cases (eg: advertising), norms might not be as relevant today as they were 20 years ago.  It’s a fair question to ask how some norms have changed over time, and to be certain that the standards you are trying to reach, are based on current market conditions/relevancy.

In your experience, when do “norms” matter – and where have they become less relevant?

PS – the guy in the pic is “Norm” (AKA George Wendt) from Cheers.