tendencias de investigación de mercado para el 2014 - grit

QUALITATIVE RESEARCHCONSULTANTS ASSOCIATION

Commentary

03 Introduction

04 ExecutiveSummary(Infographic)

06 MethodologyandSample

07 In-depth Interviews with Client-Side

Researchers

08 TheBasics:Qualitativevs.QuantitativeUsage

10 Qualitative Research

12 Quantitative Research

14 TheDriversofSupplierSelection

18 Understanding Client Views on

Supplier Selection

20 HowDoResearchProsGetInformation?

24 TheDriversofChangeintheIndustry

28 Adaptation to Change

ContactsLeonardF.Murphy

Chief Editor & Principal Consultant

(770) 985-4904

[email protected]

GreenBookNew York AMA Communication Services Inc.116 East 27th Street, Floor 6New York, NY 10016

30 AdoptionofNewResearchMethods

30 Communities, Mobile Surveys, Analytics

33 Adoption by Clients vs. Suppliers

34 Barriers to Adopting New Methods

36 Reasons for Not Using Techniques

36 Understanding Client Views on New Research Tools

42 TheFutureResearchAgency

42 Top Choices for Specialization

46 The Perfect Research Agency

47 The50MostInnovativeCompanies

inMarketResearch

50 What Makes a Company Innovative?

52 ExpectationsofChange

54 HowDoResearchersREALLYFeelAboutChange?

60 Acknowledgments

09 QualityandInnovationforLong

TermSuccess by Beth Surowiec,

Clear Seas Research

11 ResearchIsNowaGlobalVillage

by Rebecca West, Civicom, Inc.

17 Supplier:Time,CostandQuality…

PickanyTwo.Client:Ineedall

three. by Matt Warta, GutCheck

27 Towhereandhowfast? by David

Brudenell, pureprofile

31 TheDriversofchangearen’tgoing

away–it’stimetogomobile by

Wale Omiyale, Confirmit

35 MR’sHopefulButCautious

ApproachtoMobile,Online

CommunitiesandSocialAnalytics

by Robert Clancy, uSamp

37 ThePendulumisReturning by

Brett Watkins, L&E Research

39 TheCustomerContribution

Continuum:Shouldcustomers

bepartofyourteam? by Kevin

Lonnie, KL Communications

45 AdoptingInnovation by Andrew

Leary, Ipsos SMX

53 2014:SmartAutomation.

TechnologyWithoutCompromising

Qualityby George Terhanian,

Toluna

59 Whatdoesitallmean? by

Lynnette Cooke, CASRO

68 FinalThoughtsbytheEditor by

Leonard Murphy, GreenBook

LukasPospichal

Managing Director

(212) 849-2753

[email protected]

KevinMulhare

Sales Director, GreenBook

(602) 319-2778

[email protected]

Go to www.GreenBook.org/GRIT to read the GRIT Report online or to access all GRIT data and charts via an interactive dashboard which you can use for your own analysis.

TableofContents

1Winter 2014GRITReport.org

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

At Communispace, we believe there is a better way of doing business. As the leading consumer collaboration

agency, for more than 12 years we have been committed to helping

brands collaborate with — and get inspiration from — their consumers

to drive business growth. Using a variety of innovative methods, from

online communities to a range of face-to-face workshops and executive

events, we’ve partnered with some of the world’s most admired

brands to help them innovate faster and enjoy breakthrough results.

ARE YOU READY TOCOLLABORATE?

communispace.com | #collaborate

Introduction>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Welcome to the 14th edition of the GreenBook Research Industry Trends Report, using data collected in Q4 of 2013.

2013 was a pivotal year for our industry as the long-predicted wave of change finally began to hit and we are cautiously adapting to the pressures of our environment. We use the GRIT Report to quantify these trends and share the findings with the global research community.

GRIT explores the beliefs held by those who know the industry best, the sentiment around those beliefs, and the impact of change. GRIT continues to track trends that it has historically focused on, including the adoption of emerging technologies and methods. We showcase the GRIT Top 50 companies perceived to be most innovative and dive deeper into what makes a company innovative. For the first time we use cognitive neuroscience to understand the views of GRIT respondents.

Also new in this edition is a series of thought-provoking commentaries, providing a deeper context for the report’s findings. Rather than expand advertising to make publication of the GRIT Report possible, leading research organizations sponsored these commentaries and we believe that you will find them both insightful and intriguing.

GreenBook is working with a variety of international entities to make GRIT ever more representative of the industry on a worldwide level. We believe that this latest edition offers the most comprehensive global view of the research industry from the practitioner perspective ever achieved.

Our sample partners include ACEI, AIM, ANDA, AVAI, BAQMaR, CEIM, ESTIME, Insight Innovation Forum, International Market Research Society, Michigan State University, MRIA-ARIM, NewMR, NGMR, NMSBA, NYAMA, Principles of Mobile Market Research & MRII, QRCA, Research & Results, SAIMO, The Nielsen School at Wisconsin School of Business, The Research Club, and The University of Texas Arlington.

Our research partners include Averbach Transcriptions, Bottom Line Analytics, Dapresy, Decooda, Forbes Consulting, Gen2 Advisors, GMI Interactive, Grey Matter Research, Q Research Software, Researchscape and Vision Critical University.

All partners have contributed significant time, energy, and resources to the GRIT effort and deserve a big THANK YOU for their support.

We’d like to dedicate this Winter 2014 edition of GRIT in loving memory to William (Bill) Weylock. For seven years, Bill played an essential part in producing the GRIT report. Bill passed away in August of 2013 and is sorely missed.

As always I think you’ll find the report informative, provocative, and useful. Enjoy!

Leonard F. MurphyChief Editor & Principal Consultant | GreenBook



SPECIALIZATION OF THE FUTURE RESEARCH AGENCY

OnlineCommunities

MobileSurveys

Social MediaAnalytics

Big DataAnalytics

Online

FocusGroups

Suppliers

Clients

DRIVERS OF SUPPLIER SELECTION

Good relationshipwith client/supplier

Familiarity withclient needs

Completes researchon time

Previous experiencewith client/supplier

Good reputationin the industry

Provides highestdata quality

Online Communities

Mobile Surveys

Social Media Analytics

Text Analytics

Big Data Analytics

IN USE UNDER CONSIDERATION

44% 50% 38% 32%

45% 46%28% 40%

30% 34%

34%

35% 35%

35% 41%

40% 29% 35% 38%

47%

FUTURE OF RESEARCH

ADOPTION OF NEW RESEARCH METHODS

39%

41%

27%

33%

30%

30%

26%

25%

24%

25%

28%

24%

85%

81%

92%

89%

83%

67%

73%

74%84%

84%

84%

88%

Significantly Up

Significantly Down

Suppliers

Clients


OnlineCommunities

MobileSurveys


Big DataAnalytics

Online

FocusGroups

Suppliers

Clients








Online Communities

Mobile Surveys


Text Analytics

Big Data Analytics

IN U

SE

UNDER CONSIDERATION

44% 50% 38% 32%

45% 46%28% 40%

30% 34%

34%

35% 35%

35% 41%

40% 29% 35% 38%

47%

FUTURE OF RESEARCH


39%

41%

27%

33%

30%

30%

26%

25%

24%

25%

28%

24%

85%

81%

92%

89%

83%

67%

73%

74%84%

84%

84%

88%

Significantly Up

Significantly Down

Suppliers

Clients


OnlineCommunities

MobileSurveys


Big DataAnalytics

Online

FocusGroups

Suppliers

Clients








Online Communities

Mobile Surveys


Text Analytics

Big Data Analytics

IN U

SE

UN

DER

CO

NS

IDER

ATION

44% 50% 38% 32%

45% 46%28% 40%

30% 34%

34%

35% 35%

35% 41%

40% 29% 35% 38%

47%

FUTURE OF RESEARCH


39%

41%

27%

33%

30%

30%

26%

25%

24%

25%

28%

24%

85%

81%

92%

89%

83%

67%

73%

74%84%

84%

84%

88%

Significantly Up

Significantly Down

Suppliers

Clients


OnlineCommunities

MobileSurveys


Big DataAnalytics

Online

FocusGroups

Suppliers

Clients








Online Communities

Mobile Surveys


Text Analytics

Big Data Analytics

IN U

SE

UN

DER

CO

NS

IDER

ATION

44% 50% 38% 32%

45% 46%28% 40%

30% 34%

34%

35% 35%

35% 41%

40% 29% 35% 38%

47%

FUTURE OF RESEARCH


39%

41%

27%

33%

30%

30%

26%

25%

24%

25%

28%

24%

85%

81%

92%

89%

83%

67%

73%

74%84%

84%

84%

88%

Significantly Up

Significantly Down

Suppliers

Clients


OnlineCommunities

MobileSurveys


Big DataAnalytics

Online

FocusGroups

Suppliers

Clients








Online Communities

Mobile Surveys


Text Analytics

Big Data Analytics

IN U

SE

UN

DER

CO

NS

IDER

ATION

44% 50% 38% 32%

45% 46%28% 40%

30% 34%

34%

35% 35%

35% 41%

40% 29% 35% 38%

47%

FUTURE OF RESEARCH


39%

41%

27%

33%

30%

30%

26%

25%

24%

25%

28%

24%

85%

81%

92%

89%

83%

67%

73%

74%84%

84%

84%

88%

Significantly Up

Significantly Down

Suppliers

Clients


OnlineCommunities

MobileSurveys


Big DataAnalytics

Online

FocusGroups

Suppliers

Clients








Online Communities

Mobile Surveys


Text Analytics

Big Data Analytics

IN U

SE

UN

DER

CO

NS

IDER

ATION

44% 50% 38% 32%

45% 46%28% 40%

30% 34%

34%

35% 35%

35% 41%

40% 29% 35% 38%

47%

FUTURE OF RESEARCH


39%

41%

27%

33%

30%

30%

26%

25%

24%

25%

28%

24%

85%

81%

92%

89%

83%

67%

73%

74%84%

84%

84%

88%

Significantly Up

Significantly Down

Suppliers

Clients


OnlineCommunities

MobileSurveys


Big DataAnalytics

Online

FocusGroups

Suppliers

Clients








Online Communities

Mobile Surveys


Text Analytics

Big Data Analytics

IN U

SE

UN

DER

CO

NS

IDER

ATION

44% 50% 38% 32%

45% 46%28% 40%

30% 34%

34%

35% 35%

35% 41%

40% 29% 35% 38%

47%

FUTURE OF RESEARCH


39%

41%

27%

33%

30%

30%

26%

25%

24%

25%

28%

24%

85%

81%

92%

89%

83%

67%

73%

74%84%

84%

84%

88%

Significantly Up

Significantly Down

Suppliers

Clients


OnlineCommunities

MobileSurveys


Big DataAnalytics

Online

FocusGroups

Suppliers

Clients








Online Communities

Mobile Surveys


Text Analytics

Big Data Analytics

IN U

SE

UNDER CONSIDERATION

44% 50% 38% 32%

45% 46%28% 40%

30% 34%

34%

35% 35%

35% 41%

40% 29% 35% 38%

47%

FUTURE OF RESEARCH


39%

41%

27%

33%

30%

30%

26%

25%

24%

25%

28%

24%

85%

81%

92%

89%

83%

67%

73%

74%84%

84%

84%

88%

Significantly Up

Significantly Down

Suppliers

Clients


OnlineCommunities

MobileSurveys


Big DataAnalytics

Online

FocusGroups

Suppliers

Clients








Online Communities

Mobile Surveys


Text Analytics

Big Data Analytics

IN U

SE

UN

DER

CO

NS

IDER

ATION

44% 50% 38% 32%

45% 46%28% 40%

30% 34%

34%

35% 35%

35% 41%

40% 29% 35% 38%

47%

FUTURE OF RESEARCH


39%

41%

27%

33%

30%

30%

26%

25%

24%

25%

28%

24%

85%

81%

92%

89%

83%

67%

73%

74%84%

84%

84%

88%

Significantly Up

Significantly Down

Suppliers

Clients


OnlineCommunities

MobileSurveys


Big DataAnalytics

Online

FocusGroups

Suppliers

Clients








Online Communities

Mobile Surveys


Text Analytics

Big Data Analytics

IN U

SE

UN

DER

CO

NS

IDER

ATION

44% 50% 38% 32%

45% 46%28% 40%

30% 34%

34%

35% 35%

35% 41%

40% 29% 35% 38%

47%

FUTURE OF RESEARCH


39%

41%

27%

33%

30%

30%

26%

25%

24%

25%

28%

24%

85%

81%

92%

89%

83%

67%

73%

74%84%

84%

84%

88%

Significantly Up

Significantly Down

Suppliers

Clients


OnlineCommunities

MobileSurveys


Big DataAnalytics

Online

FocusGroups

Suppliers

Clients








Online Communities

Mobile Surveys


Text Analytics

Big Data Analytics

IN U

SE

UN

DER

CO

NS

IDER

ATION

44% 50% 38% 32%

45% 46%28% 40%

30% 34%

34%

35% 35%

35% 41%

40% 29% 35% 38%

47%

FUTURE OF RESEARCH


39%

41%

27%

33%

30%

30%

26%

25%

24%

25%

28%

24%

85%

81%

92%

89%

83%

67%

73%

74%84%

84%

84%

88%

Significantly Up

Significantly Down

Suppliers

Clients

Executive Summary

The recipe for earning business is straight out of Business 101: It’s all about relationships. Know the client, deliver on their needs and do it with the highest quality.

The Paradigm has shifted. Adoption of Communities & Mobile as insight gathering tools and analyzing Text & Social Media in Big Data frameworks are the paths to growth.

4Winter 2014 GRITReport.org


OnlineCommunities

MobileSurveys


Big DataAnalytics

Online

FocusGroups

Suppliers

Clients








Online Communities

Mobile Surveys


Text Analytics

Big Data Analytics

IN USE UNDER CONSIDERATION

44% 50% 38% 32%

45% 46%28% 40%

30% 34%

34%

35% 35%

35% 41%

40% 29% 35% 38%

47%

FUTURE OF RESEARCH


39%

41%

27%

33%

30%

30%

26%

25%

24%

25%

28%

24%

85%

81%

92%

89%

83%

67%

73%

74%84%

84%

84%

88%

Significantly Up

Significantly Down

Suppliers

Clients

Exploring new methodologies

Exploring new technologies

Doing more with same resources

Exploring new sample resources

Investing in more in in-house technology

Client budgetary constraints

Increased use of non-traditional techniques and technologies

Supplier Budgetary constraints

Client demands for innovation

Increased use of tablet computers and smart phones

Vision CriticalMentions (203)

IpsosMentions (202)

GFKMentions (142)

GoogleMentions (133)

TNSMentions (126)

NielsenMentions (102)

Millward BrownMentions (80)

InSites ConsultingMentions (74)

Research NowMentions (72)

BrainJuicerMentions (400)

DRIVERS OF CHANGE REACTIONS TO CHANGE

INNOVATIVE COMPANIESTOP 10 WITHOUT ROLLUPS

28%

31%

22%

30%

31%

26%

21%27%

20%

27% Suppliers

Clients

41%

52%

58%

58%

38%

33%

26%30%

24%30%

Visualization by

�THE DYNAM�ICS OF CHANGE












IpsosMentions (202)

GFKMentions (142)


TNSMentions (126)








28%

31%

22%

30%

31%

26%

21%27%

20%

27% Suppliers

Clients

41%

52%

58%

58%

38%

33%

26%30%

24%30%

Visualization by













IpsosMentions (202)

GFKMentions (142)


TNSMentions (126)








28%

31%

22%

30%

31%

26%

21%27%

20%

27% Suppliers

Clients

41%

52%

58%

58%

38%

33%

26%30%

24%30%

Visualization by













IpsosMentions (202)

GFKMentions (142)


TNSMentions (126)








28%

31%

22%

30%

31%

26%

21%27%

20%

27% Suppliers

Clients

41%

52%

58%

58%

38%

33%

26%30%

24%30%

Visualization by













IpsosMentions (202)

GFKMentions (142)


TNSMentions (126)








28%

31%

22%

30%

31%

26%

21%27%

20%

27% Suppliers

Clients

41%

52%

58%

58%

38%

33%

26%30%

24%30%

Visualization by













IpsosMentions (202)

GFKMentions (142)


TNSMentions (126)








28%

31%

22%

30%

31%

26%

21%27%

20%

27% Suppliers

Clients

41%

52%

58%

58%

38%

33%

26%30%

24%30%

Visualization by













IpsosMentions (202)

GFKMentions (142)


TNSMentions (126)








28%

31%

22%

30%

31%

26%

21%27%

20%

27% Suppliers

Clients

41%

52%

58%

58%

38%

33%

26%30%

24%30%

Visualization by













IpsosMentions (202)

GFKMentions (142)


TNSMentions (126)








28%

31%

22%

30%

31%

26%

21%27%

20%

27% Suppliers

Clients

41%

52%

58%

58%

38%

33%

26%30%

24%30%

Visualization by

�THE DYNAM�ICS OF CHANGEAs in years past, we’ve decided to forgo the usual text-based

executive summary and give our readers an infographic summary.

Here are the highlights of the current report.

Shrinking budgets and a rapidly changing technology landscape are driving change. The solution is a combination of rethinking business processes and exploring how to harness new tech and methods to deliver more impact.

Innovation may be a buzzword, but it’s also a vital brand attribute in a changing industry. Companies that leverage it across all communications channels reap the benefits, those that don’t risk being overlooked.


Methodology and Sample

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

GRIT respondents are recruited by email from lists of research providers and clients contributed by GRIT partners and by invitations delivered via social media channels. The sample size for this latest wave was larger than for any previous study (by almost 1000 completes). The global composition of the sample was also broader than ever before, with much more robust subsets from Europe and Latin America.The percentage of completes by sample source:

Thesamplesizeforthislatestwavewaslargerthanfor

anypreviousstudy

Weholdrelativelysteadyat80%ofrespondentsbeing

suppliersand20%beingclients

While the more globally representative sample yielded many benefits for this wave of GRIT, it also forced us to look at ways to effectively compare results from the previous waves of the study.

To enhance comparability of results between waves, data has been weighted within each year to match the 2013/2014 distribution by geography and client/supplier status. Note that statistical tests all employ Taylor series linearization to address the weighting (i.e., the weighted sample size is not an input into the computation of statistical significance).

The weighted sample size is referred to as the Population in all tables and charts.

For this report, the analysis is based on 2,229 completed interviews, although for some questions base sizes may be higher or lower due to skip patterns, rotations, routing, and other factors. The mix of respondents has varied over the 12 years of the study, but within fairly narrow bands. We hold relatively steady at 80% of respondents being suppliers and 20% being clients, broadly consistent with the last several waves of the study. That corresponds to 1,786 Suppliers and 443 Clients, sample sizes large enough to be meaningful during analysis for both groups.

Despite the robust sample size, the GRIT Report is not meant to be a census or representative sample (if such a feat is even possible in our fragmented industry!), but rather a snapshot of the widest swath of insights professionals we can achieve. With that in mind, we consider it “strongly directional” and recommend that you view it the same way.

The respondent revenue profile skews notably toward mid-range and small firms at the expense of larger organizations with annual revenue above $15M, although 18% of Supplier-side respondents do identify themselves as working for larger organizations. This is consistent with previous waves of the study.

GreenBook (direct email) 934 42%

Research & Results 328 15%

GreenBook Blog 167 7%

New MR 166 7%

International MR Society (LinkedIn) 109 5%

The Research Club 109 5%

NGMR (LinkedIn) 104 5%

Insight Innovation Forum (LinkedIn) 96 4%

MRIA 94 4%

MSU 42 2%

ANDA 24 1%

QRCA 22 1%

All Others 34 2%

TOTAL 2,229 100%


$15,

000,

000

or m

ore

Less than

$1,0

00,0

00

$1,000,000 – $14,999,999

45%

18%

37%

44%17%

39%

2012/13

2013/14

With increased international participation, the percentage of respondents from North America is 45%, the next largest segment is Europe at 38%, Asia comprise 9%, Latin America makes up 4%, and all other geographies combined contributed less than 4% of the sample.Due to the relatively small base sizes outside of North America and Europe, we have opted not to show regional breaks consistently other than where we think it ads comparative value, although as always we encourage all readers to make use of the interactive online GRIT dashboard to conduct additional analysis.

Where is your market research organization based or headquartered?

What is the range of your company’s annual market research billings/budget for primary market research (in USD)?

Column% 2013/14 2012/13 2011/12 NET

North America 45% 51% 65% 51%

Europe 38% 29% 21% 32%

Asia and Oceania 9% 12% 8% 9%

South America 4% 2% 2% 3%

International or Missing 2% 4% 3% 3%

Middle East and Africa 2% 3% 1% 2%

NET 100% 100% 100% 100%

Column n 2,229 1,374 818 4,421

As a new component of GRIT this year, Ron Sellers of Grey Matter Research conducted a series of in-depth interviews by telephone with client-side researchers to explore their views on vendor selection and adoption of new tools and techniques. The participants included:

Brian Cain, Merck•Jill Capps, Gorton’s•Sylvia Choe, Marriott•

Tom Morder, Chick-fil-A•Kyle Nel, Lowe’s Home Improvement•Kelley Peters, Post Foods•Edwin Roman, ESPN•Stacey Symonds, Orbitz•Bill Tamulonis, Erickson Senior Living•Marc Philippe Witham, Schneider Electric•Dan Womack, Aflac•

In-depthInterviewswithClient-SideResearchers

Five participants were interviewed about research vendor marketing – how suppliers market and promote their services, how clients learn about new vendors, etc. The other six were interviewed about “NextGen” insights techniques ranging from mobile research to biometrics.We’ve woven these in depth interviews into the sections “The Drivers of Supplier Selection” and “Adoption of New Research Methods” within the report to add nuance and context to the overall findings.


Online Community


Qual

Quant

Data Mining or “Big Data” Analytics

Ethnography

Stable

Serious decline

Client

Serious growthStrong decline

Supplier

Strong growth

Base n = 2229

Base n = 2229

Base n = from 2330 to 2740; total n = 4421

Online Community


Qual

Quant


Ethnography

Online Community

Qual


Quant


Ethnography

29.5

24.3

21.7

19.6

19.3

12.4

57.9

53.7

62.4

59

69.3

67.7

6.31.5 4.8 27.7 8.1 35.8

12.41.7 10.7 28.6 5.4 34

6.71.5 5.2 24.8 6.1 30.9

10.7 0.8 9.9 25 5.3 30.3

5.7 1.2 4.5 19.9 5.1 25

9.9 2.3 7.6 19.2 3.1 22.3

21.4

37.1

21.1

24.8

26.5

15.8

32.6

26.4

24.5

22.8

17.8

15.3

The Basics: Qualitative vs. Quantitative Usage

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Call it the “Revenge of Qual”! After quantitative research methods outgrew qualitative methods in 2012, in 2013 respondents reported that qualitative techniques including Online Communities and traditional qual saw slight or strong growth year over year. In fact, Online Communities enjoyed the strongest growth.

Subtracting respondents reporting decline from those reporting growth revealed net growth of 30% for Online Communities and 24% for Social Media Analytics. Despite the increasing press attention Big Data received in 2013, it somewhat lagged the other techniques, beating only Ethnography.

The biggest disconnects between suppliers and clients were in Online Communities and Social Media Analytics. Suppliers reported net growth of 33% in Online Communities, compared to 21% of clients. Clients, meanwhile, were reaching outside traditional market research suppliers for Social Media Analytics; 37% of clients reported net growth in Social Media Analytics, compared to 26% of suppliers. This same disparity is in evidence with Big Data, with a 27% vs. 18% disparity between Client and Supplier.

Net growth across all categories except Big Data was highest in South America. Big Data’s largest growth was in Asia and Oceania.

How has your use of any of these types of research changed? Use change this year: % difference

Use change this year: Client vs. Supplier

Suppliersreportednetgrowthof33%inOnline

Communities,comparedto21%ofclients

0

0

30

30 40

10

10

20

20


For many years research suppliers have been adapting and modifying solutions to meet client information, budgetary and deliverable expectations. Today we call our efforts to apply “better solutions that meet new requirements, unarticulated needs, or existing market needs” innovation (REF: Wikipedia – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/innovation). The innovation occurring today is exciting and presents new alternatives to both active and passive data collection techniques. With being innovative comes a responsibility to pay close attention to the quality of the research being conducted and integration of different methods of data collection to communicate the complete story. An innovative solution, stretching the limits of technology, is of little value if the information gathered and reported are not sufficient quality to facilitate strategic decision making. Focus must be placed on how the innovative tool/technology is enabling high quality data collection to occur in the most effective manner.

Quality and Innovation for Long Term Success

Beth SurowiecExecutive Director, Clear Seas Research

Email: [email protected]: www.linkedin.com/pub/beth-surowiec/b/353/7b9/Website: www.clearseasresearch.com

GRIT Commentary

Ensuringdataqualityandintegrity.4. Innovative data collection techniques present huge opportunities for unique insight if the information is closely monitored and results validated to ensure the data used for analysis accurately represents the view of the target audience. Unqualified participants, straight liners, or those providing illogical or inconsistent responses must be removed from the final data set. Communicatingthefindings.5. All research starts with the question “What decision(s) do I have to make?” Successful active and passive data collection techniques must address this most basic question. Once the methodology is developed, the fieldwork is conducted and the data is analyzed, the information must be reported in a straightforward, easy to understand manner that is immediately usable to strategic decision makers. Results today may need to be provided using more interactive methods including video and/or interactive apps or social interactive CRM tools (like Salesforce Chatter). It is important to consider the end users of the research and provide the most appropriate tools for them to access and interpret the information for strategic decision making. Tools using the most up-to-date communication technologies may lack appeal or be under-utilized by individuals that are not comfortable with technology.

While data quality and customer relationship management will likely always be important in supplier selection, a research supplier’s ability to be and remain innovative by keeping up with changing technology will ultimately differentiate them from competitors.

Use change this year: % difference

Focusmustbeplacedonhowthe

innovativetechnologyenableshighquality

datacollection

As research suppliers we need to continually focus on: Seekingoutnewdatacollectiontechnologies.1. As digital communication methods continue to evolve, the research supplier community must continually adapt to new ways of capturing respondent feedback. Beingmindfuloftargetaudienceidentificationandaccess.2. When capturing respondent experiences in passive and active ways we must be sure to correctly identify the individual providing feedback and determine if they are the target audience or part of the general population. Posingtherightquestionsfortheresearchobjectives&3.

usingtheappropriatedatacollectiontechnology. Active data collection methods must address the research objectives with questions designed to achieve an unbiased response regardless of data collection method. Passive data collection needs to consider the context of the feedback collected as well as the frequency of similar experiences from the target audience.


59%

46%

30%

21%

20%

19%

19%

14%

13%

11%

10%

10%

7%

5%

3%

60%

45%

34%

21%

24%

21%

17%

15%

12%

25%

11%

9%

11%

Traditional (In Person) Focus Groups

Traditional (In Person) IDIs

Telephone IDIs

Interviews/Groups Using Online Communities

In-Store/Shopping Observations

Bulletin Board Studies

Mobile (diaries, image collection, etc…)

Online Focus Groups with webcams

Other

Chat (text-based) Online Focus Groups

Monitoring Blogs

Online IDIs with webcams

Telephone Focus Groups

Chat (text-based) Online IDIs

Traditional (In Person) Focus Groups

Traditional (In Person) IDIs

Telephone IDIs

Interviews/Groups Using Online Communities

In-Store/Shopping Observations

Bulletin Board Studies

Mobile (diaries, image collection, etc…)

Online Focus Groups with webcams

I haven’t used any qual techniques

Monitoring Blogs

Chat (text-based) Online Focus Groups

Online IDIs with webcams

Other

Telephone Focus Groups

Chat (text-based) Online IDIs

32.4

17.8

10.2

7.8

6.2

5

4.2

3.2

3

2.9

2.2

2

1.8

1.4

2013/14

2012/13


Base n = 626

QualitativeResearch

While many Focus Group facilities are expanding their support for other activities, including mock trials and product testing, researchers still value this technique more than any other qualitative approach, with 59% of respondents using the technique in 2013, virtually unchanged from the year before. Likewise, IDIs (In Depth Interviews) still maintain their strong appeal.

No emergent qualitative technique dramatically increased in 2013. However, Chat (text-based) Online Focus Groups fell from 25% usage last year to 10% usage this year (arguably that was over reporting in 2012 rather than any significant shift).

The proportion of overall projects using a particular qualitative technique is directly proportional to the percent of respondents using that technique (correlation coefficient of 0.962). The top 8 most widely used techniques are also the top 8 techniques as a proportion of projects, in the exact same order. (Please keep in mind that these proportions are a respondent average not an industry average; a respondent who conducted 100 qualitative projects was not weighted differently than a respondent who conducted 10 projects.)

In-Store/Shopping Observations made up twice the proportion of qualitative projects in South America and the Middle East/Africa (~12%) as they did in North America, Europe, and Asia/Oceania (~6%). Focus Groups and In-Person IDIs were the number 1 and number 2 techniques regardless of region.

Types of qualitative research used: 2012/13 vs. 2013/14 How often have you used these qualitative methods this year?

Noemergentqualitativetechniquedramatically

increasedin2013

0 30 50 6010 20 40

0 3010 20


Innovative Technology SolutionsMarketing Research Support Worldwide

In 1858, Queen Victoria sent a telegram via the Atlantic Cable to United States President James Buchanan. The transmission took 16� hours. Without the cable, such a dispatch in one direction alone would have taken twelve days. This was the birth of the death of global distance. Today, technology enables marketing researchers to envision almost any scenario for conducting research around the world in real time or asynchronous time, without researchers, clients, or respondents ever having to leave their offices or homes. Online bulletin boards, web room technology, and mobile applications are changing the structure of how research is conducted.

For example, for an interview project that might encompass 75 financial directors in 25 countries, reporting on experience with a new software modelling tool, those interviews are done in real time via telephone and web room technology. Research with a specialist physician group evaluating proposed packaging and advertising would almost certainly be done using telephone, web rooms, and webcams. The same technology allows researchers to meet in real time with homebound patients who can visually share their experience with medical hardware by panning the webcam our using a mobile device to show how they are using medical equipment in their personal environment. For a study on smoking habits, smokers can record their struggles to quit using audio diaries that are transcribed and posted on a bulletin board for researcher review.

A global food chain can easily deploy 1,000 respondents in multiple countries simultaneously, to audio record impressions in their native languages, which are then translated and posted in an online bulletin board for researcher analysis. Difficult to reach respondents in the Middle East can participate in research via online chat rooms anonymously to protect their identities. Respondents can create visual diaries that record the inside of medicine cabinets, drawers, closets, how a laundry product is poured into a washing machine, or how they are using a power tool – all now possible through two-way mobile ethnography. These technologies open the door for a more collaborative process with respondents, with more researchers and clients able to participate in a real time interview or focus group experience.

Research Is Now a Global Village

Rebecca WestVice President, Marketing Research Services, Civicom, Inc.

Email: [email protected]: www.linkedin.com/pub/rebecca-west/9/499/11bTwitter: civicomWebsite: www.civi.com/marketingresearch

GRIT Commentary

Creative thinkers are able to figure out ways to adapt almost anything to an online focus group experience – even group brainstorming sessions using online flip charts, whiteboards, and multiple breakout rooms. In short, almost any project, locally or globally, can now be done exclusively with communications technology. In short, with the right support system in place for conducting research, location doesn’t really matter anymore. Research is now a global village. The broader trends are all in this direction, as researchers adapt to consumer and business lifestyles that embrace online as the only way of life. As Millennials mature into managerial roles, these trends will only gain even further traction.

Withtherightsupportsysteminplaceforconductingresearch,

locationdoesn’treallymatteranymore

Visual collaboration solutions now closely replicate the brain’s innate preferences for interpersonal communications. Researchers understand that leveraging online tools is an essential component in building a franchise in the global marketing research economy. As with any structure for conducting market research, embracing the global possibilities of research using communications technology requires reliance on experts and technicians that understand the multiple issues of bandwidth, mobile providers, satellite technology, audio networks, time zones, individual country requirements, privacy and security issues, and who can work in multiple languages simultaneously. Marketing researchers, already being continuously interested in how people think, can leave the technical details in the hands of communications technology experts while they concentrate on content and insights.


http://www.twitter.com/civicom

Online Surveys

CATI

Face-to-Face

Mobile Surveys

CAPI

Mail

I haven’t used any quant techniques

Biometrics/Neuromarketing

Other

Automated Measures/People Meters

IVR

Online Surveys

CATI

Face-to-Face

CAPI

Mobile Surveys

Other

Mail

Biometrics/Neuromarketing

Automated Measures/People Meters

IVR

82%

41%

30%

27%

22%

11%

7%

5%

5%

4%

4%

78%

45%

39%

23%

25%

16%

4%

5%

5%

7%

44.4

11.8

9.6

5.4

4.6

1.9

1.8

0.9

0.8

0.4

2013/14

2012/13


Base n = 626

QuantitativeResearch

Online Surveys continued their growth, rising from 78% of respondents using Online Surveys in the prior year to 82% in 2013. Mobile Surveys showed also increased by 4%, reaching 27% usage in 2013. Both techniques are cannibalizing CATI (Computer-Assisted Telephone Interviewing), Face-to-Face interviews, CAPI (Computer-Assisted Personal Interviewing), and Mail Surveys. Biometrics and Neuromarketing, despite the attention received by industry thought leaders, were only used by 5% of respondents.

Similarly to qualitative methods, the proportion of overall projects using a particular technique is directly proportional to the percent of respondents using that technique (correlation coefficient of 0.958). Online and Mobile Surveys make up nearly half (49%) of all quantitative projects worldwide, representing 61% of projects in North America but only 28% of projects in South America and 23% in the Middle East and Africa.

For clients, Online Surveys represent 52% of their projects compared to 43% of suppliers’ projects, reflecting the ease of bringing such research in house with the range of EFM (Enterprise Feedback Management) systems available today.

Types of quantitative research used: 2012/13 vs. 2013/14 How often have you used these quantative methods this year?

Forclients,OnlineSurveysrepresent52%oftheir

projectscomparedto43%ofsuppliers’projects

MobileSurveys

increasedby4%,

reaching27%usage

in2013

0

0

30

30

50 80

50

60 9010

10

20

20

40 70

40


Gongos is changing the

conversation from market

research to decision intelligence,

challenging conventional wisdom

to find what lies beyond.

Gongos Research O2 Integrated

+1.248.239.2300 | gongos.com

“Intelligence: Not because you think you know everything, but rather because you

question everything you think you know.” -Anonymous

INFORM.INNOVATE.INSPIRE.

Listens well and understands client needs

Good relationship with client/supplier

Has knowledgeable staff

Familiarity with client needs

Completes research in an agreed-upon time

High quality analysis

Previous experience with client/supplier

Rapid response to requests

Good reputation in the industry

Familiarity with the industry or category

Flexibility on changing project parameters

Provides highest data quality

Breadth of experience in the target segment

Consultation on best practices and methodology effectiveness

Length of experience/time in business

Understands new consumer communication channels & technologies

Provides data analysis services

Offers unique methodology or approach

Uses sophisticated research technology/strategies

Company is financially stable

Uses the latest data collection technology

Uses the latest statistical/analytical packages

Lowest price

92%

92%

90%

89%

88%

87%

84%

84%

84%

81%

78%

74%

74%

73%

62%

61%

60%

55%

55%

48%

43%

33%

48%

94%

92%

91%

92%

90%

84%

85%

89%

83%

82%

74%

74%

79%

74%

61%

61%

66%

53%

52%

49%

42%

31%

56%

93%

93%

89%

91%

89%

79%

92%

88%

84%

82%

76%

72%

75%

67%

62%

52%

64%

48%

46%

43%

39%

27%

56%

2013/14

2012/13

2011/12


The Drivers Of Supplier Selection

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

We asked survey respondents to indicate what was important to clients when they were selecting suppliers for their market research needs. For clients, this was a straightforward exercise, as they simply indicated what they felt was important. For suppliers, the exercise required that they estimate the importance ratings that their client counterparts would give.

The chart on this page shows the results from the research supplier perspective, for the 2012 and 2013 GRIT Reports. The bars reflect top two-box percentages (out of five), and they are ordered from highest to lowest by 2013 numbers.

We see that, once again, research suppliers anticipate that their clients value service and relationship aspects in the marketplace. Listening, understanding client needs and building good relationships are at the top of the ratings, with upwards of 90% giving ratings in the top two-box range. These results have been remarkably consistent since the inception of GRIT. It is also informative to look at the ratings that have, in fact, changed. For example, “High quality analysis” has increased in importance from year to year, perhaps reflecting the emergence of Big Data as a focal point in the industry. Conversely, we see a trend of declining importance for “Previous experience with client/supplier.” This suggests that suppliers believe clients are becoming more open to working with new suppliers, looking for novel approaches to get meaningful insights. That interpretation is certainly supported by the fact that a similar attribute, “Offers unique methodology or approach”, has trended up in this same time period.

We see the same attribute importance ratings from the perspective of clients, and it is clear that the consistency across the years with suppliers is not as strong as it is with clients.

Supplier selection importance to clients: Supplier Viewpoint

Weseeatrendofdecliningimportancefor“Previous

experiencewithclient/supplier”

0 30 50 8060 90 10010 20 40 70


Listens well and understands client needs


Has knowledgeable staff



High quality analysis


Rapid response to requests


Familiarity with the industry or category



Breadth of experience in the target segment

Consultation on best practices and methodology effectiveness

Length of experience/time in business

Understands new consumer communication channels &

technologies

Provides data analysis services

Offers unique methodology or approach


Company is financially stable

Uses the latest data collection technology

Uses the latest analytical packages

Lowest price

93%

85%

91%

81%

83%

88%

67%

83%

73%

79%

73%

84%

74%

76%

59%

65%

59%

52%

50%

49%

51%

43%

34%

89%

85%

90%

77%

86%

76%

79%

86%

82%

80%

70%

86%

65%

76%

58%

69%

63%

52%

57%

55%

53%

36%

35%

96%

89%

92%

82%

90%

84%

74%

85%

75%

79%

81%

90%

73%

70%

59%

57%

67%

45%

52%

56%

46%

41%

32%

2013/14

2012/13

2011/12


From the client perspective, several attributes sizeably shifted this year. “High quality analysis” rose from 76% top-box in previous waves to 88% in the latest, reflecting a renewed focus on analytic quality. New and emerging statistical modelling techniques, and algorithms for managing the burgeoning volume of Big Data may be driving this trend. And, as we observed with the supplier data, clients also placed lower emphasis on “Previous experience with client/supplier.” Clients and suppliers alike are noticing the shift here.

One trend, while not statistically significant, is nonetheless intriguing. Clients indicated a continued erosion in the demand for on-time delivery from their research suppliers. It may be that deadlines have been shortened to the point that over-runs are becoming more commonplace out of necessity. Or alternately, it may simply be considered table stakes and is no longer a primary driver of differentiation.

It is also interesting to compare ratings from the perspectives of suppliers and clients, that is, looking across the previous charts. What are the areas in which suppliers’ perceptions of what their clients want is different from what the clients actually say?

First, we should note that, by and large, suppliers have a very good sense of their clients’ needs. The same attributes tend to float to the top or bottom of both. There are notable differences, however. The chart on the following page shows attribute ratings that differ by 5% or more between supplier and client respondents. The top portion includes those attributes for which suppliers overestimated client preferences, and the lower portion those attributes where suppliers underestimated client preferences.

Supplier selection importance to clients: Client Viewpoint

“Highqualityanalysis”rosefrom76%top-boxto88%,

reflectingarenewedfocusonanalyticquality

0 30 50 8060 90 10010 20 40 70









Lowest price


Uses the latest statistical/analytical packages

92%

89%

88%

84%

84%

78%

55%

48%

74%

33%

85%

81%

83%

67%

73%

73%

50%

34%

84%

43% Client

Supplier

Two disparities are particularly noteworthy. First, we see that suppliers felt clients would give higher ratings than the suppliers actually provided to “Previous experience with client/supplier.” Earlier in the report, we noted that both groups acknowledged a decline in this attribute, but it is apparent that suppliers did not anticipate the magnitude of this decline. The message is clear.

The second disparity is one that appears consistently in GRIT Reports. Suppliers overstate the importance of “Lowest price” among their client populations. There are several possible explanations for this disparity. Price may not be particularly important in getting on the “short list,” but more crucial in final selection and therefore more salient to suppliers. Suppliers have to engage with Procurement in the RFP process, and these agents may be much more focused on price. Or it could simply be that clients are more likely to report that price is a determinant, just to avoid having to inform a candidate that their firm’s offering was of inferior quality.

It is also interesting to note that the two areas in which suppliers underestimated the importance that clients gave: data quality and statistical analytics. In fact, data quality ranked fifth among the 23 attributes for clients, but suppliers perceived it only as 13th in their list. Given the proliferation of new data sources in today’s market research environment (website analytics, social media data, global positioning information), savvy researchers will be alert to the needs for careful vetting of the information they are using to drive insights.

Suppliersoverstatetheimportanceof“Lowestprice”

amongtheirclientpopulations

0 30 50 8060 90 10010 20 40 70


“More insights in less time with less money.”How often has this request (or mandate) been delivered to you, either explicitly or implicitly? The answer is it has probably become more common over the last few years. When GutCheck was started in 2010, it wasn’t uncommon for market research providers to pan the idea of delivering insights in quicker timeframes. Clients don’t mind waiting a few weeks for the answer was a refrain we heard often. Well, that has changed dramatically in just the last couple of years. And not only do clients want information quicker, they want it for less and with good quality. Whether you are a big established brand or an emerging scrappy competitor, winning in today’s market hinges on your ability to innovate and differentiate faster and more efficiently than the competition.

This year’s GRIT report shows abundant and growing evidence of this reality. For instance:GRIT respondents were asked to rank the importance of eight key criteria in selecting methodologies.

Timeliness of Results ranked #3•Cost came next at #4•Most interesting is that time and cost significantly closed •the gap on the top two criteria of Data Quality and Effectiveness / Impact.

Corporations must be faster, more innovative, and differentiated than their competitors in order to win in the marketplace. Keen, timely customer insights lie at the heart of a company’s ability to meet this competitive pressure. Nowhere is this more evident than in Procter & Gamble’s move to bring back A.J. Lafley as their CEO. Lafley gained a reputation for pushing innovation at P&G, telling employees to get their ideas directly from consumers. In a nod to GRIT’s findings above, he kept in place a move by his predecessor, Bob McDonald, that brought together teams of marketers, researchers, and executives so they could move together more quickly in their attempt to bring blockbuster new products to the market.

Supplier: Time, Cost and Quality…Pick any TwoClient: I need all three.

Matt WartaCEO, GutCheck

Email: [email protected]: linkedin.com/company/gutcheckTwitter: gutcheckitWebsite: www.gutcheckit.com

GRIT Commentary

To remain relevant in this type of environment, consumer insights teams must become much more nimble and cost-efficient: in short, they need to become agile. Becoming more agile is one reason why online research communities have grown so much over the last few years. This year’s GRIT report shows online communities continuing to be the #1 fastest growing methodology overall because they provide insights significantly faster and in a more flexible way than traditional methodologies. Online community platforms continue to innovate and in some cases have shrunk timelines to days and driven down costs to new levels. These new solutions now allow researchers to “turn on a dime.”

Leveraging agile practices and methodologies like online research communities to drive immediacy and intimacy is potentially transformative for research departments. Alice Fawver, Director of Global Insights for Logitech and recent adopter of agile techniques, recently commented that her group “has moved from big, expensive and late to flexible, inventive and responsive. And we can do more research for the same budget.” Agile is enabling Logitech to do more research for the same budget and in less time, and arrive at a better result.

So, the next time you need an answer, be Agile and pick all three.

Toremainrelevant,consumerinsightsteamsmustbecomemore

nimbleandcost-efficient


www.linkedin.com/company/gutcheck?trk=cp_followed_name_gutcheck

http://www.twitter.com/gutcheckit

UnderstandingClientViewsonSupplierSelection

RonSellersofGreyMatterResearchconductedaseriesoffive

in-depthinterviewsbytelephonewithclient-sideresearchers

toexploretheirviewsonsupplierselection.

Although obviously there is no quantitative projectability involved, it is still interesting to note how much agreement there was. Participants report being inundated by vendor marketing, promotional and sales attempts. Unsolicited email is the most common, followed by phone calls. However, for clients, the preferred way of finding out about new vendors is word of mouth.

“Everybody says they do great work. I’ll listen to somebody •whose opinion I trust, so it’s mostly word of mouth.”“I’d say past knowledge and experience would be the •number one way.”

The second way that clients learn about new vendors is at conferences, particularly if the vendor is actually presenting. At the same time, some clients did note that conferences could be frustrating, because so many vendors target them during that short time.

“People that we see at a conference or a seminar. That’s •how we ended up with our online software vendor. I had known a little bit about them in the past, but I went to a conference or workshop on online research, and they were there giving the presentation. ”“I think it’s finding the right events and probably finding •the right ways (to approach people). Because the thing that I find terribly frustrating at conferences is people just out of the blue showing up, or literally bugging you to death when you have that two or three days out of the office that you rarely get to do something other than work for a few minutes.”

Networking and personal relationships are critical for most of these clients.

“I’ll be honest; the [people] that I generally meet and wind •up doing business with are the ones who aren’t trying to sell anything. They are doing something to give back to the industry or contribute to the work we do as a whole. And I get to know them through that, and over time I get to know their business, and we find a way to work together.”“I would emphasize the social media aspect of it. If I have •seen a good comment (on LinkedIn), I have contacted the person. That was an element in choosing somebody for an Ethnography study that we just completed.”“It’s hard to differentiate between vendors. I think that’s •why, at least for me, it comes down to the personal connection. If I am at a seminar and sitting at a table with somebody , in my mind, that’s going to give them a plus over someone else I don’t know. Meet me in person.” “Get to know me first and worry about the sale after that.”•

Clients reported that the is the people behind a company or a methodology are key.

“I’m convinced that the individuals behind are the most •critical part.”

There is very little feeling that research vendors have differentiated brands. Some clients tended to differentiate a few vendors by size or by methodology or specialty, but the brands themselves generally had little real meaning to clients. This is particularly true with services such as qualitative recruiters, field centers, and other established methods where there’s not much that’s revolutionary in terms of the approach offered – clients really couldn’t name many brands that stand out to them in any way or have any equity.

“If I were to think of a good brand of automobiles, I •can immediately think of a Mercedes. When it comes to market research vendors, no, I don’t think there are really strong brands out there. ”“Very undifferentiated. It always surprises me, given the •work that we all do – you would think that we would understand [brand differentiation] as well or better than anybody. ”“I’d say by and large it leans more toward the commodity •market.”

The perception that research brands are largely undifferentiated goes hand-in-hand with the perception that research vendors too often see potential clients as undifferentiated. These clients complained strongly about how many times vendors approach them in an entirely impersonal way, knowing nothing about them or their needs (and yet still promising to solve whatever those needs may be).

“They don’t even know if I’m sales or marketing or market •research. ”“[Their biggest mistake is] not asking me what I’m looking •for first. They start talking about what they do and what they offer without knowing what is on my plate or what’s keeping me up at night first.”“Understand what my needs are a little bit better instead •of one size fits all. The target group is all heads or VPs of insights, but we may not all have the same needs.”

Similarly, clients reported strongly feeling that too many vendors don’t treat them as people, but as potential accounts. In short, there was a pervasive sense that too much vendor marketing focuses squarely on solving the needs of the vendor (for more sales), rather than caring at all about actually learning and solving the needs of the client.

Forclients,the

preferredwayof

findingoutabout

newvendorsis

wordofmouth

Personal

relationshipsare

criticalformost

clients

Thereisvery

littlefeelingthat

researchvendors

havedifferentiated

brands


“If on the rare occasion I am able to answer a call or get •on the phone with someone, and then I learn that they are only trying to set up an appointment for me with someone else, because they don’t know crap about this industry, that is incredibly frustrating.”“It’s very generic. They don’t really mention any specifics, •a specific need or a specific project. It’s just very general. You can tell they’re just kind of fishing. ”“I am talked to as though my needs are the same as •everybody else’s. And it’s all about the vendor and not about me. Get to know me. If you’re in the market research and insights industry, isn’t that your job? Isn’t that what you’re helping us do? So why aren’t you doing it yourself?”“Just try to be a normal person. Forget you’re trying to sell •me something. Use normal interpersonal skills to keep the relationship open. Don’t come to me and say, ‘What’s the next project for us?’ Treat me as a person as opposed to the next client that they can check off.”

An extension of this problem is when vendors try to circumvent the research department and reach out to other people in the company, or just blanket as many people as they can in the company. This really leaves a bad taste in clients’ mouths.

“We’ve had a few potential suppliers become non-•potential suppliers when they didn’t reach the insights team and they started branching out to every other part of the organization. That only generates more phone calls for me, because people internally will forward stuff or call me, and we don’t want a lot of research going on outside the insights team. And here a company is trying to sell just that.”“It does not do a research company any good to blanket •our corporate e-mail system with cold e-mails! In our organization, people will forward those to me, and then I get to chuckle at the duplicated ‘personal touch.’ It tends to give me a feeling of the kind of attention my project might get.”

There were also complaints about vendors that promise to do everything. Specializing in everything usually creates the impression that the vendor really specializes in nothing.

“Pick a niche and just become known as a specialist or •an expert in a particular industry or market segment or methodology. I guess those might be the three ways you could differentiate yourself.”“[The most overdone message] for me it’s that they’ll do •anything and everything, it’ll be a top-quality job, and they haven’t asked me what kind of work I might need. ”

These clients also largely dismissed vendor advertising as bland, undifferentiated, and ineffective.

“I don’t think much of it. In maybe ten years of looking •at Quirk’s and other ones, I can remember one ad that I really liked.”“It’s not very effective. They all usually have a picture of a •person that’s either the company president or supposed to be like a respondent’ that kind of thing. ”

The balance between vendors managing to keep their name in front of potential clients and becoming an annoyance is delicate. These clients acknowledged that unless a vendor stays in their view, they’ll forget about that vendor, so they recommended persistence. At the same time, they didn’t want to be constantly bothered. A substantial distinction between “staying in touch” and “annoying me” is whether even a modicum of a relationship exists. If the client has even a slight personal connection to the vendor, “staying in touch” can actually mean “staying in touch.” If the client is being treated as the next number the vendor is calling, “staying in touch” can quickly fall over the edge into “annoying me.”

“If I have a relationship with them or I know them, of •course I’m going to respond to them.”

In terms of contacting potential clients with something of value rather than just a sales call, content marketing also has value for these clients.

“Send me a little something every once in a while with •an interesting article you’ve read or an interesting white paper you’ve written. Send me a story like that that sticks in my mind or gives me something to remember you by.”“[Content marketing] gives them a lot of credibility. •It gives me a sense of expertise, particularly when I’m thinking about whitepapers. I like blog posts because that shows me they’re active in the dialogue of what’s happening out there.”“The next best thing [to conferences] would be if they •publish things in industry publications. If they’re sort of out there as experts, then that sticks with me as well.”

In short, these clients roundly criticized many of the attempts at vendor sales, marketing, and branding as undifferentiated, impersonal, and focused on what the vendor is selling rather than on what the client may need. Some marketing messages might get through, but primarily when fortune dictates that the message comes at a time when they just happen to need that service. The personal touch is critical, through high-visibility activities such as participating in industry functions, presenting at conferences, or being part of the social media conversation, but also through the simple act of treating the potential client as a human being rather than the next potential sale. In an industry of relationships, clients want to buy from and work with people rather than just companies.

Toomuchvendor

marketingfocuses

squarelyonsolving

theneedsofthe

vendor

Clientsalsolargely

dismissedvendor

advertising

asbland,and

ineffective

Contentmarketing

hasvalueforclients


Seminars, Conferences or Tradeshows

Webinars or Virtual Events

Industry Websites

Technology Websites or Publications

Business Networking Communities like LinkedIn

White Papers

Trade Organization Events

Blogs

Industry Print Journals

E-mail delivery of Blog Subscriptions

Social Networking Sites like Facebook & Google+

Twitter

66%

60%

55%

49%

45%

51%

47%

39%

42%

30%

24%

19%

61%

59%

55%

54%

52%

48%

45%

40%

39%

33%

28%

22%Client

Supplier

Base n = 2229

How Do Research Pros Get Information?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

At GreenBook we are always curious about the channels that market researchers find to be most effective for information access. To that end, we asked two questions related to information sources: one regarding the channels used to stay abreast of changes in the industry, and a follow-up related to what is most important in their selection of industry events.

Consistent with previous GRIT waves, conferences & tradeshows, webinars, and online information portals remain the most popular among suppliers and clients, with conferences being somewhat more popular with clients.

On the supplier side, technology-specific websites and business networking platforms like LinkedIn are popular, most likely due to the supplier imperative to keep abreast of innovation and make connections with colleagues and prospects.

Interestingly, less than one third of GRIT respondents consider blog subscriptions, more general social networking sites or Twitter to be important, perhaps reflecting the time commitment necessary to fully utilize them or the “information overload” aspect of the stream of information coming in at all times via those channels. More curated content approaches seem to have wider acceptance as means of delivering focused content relevant to market research professionals.

There were significant differences when we compared this wave of data with previous waves, although these differences could be artefacts of sample changes rather than growing awareness of, or engagement with, different information channels.

Staying abreast of developments: Client vs. Supplier

0 30 50 6010 20 40 70


YOUR GLOBAL RESEARCH PARTNER, ANYWHERE, ANYTIME.

Recruitment > Focus Groups > Online > Technology > Global Project Management

Thankfully, Schlesinger Associates Does Both

Actually, we can’t guarantee your favorite team will win the big game. However, we will deliver the right solution to push any market research project over the goal line. Whether it is qualitative or quantitative,

Schlesinger Associates is your resource for complete global data collection services.

Tel. +1 866 549 3500

© 2011 Schlesinger Associates.

Is Better Done Online Is Better Done In Person

SA_Single_Quirks.indd 3 6/14/11 10:42:15 AM

Focuses on issues important to my business

Explores “cutting edge” topics

Quality of speakers

Networking opportunities with peers

Cost

Interest in speakers

Location

Organization producing the event

Supplier or partner vetting

Possibility of educational credits

Other option

63%

49%

51%

29%

33%

22%

19%

11%

4%

4%

2%

Seminars, Conferences or Tradeshows

Webinars or Virtual Events

Industry Websites

Technology Websites or Publications

Business Networking Communities like LinkedIn

White Papers

Trade Organization Events

Blogs

Industry Print Journals

E-mail delivery of Blog Subscriptions

Social Networking Sites like Facebook & Google+

Twitter

62%

59%

55%

53%

51%

49%

45%

40%

40%

32%

27%

21%

44%

43%

47%

40%

49%

35%

32%

29%

30%

33%

18%

16%

59%

51%

47%

40%

35%

22%

21%

7%

6%

3%

1%

2013/14

2012/13


Client

Supplier

Base n = 2229

Considering the consistent importance GRIT respondents give to events, we asked a new question in this year’s edition of GRIT about what they consider most important when selecting events to attend. Content proves to be king for event selection, with the agenda’s relevance to the business, exploration of “cutting edge” topics, and overall quality of speakers being most important attributes.

Both clients and suppliers were aligned across all attributes, with one exception – opportunities to network with peers are much more important to suppliers.

In what may be surprising for many event producers, cost, location and brand of the producing entity were not major drivers of consideration. Perhaps we will see fewer events in major tourist destinations and a greater focus on delivering impactful content as the lure for events.

Staying abreast of developments: Top 2 What is most important to you in selecting the events you participate in?

Contentprovesto

bekingforevent

selection

0

0

30

30

50

50

60

60

10

10

20

20

40

40

70

70






Investing in more in-house technology

Spending/charging less for the same services

Close partnering with quality access panels

Working longer hours with less staff

Negotiating discounts or shorter timelines with vendors

Changing ratio of insourcing vs. outsourcing of research functions

Opening direct channels of communications with customers

More diligent validation

Asking for sacrifices from vendors

Asking for sacrifices from employees

Recommending higher respondent incentives

Other

56%

41%

38%

26%

24%

13%

16%

18%

19%

20%

17%

10%

14%

10%

8%

6%

56%

52%

33%

30%

30%

19%

19%

17%

15%

12%

12%

12%

10%

10%

10%

5%

Client

Supplier

Base n = 2188; total n = 2229

The Drivers of Change in the Industry

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Clients and suppliers cite similar issues as drivers of change; however, the focus of those drivers highlights a fundamental difference in the mindset that exists between client and supply side researchers.

Supplier side researchers reported being highly invested in new technologies in 2013 (52%), while client researchers (41%) actually are less focused on technology, although interest in new methodologies (56%) was very similar among both groups. Given that budgetary constraints, increased mobile usage, and reduced outsourcing impacted insights delivery and workloads, it’s not surprising that client researchers are more focused on newer methodologies than new technologies, which often require both a proof of concept and internal testing in order to gain acceptance. The concept of doing more with the same resources (38%) resonated strongly among client researchers.

Client demand for innovation was reported to be lower in 2013 than in 2012 (21%) while supplier interest rose in 2013 to 27%. As the chart on the next page indicates, client researchers are very consistent in their needs while suppliers tend to underestimate the impact of internal workloads and financial pressures, while overestimating external factors and the impact of new research technology.

In established markets, clients and suppliers alike noted that budgetary issues are critically affecting data collection. While mobile communication (14%) was cited most often as a primary driver of change, client budgets (13%) and budgetary restraints (12%) collectively comprise 25% of the mentions noted as influential in the choice of data collection methods.

What steps is your organization taking to address these issues? Client vs. Supplier

Clientresearchersaremorefocusedonnewer

methodologiesthannewtechnologies

30 50 6010 20 40




Budgetary constraints



The economy, business growth/slowdown

Desire for a more collaborative process with respondents

Quality of sample

Increased reliance of alternative data sources

Changes in response rates

Changes in sample costs

More insourcing of research process

Desire to avoid limitations of self-reported attitudes/behaviors

Changes in staffing or layoffs

Changes in salaries/wages/costs

Other issues

Increased use of mobile communications


Budgetary constraints



Quality of sample

The economy, business growth/slowdown

Desire for a more collaborative process with respondents

Desire to avoid limitations of self reported attitudes/behaviors

Changes in response rates

Availability of US sample

Availability of non-US sample

Other issues

Changes in sample costs

Changes in staffing or layoffs

Changes in salaries/wages/costs

Availability of US sample

Availability of non-US sample

Increased use of mobile communications

Desire to avoid limitations of self reported attitudes/behaviors

28%

22%

31%

21%

20%

20%

15%

15%

17%

12%

13%

25%

13%

14%

10%

6%

14%

13%

12%

9%

8%

8%

6%

6%

4%

4%

4%

3%

3%

3%

2%

1%

0%

0%

0%

0%

31%

30%

26%

27%

27%

25%

20%

17%

16%

15%

15%

14%

14%

13%

10%

4%

Client

Supplier

Base n = from 2229 to

2631; total n = 4421

Base n = 2188; total n = 2229

In emerging markets (primarily South America and the Middle East/Africa), mobile technologies clearly played a significant role in the expansion of data collection and were the primary drivers of growth. While budgets played a significant role in data collection in these markets, the impact was more likely associated with an expansion of services (new allocation dollars) rather than contraction of existing budget allocations.

Issue prompting major changes in data collection: Client vs. Supplier

Issue prompting major changes in data collection

30

10 15

10

0

20

5

0


Base n = 2188; total n = 2229

In more established regions, clients and suppliers alike realize that shifts toward more customer centric marketing and declines in response rates are driving a need for more interactive platforms. While there are many reasons associated with these shifts, clients and researchers agree (56% respectively) that new methodologies are needed. However, there is a strong divergence among the clients (41%) and suppliers (52%) on the need for new technology. Clients (17%) are also emphasizing a more direct relationship with customers while only twelve percent (12%) of suppliers see this as a priority.

NorthAmerica EuropeAsiaand

OceaniaSouthAmerica

Internationalor

Missing

MiddleEastand

Africa

Increased use of mobile communications 13% 13% 14% 22% 12% 17%

Client budgetary constraints 13% 15% 12% 13% 8% 9%

Budgetary constraints 12% 13% 10% 8% 8% 9%

Increased use of tablet computers and smart phones 10% 8% 10% 8% 14% 13%

Client demands for innovation 8% 8% 7% 10% 8% 7%

Quality of sample 8% 7% 11% 7% 10% 7%

The economy, business growth/slowdown 6% 6% 10% 3% 6% 9%

Desire for a more collaborative process with respondents 7% 5% 6% 10% 6% 2%

Desire to avoid limitations of self reported attitudes/behaviors 4% 4% 4% 0% 10% 0%

Changes in response rates 5% 3% 5% 2% 6% 4%

Availability of US sample 3% 5% 2% 2% 4% 4%

Availability of non-US sample 3% 3% 2% 2% 4% 2%

Other issues 3% 3% 2% 2% 0% 2%

Changes in sample costs 1% 4% 3% 5% 0% 11%

Changes in staffing or layoffs 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%

Changes in salaries/wages/costs 1% 1% 2% 1% 0% 2%

Availability of US sample 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Availability of non-US sample 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Increased use of mobile communications 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Desire to avoid limitations of self reported attitudes/behaviors 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Issue prompting major changes in data collection: Geographic Location

Inestablishedmarkets,clientsandsuppliersalike

notedthatbudgetaryissuesarecriticallyaffectingdata

collection


For me, it’s always refreshing to begin the start of each calendar year with a stack of information that will help or substantiate decision-making for the business. For me, GRIT is one of those trusted information sources for a number of years now.

To where and how fast?

David BrudenellExecutive Vice President, pureprofile

Email: [email protected]: www.linkedin.com/in/davidbrudenell/Twitter: davidbrudenellWebsite: www.pureprofile.com

GRIT Commentary

Data collection is one of the key pillars for Marketing Research practice; it’s impact on design, cost, speed and insight arguably has the greatest impact on decision-making. So to look to understanding the velocity of change in industry, this is a great spot to look at. Below are some interesting insights from this years report:

First, and not surprisingly, is that the increased use of •mobile communications on data collection continues to be the leading issue in industry. The rising penetration of mobile technologies shows continued investment in mobile data collection, participation platforms and question-design is paramount.At the top level, attitudes on the impact of the economy •on data collection appear to be trending up. But on deeper analysis, Clients in 2013 were less inclined to mark economic factors as being impactful as Suppliers. This could illustrate the growing investment by Marketing in data from other budgetary divisions (1) that trickles into Marketing Research budgets.Clients want more and better ways to collaborate with •respondents. This is interesting as when viewing the use change within industry: online community growth as a technique is slowing, however the overall growth is significant. This could possibly show that adoption of online communities has reached saturation and as Clients become more comfortable using this medium, expectations of new and better engagement techniques have risen. A similar pattern in the use of mobile technologies could also be found in this report.

These are a few interesting highlights from a report deeply saturated with insight. I encourage you to dive into to GRIT and view some of the changing behaviors and sentiments of industry. If you’re reading this commentary you are on the journey with the rest of us. Perhaps you might be the one to see the destination and time of arrival.

GRITillustratesthechangingbehaviorsof

anindustrywhoseconservativecorehas,

andcontinuestobetransportedtoanew,

progressivedestination

GRIT does not maintain Delphic proportions in the industry yet; the Marketing Research industry has never been more complex. But it has over the past years built an open information platform that illustrates the changing behaviors of an industry whose conservative core has, and continues to be transported to a new, progressive destination. Whether this stop is temporary and a U-turn is around the bend remains to be seen, but certainly the impact of technology, the rise of consumer participation, privacy and ever-increasing budgetary pressures show that the velocity of change in industry continues to increase significantly.

Understanding the velocity of change is a powerful predicative tool for business leaders. News cycles hungry for new fodder focus on the latest disruptive products or services, but these are typically not aligned with the pace of business adoption. To stay progressive it’s important to keep a keen eye on the latest in wearable technology, drones and nanotechnology, but to stay competitive one can look to the current platforms that have impacted Marketing Research for the last 3-5 years. Mobile, CRM, Social, Online Communities and panel sample are where finite budgets are most in flux. The underlying drivers affecting how fast budgets are being put into which of these areas will have the greatest effect on competitiveness in 2014.

If 2013 could be summarized in a term, outside of the year of Gangam Style (unfortunately), it would be ‘Data’. Data supply has never been higher and the demand for it follows a similar trajectory.


http://www.twitter.com/davidbrudenell


AdaptationToChange

Notably, there is a common theme among suppliers (33%) that clients are spending more on in-house technologies, while clients (38%) see themselves doing more with the same resources. Only about a fourth of clients (24%) plan to invest in new technology while 30% of suppliers plan on significant investments in the near future. This may be due in part to the relatively slow conversion of suppliers to mobile-based platforms.

While clients have become more adept and efficient within smaller budgets and smaller staffs in 2013, they also continue to manage more chronic issues such as declining response rates, limitations with self-reporting, and the need for faster execution. As a result, many client organizations have chosen to exert more control and have transitioned a significant amount of data collection to in-house platforms. Although the capabilities of these platforms are growing, significant limitations still exist in data extraction and management.

Notfa

shio

nab

le

Tooe

xpen

sive

Tim

eco

nst

rain

ts

It’sb

oring

Budge

tary

const

rain

ts

Logi

stic

alrea

sons

Old

fas

hio

ned

rese

arch

supplie

r

Tooh

ardtoo

rgan

ize

Res

earc

hp

rovid

er's

lack

ofim

agin

atio

n

Lock

edin

tocurr

ent

appro

ach

Blo

cker

sw

ithin

the

com

pan

y

Toom

anyris

ks

involv

ed

Old

fas

hio

ned

clie

nts

Clie

nt's

lack

of

imag

inat

ion

We

are

notca

pab

le

ofdoin

git

Tech

nolo

gica

l

limitat

ions

Nosupplie

rsh

ave

an

adeq

uat

eoffer

ing

Lack

ofpro

ofit

work

s

Fear

oftr

yin

g

som

ethin

gnew

Unpro

ven

Ignora

nce

Lack

ofknow

ledge

Social Media Monitoring 0 2.1 4.9 0.3 4.5 3.4 3.1 4.3 1.3 1.8 2.6 2.4 4.2 2.9 6.8 8.4 5.1 12.6 3.6 8.3 4.5 13

Research Gamification 0 3.5 3.6 0.6 5.2 2.8 2.5 3.4 2 2.3 2.8 2.9 4.7 5.7 5.7 4.7 4 10.4 4.6 6.6 6.8 15.3

Crowdsourcing 0.4 2.1 2.6 0.5 4 3 2.7 6.1 1.3 3.2 3.9 5 3.7 4 4.2 2.5 2.2 10.2 4.1 5.6 8.9 19.9

Online 0 0.6 2.9 0.3 2 8.1 3.3 3.4 1.8 6.4 2.5 6.2 7.3 2.6 3.7 9.2 4.1 10.7 3.8 7.8 5 8.3

Text Analytics 0.4 5.6 2.7 1.6 5.3 2.7 1.1 3.3 0.6 0.5 2.9 2 3.4 3.2 7 11.2 7.7 8.9 4.6 5.4 7.4 12.8

Mobile Surveys 0.4 3.6 2.3 0.4 3.8 8.8 2.3 4.8 2.4 3 2.9 3.7 6.1 4.8 4.6 15.1 3.4 8 4 5.2 2.7 7.6

Online Focus Groups 0.3 3.3 2.5 1.4 3.2 7.7 1.7 6.1 2 4 2.5 6.3 5 3.9 5.2 9.5 4.6 9.1 4.9 4.7 3.7 8.7

Online Communities 1 4.9 5 1.1 9.1 5.2 1.9 4.1 1.4 2 2.5 6.2 6.5 3.3 7 5.5 3.1 7.3 5.2 4.5 3.6 9.6

Other techniques 0.3 8 8.5 0.5 12.9 6 0.7 1.9 0.9 2 4.3 2.7 1.4 5.4 3.3 10 1.9 7.7 6.4 7.4 2.9 5

Focus Groups 4.3 16 9.9 2.7 17.8 7.5 4.7 4.8 3.1 3.3 1.6 0.2 3.3 6.3 2.7 0.4 0 3.9 2 0.8 1.3 3.5

Telephone 9.8 19.9 8 5.6 11.2 9.6 2.1 2.8 2.8 1.6 1.2 5.5 1.7 0.3 1.6 6.3 0.9 5.9 0.6 0.8 0 1.9

Mail 9.6 6.2 17.8 7.4 4.6 14.3 6.6 4.2 0.3 0.6 2.3 3.8 3.7 1 0.9 6.1 1.1 6.5 0.7 1.1 0.3 1

Face to Face 4.1 26.7 12.1 2.2 16.7 7.8 1.4 8.5 1.4 1.6 2.6 2.8 2.1 2.2 2.6 1 1.3 0.4 0.2 0.8 1.5 0

As previously discussed, technology was not a huge driver for client researchers; however as respondents tire of existing technologies, it is likely that next generation methodologies will increase researchers’ dependence on technology. While client researchers have displayed a strong preference for customer centric research, the role of behavioural insights is potentially the most significant factor in their decision process. As researchers become more accustomed to benefits and limitations of communities, new techniques will likely enhance the learnings associated with interactive response, data analytics, and community dynamics rather than new methods of stated data extraction. This may be represented through a commitment to more interactive platforms and/or a process that is more focused on data synthesis.

The following table represents a series of techniques and reasons why each of the techniques are not currently within the tool set of most researchers. In many cases, the lack of familiarity with the technique and its application were cited as primary reasons for non-incorporation as well as a need for proof of the concept.

Reasons for not using types of research

Manyclient

organizationshave

transitioneda

significantamount

ofdatacollectionto

in-houseplatforms


Notfa

shio

nab

le

Tooe

xpen

sive

Tim

eco

nst

rain

ts

It’sb

oring

Budge

tary

const

rain

ts

Logi

stic

alrea

sons

Old

fas

hio

ned

rese

arch

supplie

r

Tooh

ardtoo

rgan

ize

Res

earc

hp

rovid

er's

lack

ofim

agin

atio

n

Lock

edin

tocurr

ent

appro

ach

Blo

cker

sw

ithin

the

com

pan

y

Toom

anyris

ks

involv

ed

Old

fas

hio

ned

clie

nts

Clie

nt's

lack

of

imag

inat

ion

We

are

notca

pab

le

ofdoin

git

Tech

nolo

gica

l

limitat

ions

Nosupplie

rsh

ave

an

adeq

uat

eoffer

ing

Lack

ofpro

ofit

work

s

Fear

oftr

yin

g

som

ethin

gnew

Unpro

ven

Ignora

nce

Lack

ofknow

ledge

Social Media Monitoring 0 2.1 4.9 0.3 4.5 3.4 3.1 4.3 1.3 1.8 2.6 2.4 4.2 2.9 6.8 8.4 5.1 12.6 3.6 8.3 4.5 13

Research Gamification 0 3.5 3.6 0.6 5.2 2.8 2.5 3.4 2 2.3 2.8 2.9 4.7 5.7 5.7 4.7 4 10.4 4.6 6.6 6.8 15.3

Crowdsourcing 0.4 2.1 2.6 0.5 4 3 2.7 6.1 1.3 3.2 3.9 5 3.7 4 4.2 2.5 2.2 10.2 4.1 5.6 8.9 19.9

Online 0 0.6 2.9 0.3 2 8.1 3.3 3.4 1.8 6.4 2.5 6.2 7.3 2.6 3.7 9.2 4.1 10.7 3.8 7.8 5 8.3

Text Analytics 0.4 5.6 2.7 1.6 5.3 2.7 1.1 3.3 0.6 0.5 2.9 2 3.4 3.2 7 11.2 7.7 8.9 4.6 5.4 7.4 12.8

Mobile Surveys 0.4 3.6 2.3 0.4 3.8 8.8 2.3 4.8 2.4 3 2.9 3.7 6.1 4.8 4.6 15.1 3.4 8 4 5.2 2.7 7.6

Online Focus Groups 0.3 3.3 2.5 1.4 3.2 7.7 1.7 6.1 2 4 2.5 6.3 5 3.9 5.2 9.5 4.6 9.1 4.9 4.7 3.7 8.7

Online Communities 1 4.9 5 1.1 9.1 5.2 1.9 4.1 1.4 2 2.5 6.2 6.5 3.3 7 5.5 3.1 7.3 5.2 4.5 3.6 9.6

Other techniques 0.3 8 8.5 0.5 12.9 6 0.7 1.9 0.9 2 4.3 2.7 1.4 5.4 3.3 10 1.9 7.7 6.4 7.4 2.9 5

Focus Groups 4.3 16 9.9 2.7 17.8 7.5 4.7 4.8 3.1 3.3 1.6 0.2 3.3 6.3 2.7 0.4 0 3.9 2 0.8 1.3 3.5

Telephone 9.8 19.9 8 5.6 11.2 9.6 2.1 2.8 2.8 1.6 1.2 5.5 1.7 0.3 1.6 6.3 0.9 5.9 0.6 0.8 0 1.9

Mail 9.6 6.2 17.8 7.4 4.6 14.3 6.6 4.2 0.3 0.6 2.3 3.8 3.7 1 0.9 6.1 1.1 6.5 0.7 1.1 0.3 1

Face to Face 4.1 26.7 12.1 2.2 16.7 7.8 1.4 8.5 1.4 1.6 2.6 2.8 2.1 2.2 2.6 1 1.3 0.4 0.2 0.8 1.5 0

On a final note, the primary drivers, as would be expected, are based on a combination of financial need, insight development, quality control, user experience, and leveraging of mobile technology. For those in emerging markets, drivers were more consistent with usage of the data while in more established markets the transition to more agile platforms that increase both survey efficiency and insights delivery are key areas of focus. While mobile/digital technology is the single most transformative factor in most organizations, researchers often struggle with optimal survey content within the platform from both a content and display perspective.

The most consistent finding was the gap that exists between client and supplier goals. The ability to produce stronger insights through hybrid methodologies incorporating multiple data streams is increasingly important to organizations as “real time” feedback. Client researchers are open to new methodologies that enhance their current operations and most recognize that mobile technology is currently on track to dominate customer interactions; however, current research

solutions are limited in their ability to adapt to the platform and offer little more than directional guidance. While there is an interest in new technology, the primary interest remains with their ability to develop a more efficient process that increases insight while reducing the overhead associated with internal research. Suppliers who align their services to support those goals are likely to have a higher rate of success than those who attempt to introduce new technologies designed around data collection.

Themostconsistentfindingwasthegapthatexists

betweenclientandsuppliergoals


Significantly up Significantly downBases 2012/13= 1,375, 2013/14=2,229

Adoption of New Research Methods

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

This section looks at the adoption, by clients and suppliers, of new research methods, and the barriers to adopting new approaches. In evaluating the current picture and changes from the previous year it should be noted that two new research methods have been added to the survey this year: Big Data Analytics and Micro-Surveys.

The data show very few changes between waves, and continue to show that Online Communities is the new technique with the largest reported adoption, with 49% of respondents claiming to be currently using them, and 82% either using or considering them.

Given that the differences between the two most recent waves are few, the interest lies in where the two new items in the list have been placed. Micro-Surveys have entered the table at just under halfway up, with 19% saying they already use them, and 38% considering them. Micro-Surveys are an essential element of the new type of market research that many are predicting, so it will be interesting to see if their ranking is even higher next year.

The other new entrant is Big Data Analytics, with 31% saying they already use it and 38% having it under consideration.

The table suggests that there may be a drop in organizations that have Online Communities ‘under consideration’. However, combining ‘use’ and ‘consideration’, the figures are 83% last year and 82% this year, so no real change, and a massive endorsement for the proposition that communities have become mainstream.

Inuse Underconsideration

2013/14 2012/13 2013/14 2012/13

Online Communities 49% 45% 33% 38%

Mobile Surveys 41% 41% 41% 45%

Social Media Analytics 36% 36% 40% 42%

Text Analytics 33% 31% 35% 37%

Big Data Analytics 31% 0% 38% 0%

Webcam-Based Interviews 27% 25% 30% 39%

Eye Tracking 26% 23% 25% 21%

Mobile Qualitative 22% 23% 39% 41%

Mobile Ethnography 21% 20% 38% 39%

Micro-surveys 19% 0% 32% 0%

Prediction Markets 17% 17% 27% 30%

Research gamification 16% 15% 38% 33%

Crowdsourcing 14% 13% 33% 30%

Virtual Environments 14% 17% 28% 30%

Facial analysis 13% 9% 23% 20%

Neuromarketing 11% 9% 25% 22%

Biometric Response 8% 7% 19% 21%

The data suggest that not much has changed over the last 12 months. The same four techniques head up the list, with Online Communities being number one. However, there are some interesting insights when we look at the detailed data, such as the way that clients seem to be adopting Social Media Analytics and Big Data Analytics more widely than suppliers are, and these nuances are explored in this section.This section also looks at the why approaches are not used. The data remind us that no approach is right for every situation, and that barriers can range from not understanding a new technology through to finding an older approach too slow and too expensive.

Communities,MobileSurveys,Analytics

Techniques of the future: 2012/13 vs. 2013/14

OnlineCommunitiesisthenewtechniquewiththe

largestreportedadoption


Looking through the results from the GRIT questionnaire, I found myself going back to the Drivers of Change section. It’s not only the results that caught my eye (though they did, but more of that later), but I’m always interested in what people in our industry feel is driving us all forward. And more importantly, what the actual impact of those drivers has been. MR is an industry with enormous potential for evolution – even disruptive evolutions – which, for a well-established, mature sector is something we should all be pretty excited about.

But I’m not sure we’re living up to the opportunities. At least, not all of them.

Here, I’m mostly talking about mobile, which tops the list of drivers for change. Hardly a huge surprise, more a confirmation of a fact that surveys like this have been telling us for some time now. But are we really making the changes we need to?

The lack of progress in the optimization of surveys for mobile has – in 2013 – been a disappointment. For several years now, the proportion of respondents opening surveys on a mobile has increased (it now stands at around 20%) but much of the MR industry has steadfastly failed to make progress in accommodating this development. This is frustrating, given the technology is there, effective and ready to use, and this inertia will only service to frustrate respondents and drive down response rates.

There are two areas to consider for those MR agencies who are adding mobile to their data collection repertoire: accidental and purposeful. Accidental, like those situations referenced above, are those respondents who’ve been sent an online survey, but who open it on a mobile device. If these people are not provided with a good survey experience (for example, thought Responsive Web Rendering), they’ll simply abandon the survey and never return to it. The resulting lack of engagement and reduced response rates simply isn’t something we, as MR practitioners, can accommodate. The technology is there to ensure that web surveys open automatically to take advantage of the native characteristics and components of the device in question so there’s no excuse not to use it.

The Drivers of change aren’t going away – it’s time to go mobile

Wale OmiyaleSVP, Confirmit

Email: [email protected]: www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1621999Twitter: wale100 / confirmitWebsite: www.confirmit.com

GRIT Commentary

Purposeful mobile is increasingly becoming an area that we need to consider, though in many respects there’s less urgency than there is for capturing the accidental mobile audience. However, purposeful mobile – which includes Apps that capture mobile diaries, rich media and GPS data – provides an incredible opportunity for those businesses who are prepared to get stuck in. Apps can enable respondents to provide data while offline, and lend themselves extremely well to providing extensions of other CAPI (Computer Assisted Personal Interviewing) programs.

Thinkaboutmobileresearchasawayto

conversewithrespondentsinthewaythat

theyprefertocommunicate

Think about mobile research as a way to converse with respondents in the way that they prefer to communicate, or in some cases, the only way in which they can be reached. From an industry that’s been dealing with declining response rates and (from some sources) threats of complete extinction – it’s a short-sighted decision to opt out of mobile entirely. And not one I’d recommend.


http://www.twitter.com/wale100

http://www.twitter.com/confirmit

The world of consumer insights is changing fast.

11 forward-looking tracks »Over 100 speakers »80+ presentations »

Atlanta

NA

June 16-182014Learn more at

www.iiex-na.org

Corporate Partners

Hands-on workshops »Networking events »

Base: Client=443, Supplier=1786 Significantly up Significantly down

Inuse Underconsideration

Client Supplier Client Supplier

Online Communities 44% 50% 38% 32%

Mobile Surveys 28% 45% 46% 40%

Social Media Analytics 47% 34% 35% 41%

Text Analytics 30% 34% 35% 35%

Big Data Analytics 40% 29% 35% 38%

Webcam-Based Interviews 19% 29% 27% 30%

Eye Tracking 25% 26% 25% 25%

Mobile Qualitative 13% 24% 38% 40%

Mobile Ethnography 13% 23% 37% 39%

Micro-surveys 16% 20% 31% 32%

Prediction Markets 18% 16% 29% 27%

Research gamification 9% 18% 36% 38%

Crowdsourcing 13% 14% 34% 33%

Virtual Environments 11% 14% 25% 29%

Facial analysis 9% 14% 20% 24%

Neuromarketing 11% 12% 27% 25%

Biometric Response 7% 8% 18% 19%

The data show relatively modest differences by region, but once again there are interesting nuances.

North America has a lead in the largest number of methods, with significantly high scores for Mobile Surveys, Text Analytics, Big Data Analytics, Webcam-Based Interviews, Mobile Qual, and Mobile Ethnography.

Europe is significantly strong in Online Communities and Eye Tracking, whilst Latin America is significantly strong in Social Media Analytics and Micro-Surveys.

About half the respondents expected their balance between qual and quant to remain about the same over the next two years, with just over 20% reporting that they will be doing more quant, and just over 20% reporting that they will do more qual. This consistency is in line with the picture reported by the last few ESOMAR industry studies, which have shown little change in the balance between qual and quant over the last few years.

Clients and suppliers share a similar view about the balance of qual and quant over the next two years, neither predicting a big change. The regional data also suggests no change as the main picture, with the data from Latin America suggesting a small shift to qual and the data from Asia suggesting a small shift to quant.

RegionalDifferences MoreQualorMoreQuant?

The overall pattern between clients and suppliers (what clients are buying and what suppliers are selling), is broadly similar (particularly when the ‘in use’ numbers are combined with the ‘plan to use’ numbers) – which is hardly surprising. However, there are some interesting differences, as shown in this chart.

AdoptionbyClientsvs.Suppliers

Techniques of the future: Client vs. Supplier

Themobilerevolutionisgoingtobemore‘supplier-

driven’than‘client-pulled’

The single biggest difference between the client and supplier values was for Mobile Surveys. This may suggest that suppliers are more aware that something like 20% to 30% of ‘offline’ surveys are already being conducted via mobile devices – a phenomenon that is sometimes referred to as ‘accidental mobile’. However, the fact that both Mobile Qualitative and Mobile Ethnography are stronger amongst suppliers than clients might suggest that the mobile revolution that many are forecasting is going to be more ‘supplier-driven’ than ‘client-pulled’, with a growing range of options being offered.

Another interesting difference between the client and supplier responses is in the area of Social Media Analytics and Big Data Analytics, both of which are currently stronger amongst the client respondents. It is possible that this reflects involvement by people outside of traditional market research.


The other side of looking at what is being adopted is to assess why new approaches such as Biometrics, Neuromarketing, Facial Analysis, and Virtual Environments are not gaining in adoption.

The study asked respondents whether they ever felt inhibited from using some types of research methodologies or approaches. In total, about two-thirds (66%) said they had felt inhibited, up from 58% last year. Clients and suppliers

BarrierstoAdoptingNewApproaches

companies to find their suppliers. The second connected factor is that many of the providers of Social Media Analytics and Big Data solutions are not from the market research industry; even when the purchasing is conducted by client-side insights teams, the work may go to a non-MR organisation, or be completed in-house using a DIY tool.

Insidemanyclientorganizations,theinsightsteamdoesnotconductthe

purchasingofSocialMediaAnalyticsandBigDatasolutions

Inside many client organizations, the insights team does not conduct the purchasing of Social Media Analytics and Big Data solutions. The insights team may be working with the information generated from these tools, often to add context or depth, but they may not ‘own’ the process. If the finance department, IT, COOs, CTOs and the like, are making purchasing decisions, they may not be looking to market research

were almost equally likely to say they were sometimes inhibited. Respondents from the Middle East and Africa and from Asia were the most likely to say they had felt inhibited (74% and 71%, respectively). Respondents in companies with 3 or fewer employees were the most likely to report feeling inhibited, but even the larger and largest companies reported 60+% rates for inhibition.

The saying, “all or nothing” does not typically apply to Market Researchers. As pioneers, we’re certainly excited and dazzled by new technology, but as researchers, we are methodical in approach, and as a consequence, not always the earliest of adopters until a case has been proven – or budgets allow for this kind of exploration. This year’s GRIT Dashboard revealed the tension between progress and pushback.

MR’s Hopeful But Cautious Approach to Mobile, Online Communities and Social Analytics

Robert ClancyVice President of Insights and Strategy, uSamp

Email: [email protected]: www.linkedin.com/pub/robert-clancy/48/838/ba6Website: www.usamp.com

GRIT Commentary

Overall, the dashboard revealed increased usage of online and mobile methodologies in the quant space and a decrease in face-to-face interviewing – with respondents naming mobile among their top three methodologies to leverage in the near future. But while it’s arguable that the future belongs to mobile research, it still remains an underutilized platform, only accounting for about five percent of total research conducted. Why the gap?

The majority said they feel inhibited from using this new technology. At the same time, “technology limitations” are the primary reason respondents cite for not using mobile. The data suggest that suppliers and clients simply do not believe or do not realize how far the technology has already been developed. Alternatively, they might not have seen enough clear proof that mobile works. Either they have not fully investigated mobile options, or we need to do a better job of educating them about the feasibility of mobile.

There is obviously interest in mobile and people recognize it as an important methodology for the future, but several factors, like those described above, are holding researchers back. Once the technology is completely proven and researchers start to see the power of the insights mobile can provide, then we should start to see mobile acceleration. It won’t happen overnight, though. It takes time for a new methodology to gain universal acceptance, and online is still, by far, the most trusted and utilized research methodology.

Asresearchers,wearemethodicalin

approach,andasaconsequence,notalways

theearliestofadopters

Two-thirds of all respondents report feeling inhibited from using certain methodologies such as gamification, online communities, mobile, social analytics and crowdsourcing. At the same time, respondents indicate that the top three methodologies of the future are online communities, mobile, and social analytics. This contradiction indicates definite interest, but hesitation to go “all in” until clients and suppliers presumably see more proof of how insights produced through these methods can impact business and/or until their companies are willing to commit more dollars.

The report reveals a few things that have impacted the way data are collected: One, the increased use of mobile technologies and non-traditional research techniques, and two, client budget constraints. Given the latter point, it’s not surprising that clients admit to taking more of the research in-house, especially as it applies to social media analytics. This is a technique that is more easily in-sourced than, for example, creating and managing an online community – another popular methodology amongst suppliers.


Research Gamification

Social Media Monitoring

Mobile Surveys

Crowdsourcing

Online Communities

Text Analytics

Online Focus Groups

Focus Groups

Mail

Face to Face

Telephone

Online

Other techniques

2013/14

2012/13

40%

36%

32%

30%

27%

26%

20%

18%

15%

17%

16%

12%

12%

40%

39%

35%

33%

29%

30%

24%

11%

14%

15%

11%

9%

9%

ReasonsforNotUsingTechniques

For the newest techniques, such as Research Gamification, Text Analytics, and Crowdsourcing, reasons tend to be lack of knowledge, lack of proof, and technological limitations.When respondents were asked to indicate for which approaches they had experienced inhibitions, the results are illuminating.

The data in the chart shows that inhibitions were experienced in the same main areas in the last year as in the previous year. However, the data do not suggest that inhibitions were necessarily the key reason when a methodology was not successful. Three of the approaches most mentioned as creating inhibitions were also the top three most adopted approaches (Social Media Monitoring, Mobile Surveys, and Online Communities).

However, this data does suggest that Research Gamification and Crowdsourcing would benefit from approaches that made it easier to learn about them and easier to implement them.

RonSellersofGreyMatterResearchconductedaseries

ofsixin-depthinterviewsbytelephonewithclient-side

researcherstoexploretheirviewson“NextGen”research

techniquesandtools.

The old joke is, “What do you have if you have one hundred economists in a room?” (One hundred different opinions!) It seems this applies also to a room full of researchers if the topic is the future of the industry. This is true if you read the GreenBook blog, LinkedIn discussion groups, and all the other chatter out there, and it certainly was true of the six participating clients. These clients universally reported feeling that the industry is changing with the plethora of new techniques. But there are wide differences in how much they’re using NextGen methods, and even which ones they’re familiar with. As one client described it, “It’s a professional mess.”

UnderstandingClientViewsonNewResearchTools

Amongst the people who said they did not use a technique, the reasons tend to fall into three groups. For older techniques, such as Mail, Telephone, and Focus Groups, the inhibitors tend to be that they are slow, expensive, and not fashionable. For Online, a massive “newish” technique, the inhibitions tend to be ‘old-fashioned clients’ and lack of proof it works.

There is wide variation in terms of which methods are being used by different companies, ranging from mostly traditional approaches with a smattering of NextGen, to mostly NextGen with a smattering of the traditional. No client saw NextGen approaches as complete replacements for traditional techniques. An analogy that came up a number of times was adding tools to their toolbox.

“I have trouble saying that any of [the traditional tools] •are invalid. I see the tools we have as a toolbox. So I still see that they have applicability. I haven’t ruled out any of the ‘older methods,’ not because I’m being stubborn but because I’m trying to evolve older and new in a purposeful way.”“What’s going on is more tools are being added to the •toolbox, and it’s coming at a very rapid rate. I think that’s what a lot of folks are dealing with.”

Techniques of the future: 2012/13 vs. 2013/14

Noclient

sawNextGen

approaches

ascomplete

replacements

fortraditional

techniques

0 30 4010 20


As I look at the MR industry, I am struck by the irony that despite our role in guiding the world’s brands on consumer wants and needs, we are proving how poor our own marketing skills are by not effectively communicating the value of MR to consumers. The continuing downslide of cooperation rates among consumers is not just a methodological problem. It is an awareness problem. The consumer doesn’t understand the value we provide in making the things they love… better. We are the scientists who study human behavior to create better marketing communications, and yet, we are failing to articulate our value to those whose cooperation we rely upon.

The Pendulum is Returning

Brett WatkinsPresident, L&E Research

Email: [email protected]: www.linkedin.com/company/l&e-researchTwitter: LEresearchWebsite: www.leresearch.com

GRIT Commentary

Combineresourcestoimprovecooperationrates.2. I realize that many readers of this commentary don’t have budget for a brand campaign for the MR industry, but we can pool resources to advocate for our industry. Member organizations like CASRO, ESOMAR, MRA, QRCA and the like should be encouraged to educate consumers on the processes of market research and how their input matters. The lack of consumer knowledge on the product life cycle process hurts our ability to produce compelling research. If we combine our efforts and ask – even demand – that our industry associations provide this kind of support, we could work toward having a real impact.UtilizeMRasamarketingtool.3. Our training has cocooned us into believing consumers are subjects, and we are scientists. In the digital marketing world, we are missing opportunities to not only engage consumers long-term, but also to educate them on how product development works, and how vital their role is in it. Research participants are generally passionate about brands. If they were engaged throughout the product cycle, they could become a brand’s biggest apostles.

As we embrace new technologies and other innovations in our industry, let’s not lose sight of what makes our MR world go round: people. The new generation coming up is our future – both internally and externally. If we want to arrest the backward slide in cooperation rates, we need to understand our consumers, including their goals, how they work, and the technologies that they use. This is a first step toward becoming thoughtful and effective stewards of our industry.

While the solution to this challenge is not easy, I have three recommendations to begin the process of motivating change:

SeekoutGenYandengagethemtostartacareerinMR.1.

Generation Y careerists are not built like their Generation X, Boomer and Mature generation contemporaries.. As a group, they are interested in making a difference and being part of a team where they can be involved and leave their mark. Our industry offers tremendous opportunity to “connect the dots” between MR work and product and service improvements, providing a clear cut opportunity to see the full life cycle of the research as well as the results of that work.

Thecontinuingdownslideofcooperation

ratesamongconsumersisnotjusta

methodologicalproblem.Itisanawareness

problem


http://www.twitter.com/LEresearch

There were many comments about companies “putting a toe in the water” with some of the NextGen approaches – testing them to see whether they are valid. For many, the jury was still out on some of the newer techniques. Only one respondent had jumped in with both feet, and he admitted to being an outlier even in his own company.

“We started slowly, and we’re deploying them to a greater •extent. We are understanding them. We first put them in a test and control, and we’re seeing benefits with those different kinds of solutions.”“We’ll often talk to potential partners about these more •non-traditional techniques and try something small. So maybe like a small pilot test and see how it goes; a low-risk, low-finance investment and see what happens.”

Although the consensus is that the NextGen techniques are not wholesale replacements for traditional research approaches, inevitably with more tools available, individual projects are seeing some shift away from the traditional. This is especially true of the long, cumbersome brand tracking studies.

“Our large trackers, they’re completely gone now. We •replaced them with a five-question Google survey. A micro-survey platform.”“What’s the replacement for that? That’s on my radar •screen to figure that out. But it’s not an urgent, immediate need. It’s a transition. It’s an evolution.”“I think traditional tracking programs will continue to •scale back, and I think they’ll probably be reported on less frequently or less granularly to make room in the budget for things like social.”

Yet there generally is a belief that the traditional methods will continue to be used as well.

“I don’t think it’s about being dead or obsolete. It’s about •evolving to stay relevant. Surveys need to be shorter. They need to be engaging. They need to be mobile friendly. But they’re not dead. And the same with focus groups.”“I think there’s still a role for the survey in the world •today. You can focus a person’s attention on something for a period of time, where if you’re in social media, you have no control over what you talk about, how long it gets talked about, how deep you go, or how much you understand it.”“I think some people are wholeheartedly embracing some •of these new techniques without knowing if they’re completely 100% reliable, accurate, and valid. At one of these conferences recently a corporate side researcher said a very jarring statement, something like ‘surveys won’t exist’ or ‘I won’t be using surveys in five years,’ or something like that. And I thought that was a little sensationalist.”

Everyone reported feeling that the industry is changing, but there is widespread disagreement as to the rate of change, the wisdom of some of the change, and what change is actually taking place.

“It’s going to be transformational. Maybe even •revolutionary. Data collection methodologies have got to change to keep up with the consumer. ”“You’re going to have convergence and divergence going •on at this scale that we’ve never seen before. I think there’s going to be a lot more convergence going on between neuro-data and Big Data and social media and all these things that will happen pretty quickly. ”“I think marketing research is a relatively slow-moving •industry; probably too slow, to be honest. I think we are a rather conservative bunch. So I don’t see any radical shifts or abandonment of traditional approaches. I see it more as a gradual layering in of the new approaches.”

Withmoretools

available,individual

projectsareseeing

someshiftaway

fromthetraditional

Traditionalmethods

willcontinuetobe

used

When it comes to individual techniques, there are many different perspectives on what’s valid and what’s not. Some worried that Eye Tracking and Neuroscience are unproven and don’t explain the “why,” while others are excited about these techniques. Some are using Google Surveys while others feel that there’s not much usefulness there. Some feel Social Media Analytics are dangerously misused and over-rated, while others use them extensively. Some are excited about Big Data while others feel it’s not strategic enough.

“I think part of the problem is people over-rely on social. •People treat it as if it’s completely representative. This idea that almost anybody can do their own research because they can just go on a forum or a blog or Twitter and extract their own insights – I think that’s a completely invalid way of thinking about research.”“We are doing social media monitoring. That one is now a •standard tool in our toolbox. It has joined the hammer, the screwdriver and the wrench as foundational. Big Data is right behind it, without a doubt.”“There’s so much hype about social media research and •text analytics and natural language processing. And there are some cool things going on there. But ultimately, is it as predictive as other things that we have? I don’t know.”

Participants were also quite open about the fact that they simply lack experience and/or knowledge about some of these approaches.

“Neuroscience, I’m in the learning process there. I’m intrigued •by it. I think there’s probably something there. Behavioral Economics – I’m still trying to figure out what that means. I’m still not certain I can even explain it to myself.”“I would say some of those I think we’re still all learning, so •it’s hard to say whether they’re completely valid or not. It’s almost like a lot of researchers are on the fence in terms of wait and see what those things can potentially provide.”


In preparation for this piece on customer co-creation, I was very excited to use insights from the recent GRIT report. Since I was being asked to write about customer co-creation, I was drawn to one table in particular.

That table was called “Reasons for not using Techniques.” Now some of the findings were rather predictable. For example, the research technique “Face to Face” was avoided for being “Too Expensive.” No great surprise there, I imagine we could have asked that 25 years ago and the results would have been the same.

Ah, but now, it gets interesting. Out of all the traditional and New MR options available, the technique that was second in being avoided was “Crowdsourcing.” And the number one reason for not using this option was “Lack of Knowledge.” Not surprisingly, Crowdsourcing also earned top scores among researchers for the dubious distinction of being avoided due to “Ignorance.”

At the risk of biting the hand that feeds me, I have to chide my fellow researchers over this finding. While I applaud your honesty, lack of knowledge and ignorance rarely constitute good long term strategy.

The Customer Contribution Continuum: Should customers be part of your team?

Kevin LonniePresident, KL Communications

Email: [email protected]: www.linkedin.com/company/kl-communications-inc.Twitter: klonnie / CrowdWeavingKLCWebsite: www.klcommunications.com

GRIT Commentary

The third level is the world of Big Data.3.

At this level, the customer has passively sacrificed •privacy for perks and contributes information without awareness or interest.It then becomes the role of data scientists (Math Men) •to decipher the meaning behind their behaviors.

I believe our industry is unnecessarily enamored with the shadow world of big data. Folks are unwittingly trading off privacy for perks, thus allowing themselves to be exploited and measured, like test subjects in a Skinner Box.

In contrast, Customer co-creation is easy to measure (e.g. Did the new product succeed?). As such, the ROI of customer co-creation is easily measured and reflected in the P&L. Compare that to the murky ROI of a focus group.

I would encourage my fellow researchers to at least educate themselves on the possibilities of customer co-creation. “Lack of knowledge” is an honest assessment and fortunately, one that is easily rectified.

The overarching question is whether customer co-creation can be a viable, productive and mutually profitable arrangement for you and your customers. If the answer is yes, then the second question is whether customer co-creation will run through you.

NOTE: The GRIT survey only asked about Crowdsourcing and not Customer Co-Creation. Over the past year, the MR industry has aligned itself more closely to customer co-creation. Our industry is not looking to outsource product ideation to customers (i.e. Crowdsourcing), but welcomes a process in which customer contributions are integral to the ideation process (i.e. Customer Co-Creation).

Weareunderafalseimpressionifwefeelwe

holdexclusiverightstocustomerinsight

As researchers, we are under a false impression if we feel we hold exclusive rights to customer insight. In fact, it appears we are far more comfortable designing a stellar survey rather than pursuing “equal footing” relationships with customers.If we continue on this path, MR will be sidestepped while more progressive agencies are contracted to pursue interactive customer contributions, such as co-creation.To put this into context, I see the future of MR lining up along “The Customer Contribution Continuum.”

At the top of this contribution chain will be the emerging 1.

area of customer co-creation/crowdsourcing.Here the customer is a powerful, proactive contributor •with full transparency into the business situation they are helping to solve.

The second level of customer involvement is reflected by 2.

traditional MR.At this level the customer acts as a reactive •contributor via surveys and moderated discussions to infer consumer decision thinking.


http://www.twitter.com/klonnie

http://www.twitter.com/CrowdWeavingKLC

Tony Dent (UK)tel: 44 1494 721841

tel: 49 41 81 99 681 (Germany)

Catherine Harston (UK)3a RydingsWindsorBerkshire SL4 4HFtel: 44 203 0111303e-mail: [email protected]: www.aimri.net

Chairman:

Deputy Chairman:

AIMRI welcomes membership applications from professional research companies in all countries.

The AIMRI website (www.aimri.net) lists members and research users can employ the “GET A QUOTE” feature to contact agencies.

AIMRI is a trade association of professional European and Worldwide Market Research agencies. AIMRI has almost 100 members in 30 countries. Together we cover all parts of Europe, Asia and America. Members offer International research through their own resources or act as lead agencies in an international consortium.

SELECTED AIMRI MEMBERS

AIMRI runs practical conferences and seminars on conducting research throughout the World – see our website.

What is aimri? How to contact aimri?

Conradstraat 183013 AP Rotterdam

t: f: e:w:

1 10 300 30031 10 300 3004

[email protected]

AmershamBucks HP6 5HEUK

t: 4 1494 7218414 7957 871 785

[email protected]: w: www.mr-sample.co.uk

Jardine House1c Claremont Road

UK

t: f: e:w:

4 20 8274 50104 20 8274 5020

[email protected]

Calle 99 Carerra 49C-14Monte Cassino No.203Barranquilla

57

[email protected]

Burg, Vening Meineszlaan 1651063 AZ Amsterdam

t: e:w:

1 (0) 20 411 3875 [email protected] www.sampleanswers.com

US Rep - , 3R’sNew York, NY 10003USA

[email protected]

11 East 22nd Street, 2nd FloorNew York, NY 10010USA

t: f: e:w:

1 212 505 68051 212 505 0284

[email protected] www.sisinternational.com

Sanne KromCentralized multi-country CATI work into the EMEA region, 200 seats

Mr Sample is an independent

provider

We offer excellence in Sampling Solutions for the Market Research Industry on a Worldwide basis. Call

sample Solutions

Call Colombia for on-line or telephone sample requirements throughout the Americas –

and the Caribbean

Europe is only a phone call away! For quality international business or Consumer samples call Ton.

Global sampling solutions – your success is our business

Global Market Research and Strategic

Americas, Europe and Asia

t: :

::

:

e:w:

e:

There were also numerous comments indicating that researchers have to be able to sell the approach internally.

“I want to make sure I’m in tune with what my •organization needs and can tolerate, in terms of risk and acceptance.”“Is it a methodology that our leaders would accept at face •value? It’s like, ‘What? You put probes on people’s heads and you’re watching brain waves? That’s creepy to me.’”

Clients didn’t seem concerned about their own future in the industry, although many could see a shift from client-side researchers actually doing much of the research to them managing specialists in various techniques who actually do the work.

“There’s no threat to me at all. As a matter of fact, it’s the •reverse. I’m excited about the opportunity. Just go find the experts that I can trust as trusted partners. I just need to know great people that do great work and orchestrate that in a way that impacts the business with great insights, conclusions, and recommendations.”“I don’t feel too worried. But I do think that if you want •to go into research today, you should have a pretty broad base to draw on. If you just learn traditional survey questioning, that will probably set you up for failure.”“If I broadly look at what the skills required to be a •researcher are, they’ve evolved in some cases to much more of a consultant or a business owner, being able to manage outsourced agencies.”

Many of the respondents are willing to use their existing vendors for NextGen techniques, but there was a feeling that the old-line vendors aren’t adapting quickly, so the newer specialists ultimately will benefit from increased business.

“I think the new vendors bring more innovative ways •of thinking, certainly. But having the blessing of a traditional vendor does bring more credibility in terms of the validity of the approach and how it compares to traditional research and, theoretically, a more objective opinion of that.”“I’d say (I look to) the new vendors, the specialized •vendors, for sure. I like (the traditional vendors). I really do. But their systems are so set up for the old way. It’s not agile enough. It’s too expensive. It’s much more time-consuming.”“I think there will always be a place for the full-service •vendor, but I think they will have a more difficult time maintaining that posture in the marketplace going forward. The industry appears to be moving to more boutique-ish, specialized areas.”

However, a danger for newer vendors is when they market a NextGen approach as a complete replacement for traditional methods. This was almost universally a major turn-off for clients, even for those who are sold on NextGen techniques.

“You know what? I actually think it erodes their credibility •with me. I would never buy into that idea that there’s like one solution to everything.”“I’ve encountered that actually many times. Words like •‘replace’ or ‘these things don’t have any validity or aren’t helpful anymore,’ those are the types of words that actually will end the relationship before it even starts.”

Overall, there was no consensus at all beyond the feeling that the industry is changing and that many things are in a state of flux right now. It’s important to note that clients generally feel that their company’s situation is unique (specialized target markets, products, customer decision points, regulations, etc.), which can drive whether each approach is valid and useful for them. This topic of NextGen Insights was chosen in an attempt to help bring some clarity to the plethora of opinions about NextGen approaches that appear in blog posts and industry-related social media, but these differing perspectives instead seemed to cement the feeling that it’s “a professional mess.”

The participating clients ranged from one who felt that the future of insights is almost entirely in the NextGen approaches to one who relies mostly on traditional approaches. This range of opinion can be encapsulated by comparing two different comments from two different client-side researchers:

“(People) don’t really know what causes the things we do. •So to ask what they think or why they do it or would do it is largely irrelevant. My philosophical slant is to do as little asking as possible. So where does that leave research? I see a lot of traditional research groups that are just being chipped away. And they don’t even see it. They may get it a little bit, but it’s largely being wiped out.”“I think quite honestly I’m a little tired of all of the •overblown new stuff that’s out there. The truly new is rare. The talk about the new is abundant.”

These views are amply supported within the quantitative portion of GRIT as well,. Having these qualitative insights as deeper context to the findings in the GRIT survey are invaluable to adding nuance and putting a “human face” to the numbers we are focusing on throughout this report.

Thereare

manydifferent

perspectiveson

what’svalidand

what’snot

Manyseeashift

fromclient-side

researchersactually

doingmuchof

theresearch

tomanaging

specialists

AdangerfornewervendorsiswhentheymarketaNextGenapproachasa

completereplacementfortraditionalmethods


Online

Mobile Surveys

Big Data Analytics


Online Communities

Focus Groups

Mobile Ethnography

Research Gamification

Face to Face

Prediction Markets

Conjoint

Mobile Qual

Text Analytics

Online Focus Groups

Telephone

Neuromarketing

Crowdsourcing

Virtual Environments

Facial Expression Tracking

Eye Tracking

In-store Intercepts

Webcam Focus Groups

Biometric Response

Mail

39%

27%

30%

26%

24%

28%

22%

17%

16%

15%

17%

10%

18%

13%

12%

13%

11%

8%

7%

10%

5%

4%

5%

3%

41%

33%

30%

25%

25%

24%

21%

18%

17%

16%

15%

16%

12%

13%

13%

12%

11%

9%

8%

7%

8%

5%

4%

2%

Base: Client=319, Supplier=1,294

Client

Supplier

The Future Research Agency

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

As part of the optional section of the questionnaire, the GRIT study explored how people saw the future through a personalized, speculative lens, first by asking what respondents would choose to specialize in and secondly by asking them to define their ‘perfect research company’.

The list of techniques reviewed for specialization included both the new techniques covered in the new approaches section and some main stream approaches such as Online Research and Focus Groups, as shown in this chart. Note, the results shown here are based on allowing the respondents to make multiple selections.

The top choice for both clients and suppliers was Online Research, an approach that has already become the single largest mode in market research. The four items ranked after Online, Mobile Surveys, Big Data Analytics, Social Media Analytics, and Online Communities were all in the top five ‘Most Used’ new research methods, as described earlier.

The one exception to items ranking high on both specialization and current use, is Text Analytics, which was ranked 4th among the top new methods. In a panel discussion of leading research figures (Jeffrey Henning, Simon Chadwick, Reineke Reitsma, Lenny Murphy, and Ray Poynter), it was conjectured that Text Analytics is currently not seen as a good bet as there are multiple contenders, many new entrants, and a view that there will only be a small number of successes. The successes are predicted to be very successful, but the suggestion is that most start-ups will either remain small or fail.

TopChoicesforSpecialization

In general the preferences of the clients and suppliers were very similar. The three key differences were Mobile Surveys and Mobile Qual (where suppliers were keener than clients) and Text Analytics (where clients were keener than suppliers).

These three differences are very similar to differences in the new research approaches adopted, where clients were further ahead on the analytics and suppliers were ahead on mobile approaches. The potential difference on mobile related approaches may relate to suppliers’ focus on how to conduct the research, and clients’ interest in the results rather than the means.

PreferencesofClientsversusSuppliers

Techniques I would choose to specialize in: Client vs. Supplier

0 30 4010 20


RESEARCH HUB™ INTELLIGENCE PLATFORM, POWERED BY THE BEACON® SURVEY SOFTWARE PLATFORM® SURVEY SOFTWARE PLATFORM®

ONLINE AND MOBILE SURVEY PROGRAMMING AND REPORTING | DATA MANAGEMENT | SAMPLING

Shouldn’t research be a chance to see things differently? To see order in chaos? And to see opportunities in the marketplace? Yup, we agree. That’s why we continue to innovate new and better market research tools—from our industry-leading mobile surveys to our proprietary Beacon™ Research Hub. Find out more inside this GRIT Report and at DecipherInc.com.

We have the tools to help you make sense of the world.

DEC Party-GRIT.pdf 1 1/9/14 1:37 PM

Base: 2012/13=796, 2013/14=1603

There were few differences by region, but there were some differences in emphasis. The table on the left highlights techniques were a region was significantly higher or lower than the others.

Note: In regions where the bases are larger it is easier to find significant differences, as the size of the difference can be smaller. In regions with a small base size the difference has to be larger to be significant.

Region Base High Low

North America 1,230 Mobile QualConjointText AnalyticsVirtual Environments

Face to FaceTelephoneEye TrackingIn-Store Intercepts

Europe 829 Focus GroupsTelephoneEye Tracking

Mobile QualWebcam Focus Groups

Asia & Oceania 241 Focus Groups Mobile EthnographyMobile QualCrowdsourcing

South America 87 NeuromarketingFacial Expression Tracking

Online

Middle East & Africa 63 Prediction Markets

In North America the future specializations are the least associated with the older research approaches (e.g. Face to Face and Telephone), and more associated with several of the newest, mostly the mobile/automated approaches.

Europe and Asia tend to be less keen on the mobile options, perhaps through a preference for Face to Face qualitative research.

In order to compare between waves it is necessary to focus on just respondents’ first choice for specialization, and only on those attributes used in both waves, which produced the chart on the left.

When forced to make a first choice, respondents focused in on a mixture of traditional approaches (Online and Focus Groups) and newer approaches (Mobile Surveys, and to a lesser extent, Mobile Ethnography, along with Online Communities).

Three of the top four methods showed significant growth between last year and this year: Online, Mobile Surveys, and Focus Groups.

PreferredTechniquesbyRegion

EvolutionofTopChoicesforSpecialization

2013/14 2012/13

Online 14% 9%

Mobile Surveys 11% 9%

Online Communities 8% 8%

Focus Groups 8% 4%

Mobile Ethnography 7% 7%

Research Gamification 6% 6%

Face to Face 5% 4%

Prediction Markets 5% 6%

Conjoint 5% 4%

Mobile Qual 4% 5%

Text Analytics 4% 6%

Online Focus Groups 4% 5%

Telephone 4% 2%

Crowdsourcing 3% 5%

Virtual Environments 3% 5%

Facial Expression Tracking 2% 3%

Eye Tracking 2% 3%

In-store Intercepts 2% 2%

Webcam Focus Groups 1% 2%

Biometric Response 1% 3%

Mail 1% 1%

Top choices to specialize in


As an entrepreneur for most of my adult life, I have always been passionate about building new products and bringing them to life. And when I look back over the last decade, it is safe to say, the most fulfilling moments for me have always been seeing the adoption of our product and services by some of the largest and most innovative companies in the world.

When I joined Ipsos, as a founding member of the Global Innovation Practice, it felt very familiar to me in many ways. We were experimenting with technologies, building and releasing new products, and working with clients to adopt these approaches. However, when we launched Ipsos SMX (Social Media Exchange) there was one new very real challenge that I had yet to face – the challenge of driving internal adoption throughout a mature organization.

When I review the 2014 GRIT results it is clear that the challenge of internal adoption is still a major factor preventing our industry from aligning with client expectations. This certainly is not due to a lack of interest or commitment to drive innovation, but due to the nature of our business, and the expectation of our clients for predictable results.

Adopting Innovation

Andrew LearyGlobal CEO, Ipsos SMX

Email: [email protected]: www.linkedin.com/company/ipsos-smxTwitter: IpsosSMXWebsite: www.ipsossmx.com

GRIT Commentary

Thus, as an industry, the question I think we have to answer, is what do we, especially the large global providers, have to do to accelerate the adoption of innovations? Following are the three lessons that I have found to be the most helpful.

We must create champions at every level of the 1.

organization, especially among those responsible for developing solutions with our clients.We must remember that technology is a tool, not the 2.

solution, and focus on how technology can help evolve our current product offerings and methodologies.We must accept that new innovations can potentially 3.

impact or cannibalize our existing business, and that this is necessary to evolve as an industry.

I realize point three is not always easy for large organizations, however, to achieve adoption and drive scalable change this must be acknowledged and accepted across the organization. Otherwise, we run the risk of not meeting our client’s needs.

The good news, and we are seeing this first-hand within Ipsos SMX, is that our business leaders are not only interested in creating products that integrate social approaches, but truly see this as the future. Thus, as we continue to develop offerings with our specialisms around community and the integration of social data we continue to see our business grow, while meeting our clients’ expectations.

Wemustcreatechampionsateverylevelof

theorganization


http://www.twitter.com/IpsosSMX

Base Client=319, Supplier=1,294

In order to get a clearer picture of where people think research should be heading, the respondents were requested to list up to three key selling points for their ‘perfect research company’. The table on this page shows that the views of suppliers and clients about what a perfect agency should be highlighting as selling points are very similar.

At first glance the results may look a little odd or counterintuitive. Readers might note that ‘lowest price’ is almost the lowest ranking characteristic and ‘listens well’ is the top item. Might this indicate a difference between what people say and what they do?

Perhaps the figures are not so surprising. If we look at ESOMAR’s 2013 Global Market Research Report, we see that the largest six agencies account for over 40% of all research spending globally. If we look at the table above with the dominance of the big six in mind we note:

None of the top six are ‘low price’ brands.•The “Big Six” are all able to offer standardized quality, •specific sector strengths (note that Nielsen, IMS Health, and Gartner are all in the “Big Six”), advice on best practices (they are so big that what they do is one definition of best practice in their areas of leadership), and strong, global reputations.Many of the factors at the bottom of the list are hygiene •factors, but not necessarily ‘selling points’. For example, being financially stable, providing data analysis, having up-to-date statistical packages, and having experience are all important, but they are not something a perfect agency would describe as their something special.Lowest cost is something that will help an agency win a •project, but only when it meets the basic requirements of the project and only when it makes it onto the tender list. Few agencies become successful by making low cost one of their top claims.

Perhaps the most interesting item from the definition of the perfect agency is the top selling point: “Listens well and understands client needs”. This fits well with what many other projects have found. Clients want to trust suppliers and have confidence in them, and one essential part of that is that the agency both listens and understands. Being able to do the research is a requirement – listening and understanding are key steps on the way to becoming the perfect agency.

ThePerfectResearchAgency

Column% Supplier Client NET

Listens well and understands client needs 14% 14% 14%

High quality analysis 12% 13% 12%

Offers unique methodology or approach 9% 7% 8%

Consultation on best practices & methodology 9% 9% 9%

Has knowledgeable staff 9% 10% 9%

Familiarity with client needs 6% 6% 6%

Provides highest data quality 7% 7% 7%

Good reputation in the industry 6% 3% 6%

Uses sophisticated research technology 6% 5% 6%

Understands consumer communications channels & technologies

6% 5% 6%

Good relationship with client/supplier 6% 5% 6%

Familiarity with the industry or category 6% 5% 6%

Rapid response to requests 5% 4% 4%

Breadth of experience in the target segment 4% 5% 4%

Flexibility on changing project parameters 4% 5% 4%

Uses the latest data collection technology 4% 3% 4%

Completes research in an agreed-upon time 4% 3% 4%

Previous experience with client/supplier 3% 2% 3%

Length of experience/time in business 3% 2% 3%

Also does qualitative research 2% 1% 2%

Uses the latest statistical/analytical packages 2% 2% 2%

Lowest price 1% 2% 2%

Provides data analysis services 2% 3% 2%

Company is financially stable 1% 1% 1%

Has an access panel 1% 1% 1%

NET 44% 42% 43%

Top choices to specialize in

Theviewsofsuppliersand

clientsaboutaperfectagency

areverysimilar

Clientswanttotrustsuppliersandhave

confidenceinthem


The 50 Most Innovative Companies

in Market Research

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Beginning in 2010 we decided to start tracking which firms were perceived as most innovative within the global market research industry. This has evolved into the GRIT Top 50 Most Innovative list, which at its core is a brand tracker using the attribute of “innovation” as the key metric. Now, each year we measure how market research suppliers are leveraging this brand element through a simple question series:

Using an unaided awareness verbatim question, we ask 1.

respondents to list the three research companies they considered to be most innovative.We then ask them to rank those firms from most to least 2.

innovative.Finally we ask another verbatim as to why they consider 3.

their number 1 ranked firm to be most innovative.

For this wave, using the aggregate of the ranking question, we developed a list of 991 companies in total, with 304 that received multiple mentions. From that list we have narrowed it down to the Top 50 for additional analysis. The goal of this avenue of inquiry is to glean insight on the drivers of perception around what makes a firm innovative in order to understand how MR firms are capitalizing on the idea of

“innovation” to grow their businesses. We believe that this list, developed by our peers within the industry, is a true measure of how successfully these companies are using “innovation” to help drive brand awareness.

Due to issues around consolidation and multiple brand within a single entity (Kantar for instance with Millward Brown, TNS, Added Value, etc…) we are presenting the Top 50 in two ways: without brand rollups which is based solely on the companies mentioned with no consideration given to parent company ownership or affiliation, and with brand rollups, where we have consolidated all appropriate business entities under the parent brand. As you’ll see this doesn’t change things significantly, but there is a reshuffling of the higher ranked companies, most notably for Kantar-owned companies.

Only brands that received 12 or more mentions made it onto the “Without Rollups” list while 11 or more was the threshold for inclusion on the ‘With Rollups” list.

Here are the rankings both ways:

Rank Top50WithoutRollups Mentions Difference Rank CombinedTop50WithRollups Mentions

1 BrainJuicer 400 0 1 BrainJuicer 400

2 Vision Critical 203 1 2 Kantar 305

3 Ipsos 202 1 3 Ipsos 221

4 GFK 142 2 4 Vision Critical 203

5 Google 133 Debut 5 GFK 142

6 TNS 126 Debut 6 Google 133

7 Nielsen 102 2 7 Nielsen 112

8 Millward Brown 80 2 8 InSites Consulting 74

9 InSites Consulting 74 2 9 Research Now 72

10 Research Now 72 11 10 Communispace 51

11 Communispace 51 5 11 Lieberman Research Worldwide 49

12 Lieberman Research Worldwide 49 25 12 20/20 Research 47

13 20/20 Research 47 4 13 Affinnova 46

14 Affinnova 46 2 14 Qualtrics 45

15 Qualtrics 45 11 15 Hotspex 41


Rank Top50WithoutRollups Mentions Difference Rank CombinedTop50WithRollups Mentions

16 Hotspex 41 8 16 GMI Lightspeed 40

17 GMI Lightspeed 40 19 17 iTracks 34

18 iTracks 34 10 18 Toluna 30

19 Toluna 30 2 19 Vocatus 30

20 Vocatus 30 Debut 20 uSamp 28

21 uSamp 28 4 21 GIM 27

22 GIM 27 Debut 22 Cello Group 26

23 Kantar 25 19 23 Mesh 25

24 Mesh 25 17 24 Revelation Global 24

25 Revelation Global 24 7 25 Gongos 22

26 Gongos 22 Debut 26 Decipher 21

27 Decipher 21 3 27 QualVu 19

28 Face Group 20 Debut 28 Forrester 19

29 Synovate 19 22 29 Dialego 19

30 QualVu 19 16 30 GutCheck 17

31 Forrester 19 8 31 Dub 17

32 Dialego 19 Debut 32 Survey Monkey 16

33 GutCheck 17 Debut 33 Research Through Gaming 15

34 Dub 17 Debut 34 iModerate 15

35 Survey Monkey 16 Debut 35 Hall & Partners 15

36 Research Through Gaming 15 8 36 Anderson Analytics 15

37 iModerate 15 Debut 37 RIWI 14

38 Hall & Partners 15 16 38 Harris Interactive 14

39 Anderson Analytics 15 26 39 Affectiva 14

40 RIWI 14 Debut 40 ideo 13

41 Harris Interactive 14 22 41 Schlesinger Associates 12

42 Affectiva 14 Debut 42 IBM 12

43 ideo 13 Debut 43 Maritz Research 12

44 Schlesinger Associates 12 5 44 KL Communications 12

45 IBM 12 Debut 45 ComScore 12

46 Maritz Research 12 20 46 Blauw 12

47 KL Communications 12 Debut 47 SSI 11

48 ComScore 12 14 48 Happy Thinking People 11

49 Added Value 12 Debut 49 facebook 11

50 Blauw 12 Debut 50 Focus Forums 11


Scan to learn more: www.toluna-group.com

The world keeps getting smaller and smaller. Toluna is out to make marketing research smarter and smarter.It’s a big world full of people who love asking questions and sharing their ideas and opinions with others. As a pioneer in the dynamic world of marketing research and survey technology, Toluna puts you at the center of it all.

Connect with more than 6 million consumers through the Toluna.com community, and couple this access with revolutionary survey programming and research tools like our DIY survey creation platform, QuickSurveys™; state-of-the art TolunaAnalytics™ analytic platform; TolunaMobile™, and PanelPortal™ branded communities.

Learn more today at www.toluna-group.com and bring clarity to an increasingly curious world.

LONDON / AMSTERDAM / PARIS / FRANKFURT / MADRID / TIMISOARA / HAIFA / WILTON / DALLAS

NORTH ANDOVER / TORONTO / SYDNEY / GURGAON / TOKYO / HONG KONG / SINGAPORE

For the third consecutive year, BrainJuicer is unequivocally considered the most innovative company by GRIT respondents, a testament to their discipline, creativity, and focus when it comes to branding and marketing. Other perennial leaders Vision Critical, Ipsos, GfK and Nielsen saw some slight shuffling within the Top 10, but the real surprise was the debut of Google Consumer Surveys at number 5, no doubt driven by the extensive industry media coverage of the Google Consumer Surveys offering as well as their ubiquitous presence at industry events.

Google wasn’t the only debut, however – a total of 18 companies made it onto the Top 50 list for the first time in 2013. Interestingly at least 4 (Vocatus, Dialego, Ideo & Blauw) seemed to be driven by the large German sample contribution to GRIT, demonstrating the power of their presence within their local market. No other regional specific players made similar appearances.

So what does this tell us? For firms that debuted or moved up in the ranks in 2013, their branding efforts paid dividends for them in the minds of the industry. With each iteration of the GRIT Top 50 we are witnessing how brands are leveraging various marketing channels (social media, conferences, advertising) focusing on the broad idea of “innovation”.

While watching the movement of the brands and correlating that to more anecdotal data such as event participation, advertising levels and social media activity is instructive, additional digging in to the verbatim question of why a firm is considered innovative combined with multivariate analysis yields additional compelling insights on how firms are perceived in the marketplace.

A simple word cloud generated using Tagxedo.com offers a glimpse into the types of responses we received in in the verbatim follow-up, with several major themes being readily apparent:

Using Text Analytics we condensed the responses into 60 codes. Based on multivariate analysis undertaken on the open ended mentions, we see service elements falling into clear cut clusters around the Methodology, Trust and Diversity, Technology Infrastructure, Innovation & Creativity and Speed & Size of all of the GRIT Top 50. These clusters and attributes are associated with each of the firms listed and we used a radial brand map to visualize the relationship between them.

WhatMakesaCompanyInnovative?

Forthethirdconsecutiveyear,BrainJuicer

isunequivocallyconsideredthemost

innovativecompanybyGRITrespondents

16 brands increased their position by moving up the ranks, with the single greatest gain being made by Lieberman Research Worldwide with a jump of 25 spots from number 37 in 2012 to number 12 in 2013. 16 brands declined in the ranks.


methodology

advertise research

emotional science

creativity

innovation sample

speed

size

data

analysis

adaptable Tailor price

knowledge

client focus risk taking

honest frugality

ethnographic employees

complete brand

presentation cooperative

diversity ease

respondent engagement

online technology

Speed & Size

Trust & Diversity

GRIT 2014 – Top 20 Innovators in Research

Innovation & Creativity

Tech Infrastructure

Methodology

The radial brand map below shows the top twenty most mentioned research suppliers and plots them against a battery of service proposition related classifications.

A brand’s position on the map correlates to the attributes and cluster they are associated with, with actual distance indicating the strength of the association. For instance:

Google is being pulled towards Speed and Size, while •BrainJuicer and Hotspex have a relatively higher association with emotional sciences and Method.Traditional research agencies such as Ipsos show a higher •resonance with trust and diversity due to their established presence.USamp & Vision Critical are associated primarily with •Technology & Infrastructure while Qualtrics, iTracks, and Affinnova are strongly linked to Methodology.

The message here is that these firms are associated with these aspects of innovation within the marketplace and their positioning on the GRIT Top 50 list indicates significant brand recognition and affinity with these attributes. These brands can use this information to adjust their messaging as needed in light of their strategic branding goals, and other firms looking to compete effectively can also leverage this analysis to help with their own positioning.

GRIT 2014 – Top 20 Innovators in Research


Very little

3%

Some

27%

Quite a bit

33%

A lot

31%

Tremendous

6%

Base n = 2229

Base n = 2229

Expectations of Change

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

GRIT indicates that the industry is changing; the adoption of new techniques and technologies, changes driven by various market forces and even the positioning of suppliers are well documented in previous waves of GRIT as well as in this wave itself. However, rather than simply draw a conclusion about change, we asked respondents how much change they expected in the products and services they deliver. 97% of respondents expected at least “Some” change.

NorthAmerica EuropeAsiaand

OceaniaSouthAmerica

Internationalor

Missing

MiddleEastand

Africa

Very little 3% 3% 5% 1% 0% 4%

Some 30% 26% 26% 23% 25% 26%

Quite a bit 31% 35% 32% 36% 29% 28%

A lot 30% 32% 28% 32% 31% 34%

Tremendous 6% 5% 9% 8% 14% 9%

There are no significant differences across regions or between clients and suppliers:

Thinking ahead five years, how much of a change do you expect in the kinds of services and products you deliver?

Change in the next 5 years: Geography

97%ofrespondentsexpected

atleast“Some”change


The market research industry truly took off in the late 1930s, driven largely by George Gallup’s accurate forecast of a Franklin Roosevelt victory over Alf Landon in the 1936 US presidential election.

Researchers, particularly public opinion pollsters, refined their methods thereafter, especially during and immediately after World War II. Beginning with the failure of the Gallup, Crossley and Roper organizations to forecast the 1948 presidential election correctly, however, there has been no shortage of doom and gloom predictions for the entire industry. Those predictions have not come true. Instead, the industry has grown steadily, year after year, decade after decade. Nevertheless, the industry has not changed fundamentally during this time either. For instance, the widely-heralded Internet revolution did not transform the way research is delivered. Teams of people are still manning the assembly lines.

What’s in store for the future? According to the GRIT report, we should expect to see more of the same--only 6% of research professionals expect to see “tremendous change” over the next five years. An implication is that brands will continue to commission copy tests, concept tests, tracking studies, customer satisfaction research, and the like; and researchers will continue to man the assembly lines.

2014: Smart Automation. Technology Without Compromising Quality

George TerhanianGroup Chief Strategy & Products Officer, Toluna

LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/pub/george-terhanian/1/a64/87Website: www.toluna-group.com

GRIT Commentary

Might the masses—the 94% that do not expect to see tremendous change--be mistaken? Anything is possible. As my former colleague Gordon Black used to say, “Dinosaurs did not realize they would become extinct.” The telltale signs are there too in the GRIT survey. For instance, speed, convenience and quality are important to research buyers and sellers, more so than in the recent past. And “budgetary constraints” tops the list of factors driving change in how data are collected.

What might cause “tremendous change”? The most likely scenario involves smart automation. In short, savvy entrepreneurs who understand market research will figure out a way to replace people—lots of them--with technology without compromising quality, thereby leading to a leaner, faster, more cost-effective market research industry. Stranger things have happened.

Savvyentrepreneurswhounderstand

marketresearchwillfigureoutawayto

replacepeople…withtechnology,without

compromisingquality


How Do Researchers REALLY Feel

About Change?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Understanding how researchers really feel about the direction in which the market research industry is moving has its challenges. First, there’s a potential self-selection bias – many of those folks who really don’t like where the industry is heading may have abandoned the industry as this point. In fact, the whole idea of innovation by definition can create a “great divide” among researchers; while there are some people who may have joined the industry as innovation drivers and leaders, others may have joined research to perpetuate their strength as deliberate thinkers. In that case, innovative methods can actually seem to be a complete disconnect with the way they think.

We then used respondents’ answers to this question to tailor the set-up of the implicit response exercise (MindSight¨), and then used CART models to better understand the various paths to Optimism and Pessimism. It’s interesting to note that we, of course, looked at various demographic and firmographic variables as well in order to better understand Optimism and Pessimism, and other than a few skews (e.g., Optimists tend to have worked in the industry fewer years and work at larger organizations), these variables had little impact on predicting Optimism.

Before we dive into the results, here’s a brief description of the MindSight¨ technique. It is an emotional discovery tool which is based on three foundational elements: the Emotional Discovery Window, the MindSight¨ Motivational Model, and the MindSight¨ Image Library.

Additional bias may be introduced by the fact that we are asking this question within the GRIT survey, which is primarily a survey about innovation. In other words, it’s pretty difficult to admit to oneself that you are pessimistic about the direction of the industry, within a survey that dedicates itself to identifying and understanding trends in innovation.

And finally, the shear direct nature of asking the question and relying on self-report is biased due to editing and distortions from respondents presenting themselves in a favorable light.

That said, we wanted to understand the emotions associated with feelings of optimism and pessimism –understanding, of course, that the sentiments uncovered in our analysis are from an “innovation lens.” So, we started by asking a simple question:

“In general, are you personally more happy about the direction market research is moving in OR more concerned about the direction market research is moving in?”

Methodology


Despite the frequency of talk about the need to “evolve or perish” and the near universal sentiment that the market research industry is undergoing significant transformation, it seems that the great majority of us are optimistic about the direction the industry is headed.

Ingeneral,researchersbelievechangeisgood–wewillsurvive!

Perspectives on the Market Research Industry


WhoaretheOptimistsandwhat’sdrivingtheiroptimism?The manifestation of Optimism seems to have two distinct pathways.

Among Optimists, a path to optimism we call “Riding the Wave” describes the aspiring innovation leaders in our midst. These individuals believe innovation will drive the future of market research; they embrace innovation, and are excited and energized by the prospects offered by innovation. These professionals understand that innovative techniques help them be successful by overcoming some of the challenges of traditional techniques and by providing superior insights that go beyond what is feasible with more traditional methods.

“Strategic Curators” place a similar importance on innovation, but focus on the need to strategically curate innovative techniques alongside more established/traditional methods. The “baby” of established strategic research and analytic techniques is safe with these researchers, even as they discard the “bathwater” of tired and outdated practices. They look at new innovative techniques as offering new choices that add to established research science, and they have truly found greater insight by incorporating the best of both toolkits -- the “tried and true” and the “latest and greatest.”

For Optimists about the future of market research, the direction of industry change is seen foremost as opportunities for personal growth. In addition to opportunities for creating success (Achievement) in the workplace – and being rewarded for that success, Optimists also see industry change as an opportunity to distinguish oneself within the industry (Identity) – by innovating and standing out from the crowd. Interestingly, for Optimists, market transformation isn’t just about individualistic gains, but also about progress for the research community as a whole. Optimists see the challenges facing the industry as a force that can bring the research community together (Belonging) – creating opportunities to work cooperatively. Change for these individuals is truly a “rising tide that lifts all boats.”

Optimistsexpectbothindividualandcommunalsuccess

ForOptimists

research,the

directionof

industrychangeis

seenforemostas

opportunitiesfor

personalgrowth

Optimists Most Chosen Images/Words

The future holds MORE opportunities to feel...


WhoarethePessimistsandwhat’sdrivingtheirpessimism?

Pessimistsfearfailureanddisengage

For a large group of Pessimists, the experience of working in today’s changing professional environment creates a sense of being dragged along “Kicking and Screaming.” These researchers do not believe in the value of innovative techniques, have extreme levels of fear about change, and only resort to using more innovative techniques because they are required to do so. Clearly innovation is outside of their core comfort zone. Rather than enthusiasm, these researchers report an overall disinterest in the new directions that MR is taking.

By contrast, Pessimists indicate a different set of emotional expectations about the future of MR that is being brought on by rapid innovation and change. They are generally insecure about the future – they feel at risk and vulnerable. This insecurity is directly expressed as a fear of failure, being professionally “defeated” by the challenges of industry change. In the end, Pessimists respond to the stress and insecurity about the future with “flight”, in the form of disengaging from the research community, feeling ultimately disinterested in industry happenings.

For a second group of pessimists, negative expectations appear to be predominately driven by concerns for personal prospects for embracing change. This group of “Hand-Cuffed and Constrained” sees the value and potential offered by innovation and really wants to be part of innovation, but for various reasons (e.g., client driven or resource driven), they are constrained from using these techniques. These professionals feel as if they are stuck standing on the sideline watching the cool kids “ride the wave.”

The future holds MORE opportunities to feel...

Pessimists Most Chosen Images/Words


For the “Novelty Surfer” Optimists in this study, it seems that the world just gets better and better. New ideas, new techniques – all of this novelty is what gets these professionals excited. And it certainly seems that there is no real end in sight. We are not experiencing an “innovation bubble” that will burst at some point; technology continues to evolve at a rapid pace, our culture evolves right along with it, and the field of market research is swept along with the culture at large. Ideas and technologies that are only newly born this decade will mature and become accepted and refined practices; still newer and more evolved ideas and techniques will continue to emerge. Like any group of consumers who are “early adopters,” the Optimists will likely continue to embrace the new, and seek the newer still.

The “Strategic Curators” will play a very important role in this seeming tsunami of changing technologies and techniques. A lot of important thinking has created layers of sound practices and principles, and this material – fundamentals about how to think about markets and about consumers, will not be made obsolete by a mobile device. These professionals are the group that will insure that the lessons of time will not get lost in the spirit of the moment and help to guarantee that market research maintains and expands its roles as an important strategic resource for the world of business.

For the Pessimists who feel that their enthusiasm is constrained by conservative bosses or bureaucracies – patience may prove the best council. Innovations that demonstrate proven value today often become the standard practices of tomorrow. Though, it must be said, that some of these constrained professionals may want to consider more accommodating work environments. It’s best to avoid being the last blacksmith, even if the farmer is paying you well.

As to our colleagues who appear to be “kicking and screaming” at the prospects for new technology, we can’t offer much solace. The current wave of MR innovation is really just beginning, and it doesn’t look as if it will be ending anytime soon. The world is changing around us in all respects and this change appears to be accelerating. Information technology, biotechnology, nanotechnology – all of these frontiers for radical innovation will continue to “trickle down” to innovations in market research. So if change in general is somewhat anathematic to some of our colleagues, then their current outlook of pessimism doesn’t stand much chance of a turn-around, and perhaps it’s time for a change of career.

WhatdoesitmeanforthefutureoftheMRIndustry?

ForthePessimistswhofeelthattheirenthusiasmisconstrainedby

conservativebossesorbureaucracies–patiencemayprovethebestcouncil

Market research is no different than any other industry. If you don’t understand and react to changes in the market, a competitor will and your business will be at risk. For our industry, change is more than evolutionary – it is disruptive. Think about Kodak as an example of the power of disruption. Per Clay Christensen, disruptive change typically starts small and cheap, which is why it is dismissed by the more mature competitors in the market.

According to the latest GRIT Report, more than three in ten are using techniques/methodologies today that either didn’t exist or were nascent five years ago. The purists in our industry would say these new techniques do not stand up to the rigor of survey research. Thus, many will dismiss non-traditional solutions and regard them as the flavor-of-the-day. The non-believers will be sorely mistaken.

Consumers have already driven a sea of change in the way we gather information. With the proliferation of smart phones, apps, wearable devices, gamification and so on, consumers of all ages have myriad options at their fingertips to share both solicited and unsolicited opinions, more and more without any type of remuneration for their time. If we can’t control the amount of data that is being generated, we must learn to harness it. It is our responsibility to help our clients sift through overwhelming amounts of information. Non-traditional competitors will be front and center, ready to take risks and bravely apply decision modeling to new ways of gathering data. The Big Data phenomenon will continue, and traditional custom market researchers will suffer if they don’t learn to fuse disparate sets of information, regardless of the sample design.

What does it all mean?

Lynnette CookeGlobal CEO of Kantar Health and CASRO Board Chair, CASRO

Email: [email protected]: CASROWebsite: www.CASRO.org

GRIT Commentary

The fusion of quantitative and qualitative information also will be necessary. To a great extent, a thirst remains to answer the WHY? question – indicated by 20% of clients who plan to do more qualitative work. The ability to answer “Why?” has to remain an important filter in what we do and how we do it – important but not the only filter. New techniques are great, but our industry’s focus needs to remain on the ultimate goal our clients have – providing insights to the behaviors of their customers that will enable them to grow their business.

Therefore, appropriate fusion and application of data rests on our shoulders. Companies that choose to forge ahead with an open mind, combined with a healthy dose of caution, will stand a greater shot at surviving this disruptive phase. We also can’t forget this is a people business – listening, strong relationships, great people and knowledge of our clients’ businesses will largely win the day in supplier selection, as evidenced in the last GRIT Report.

Our industry is undoubtedly changing, and some will be left behind. However, disruption creates opportunities. The question remains, who will grab the opportunity to move our industry to the next generation? The choice is yours.

Disruptioncreatesopportunities


http://www.twitter.com/CASRO

Acknowledgments

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

ConceptOriginator,GRIT

ExecutiveEditor:

Leonard Murphy – GreenBook

QuestionnaireAuthors:

Bill Weylock – Gen2 AdvisorsDavid Bernstein – Gen2 AdvisorsJon Puleston – GMI InteractiveTodd Powers – Gen2 Advisors

DesignConsultation:

Ron Sellers – Grey Matter ResearchGregg Archibald – Gen2 AdvisorsLukas Pospichal – GreenBook

DataCollection:

GMI InteractiveGrey Matter Research

DataProcessing:

Averbach TranscriptionsDapresy DecoodaGMI InteractiveQ Research Software

Translations:

Rafael CespedesResearch & Results

OnlineDashboard:

Q Research Software

Infographic:

Dapresy

Client-SideIn-DepthInterviews:

Grey Matter Research

NonconsciousSegmentation:

Forbes Consulting

SamplePartners:

ACEIAIMANDAAVAIBAQMaRCEIMESTIME–NEUROBIOMARKETING

AMERICASGreenBookInsight Innovation ForumInternational Market Research

SocietyMichigan State UniversityMRIANewMRNGMRNMSBANYAMAQualitative Research Consultants

AssociationResearch & ResultsSAIMOThe Nielsen School at Wisconsin

School of BusinessThe Research ClubThe University of Georgia & MRIIThe University of Texas Arlington

ReportAuthors:

Masood Akhtar – Bottom-Line AnalyticsDavid Forbes – Forbes ConsultingJeffrey Henning – ResearchscapeLeonard Murphy – GreenBook Todd Powers – Gen2 AdvisorsRay Poynter – Vision Critical UniversityRon Sellers – Grey Matter ResearchEllen Woods – Gen2 Advisors

Publication:

GreenBook¨

CommentaryProviders:

CASROCivicom, Inc.Clear Seas ResearchConfirmitGutCheckIpsos SMXKL CommunicationsL&E ResearchpureprofileTolunauSamp



www.GreenBook.org | www.GreenBookBLOG.org

GreenBookSync.org | www.InsightInnovation.org

GreenBook brings innovative resources to market

researchers on both sides of the table and offers

effective marketing opportunities in a variety of

targeted media. Our publications and events provide

stimulating, practical, and timely perspective on

topics and issues relevant to the industry.

The GreenBook media platform includes the flagship

GreenBook Directory, the GreenBook Blog, the

Insight Innovation eXchange series of conferences,

the GreenBook Research Industry Trends Report, a

Webinar Program, a bi-weekly Email Newsletter, and

a variety of social media channels.

About GreenBook

The all-new GreenBookDirectory connects buyers with suppliers of market

research services by providing detailed information on research firms and

by supporting client-supplier interaction with new online tools.

With our ContentMarketingProgram, we help market research companies

better demonstrate their strengths and capabilities, position themselves as

experts, and generate more qualified leads.

InsightInnovationeXchange events offer a window into the future of

the industry with emphasis on using innovation in solving real business

challenges through better insights.

GRITReport.org Winter 201461

http://GreenBookSync.org

Sample Partners

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

ACEIwww.acei.co

Our association was created with the objective of associating the companies within the sector, seeking to improve and maintain the quality of market research in Colombia, determining common quality standards and promoting a serious and reliable work, guided by ethics and following our country’s legislation.

AIMwww.aimchile.cl

Chile Marketing Research Trade Association. The most relevant MR provider are part of AIM.

ANDAwww.anda.cl

ANDA members are the most relevant companies that invest in advertising in the country, which in turn explain most of the number of annual advertising investment. The range is very wide partners. ANDA is part of World Federation of Advertiser.

AVAIwww.avai.org.ve

The Venezuelan Association for Market Research Agencies represents the interests of its affiliated marketing research Firms and strengthens global core values and best practices of the industry in Venezuela through its international presence and local events and standards.

BAQMaRwww.baqmar.eu

BAQMaR is the research association that aims to make research COOL again through its forward thinking online content and events.

CEIMwww.ceim-argentina.org.ar

CEIM (Cámara de Empresas de Investigación Social y de Mercado) brings together the leading companies in the Consumer and Opinion Research industry. Its main objective is to establish mechanisms ensuring the responsible operation of this business sector in Argentina. It promotes flawless quality as key differentiator of their company members performance within their specialty, and advises, defends and represents their members, acting in the quest of their recognition within the community.

ESTIMEwww.estime-neurobiomarketing.com/en/

Consumer’s NeuroInsight Lab with full capabilities of EEG, GSR, fNIRS, ET and HRV equipment tied to proprietary neuropsychology modeling and teamed with a dedicated group of highly skilled cognitive neuropsychologists and industry specific experts. The Firm is a pioneer in the development and deployment of innovative market research solutions for FCMG, IT and Services Markets.

InsightInnovationForumwww.linkedin.com/groups?gid=41051

The Insight Innovation Forum is a LinkedIn group actively managed by GreenBook. Its mission is to enable learning and open discussion of all aspects of market research & insight innovation.

InternationalMarketResearchSocietywww.uniresearch.info

The main focus of the International Market Research Society is on delivering value to the clients, improving productivity throughout the research process, data quality management, and rigorous cost control.

MichiganStateUniversitymarketing.broad.msu.edu/msmr

The Broad Master of Science in Marketing Research is a specialized graduate-level degree for people who want to build or accelerate their careers in marketing research. There are two program formats: a one-year, full-time program that starts in January, and a part-time, 21-month hybrid program that is mostly online, with several on-campus sessions.

MRIA-ARIMwww.mria-arim.ca

The Market Research and Intelligence Association represents all sectors of the market intelligence and survey research industry in Canada and is its single authoritative voice.

NewMRwww.newmr.org

A collaborative endeavour, designed to help co-create the future of market research by combining the best of the new with the best of the old.

NextGenMarketResearch(NGMR)www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=31804 and

www.nextgenmr.com

The market has changed, the customers have changed, why should consumer insights be the same? NGMR is an invitation-only group for analytics-professionals who want more than traditional market research.

NMSBAwww.nmsba.com

International Association for everyone with a professional interest in Neuromarketing.


QUALITATIVE RESEARCHCONSULTANTS ASSOCIATION

NYAMAwww.nyama.org

NYAMA raises the profile of marketing and marketers. It prepares marketers to thrive in new roles, develop expertise and grow new capabilities. NYAMA inspires, supports and celebrates brilliance in marketing.

PrinciplesofMobileMarketResearch&MRIIwww.georgiacenter.uga.edu/mrii

Principles of Mobile Market Research & MRII are proud education partners of GreenBook; MRII is a non-profit educational institute established to serve as a source of education programs and training material for the marketing and opinion research industry. The Principles of Market Research and the Principles of Pharmaceutical Market Research are online certificate courses administered by the University of Georgia.

QualitativeResearchConsultantsAssociationwww.qrca.org

The Qualitative Research Consultants Association is a vibrant global organization of qualitative researchers immersed in the most exciting work being done in the field. QRCA offers opportunities to connect and stay current on the latest in qualitative research.

Research&Resultswww.research-results.com

Research & Results publishes leading market research media in print, online and mobile: Research & Results magazine, StudioGuide (viewing facilities), IT-Guide, web sites and an email newsletter. The annual Research & Results show in Munich, Germany, is the leading international trade show for market research.

SAIMOwww.saimo.org.ar

SAIMO is the institution founded in 1996 that brings together all professionals in marketing and opinion research in Argentina.

TheNielsenSchoolatWisconsinSchoolofBusinessbus.wisc.edu/centers/ac-nielsen-center-for-

marketing-research

The Marketing Research MBA offered through the A.C. Nielsen Center, at the Wisconsin School of Business, is the premier full-time marketing research MBA program in the country. Students are given the business acumen to work in cross-functional teams, the research and statistics foundation to successfully manage research projects, and the marketing knowledge to translate results into business programs that impact the bottom line.

TheResearchClubwww.theresearchclub.com

The Research Club organizes free social events for everyone involved in the market research industry. Come along and make new contacts, catch up with former colleagues, and develop new opportunities. We know you’ll have a great time!

UniversityofTexasArlingtonwww.uta.edu/msmr

The MSMR Alumni Association (MAA) is a nonprofit association for graduates of the Masters of Science in Marketing Research (MSMR) program from the University of Texas at Arlington. MSMR is a practical, hands-on program designed to prepare students for careers in marketing research. Students learn how to meld logic with creativity, quantitative data with qualitative insights, and intelligence with intuition to solve marketing problems and create business opportunities.


Research & Production Partners

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

AverbachTranscriptionwww.avtranscription.com

Averbach Transcription specializes in making qualitative researchers happy. Simple rates, fast turnaround.

Bottom-LineAnalyticswww.bottomlineanalytics.com

Full service analytics consultancy offering media mix modelling, brand equity modelling, KPI dashboard development, cutting edge social media language analytics and customer segmentation. Our consultants have a total of over 100 years of direct analytics experience with major global blue chip clients.

Dapresywww.dapresy.com

Dapresy specializes in providing a business intelligence tool specifically designed for professional market researchers who want to analyze, present and distribute dynamic results from their research studies. Through innovative design and customized InfoGraphics, Dapresy provides visually engaging, easy to use dashboards that deliver comprehensive solutions.

Decoodawww.decooda.com

Decooda’s SaaS enables brands to analyze big data in real-time to identify the emotions and drivers of behavior that brands can use to predict and shape consumer behavior. Our actionable intelligence supports the entire product lifecycle, from brand development to in-market performance. Decooda delivers business results based on evidence, not conjecture and speculation.

Gen2Advisorswww.gen2advisors.com

Gen2 Advisors tackle the issues generating the most change, the most exciting opportunities and the greatest traumas for insights organizations. Through reports, advisory services, and consulting, we lay out the new ways of solving marketing problems. At Gen2 Advisors, we concentrate our business on what’s happening in insights. Nothing more, nothing less.

GMIInteractivewww.gmi-mr.com

From intelligent sampling to survey engagement software to sample management and custom reporting, GMI adds value at every stage of the research process. With millions of deeply profiled double opt-in panelists across 40 proprietary panels, GMI offers a wide range of respondent access in a single, trusted partner.

GreyMatterResearchwww.greymatterresearch.com

Grey Matter Research is a consumer insights company with a passion for research that makes a difference. We believe in working as a research partner rather than a vendor, providing high levels of service and flexibility, employing creativity to address your business problem, and forming long-term relationships with the people and organizations who depend on us.

QResearchSoftwarewww.q-researchsoftware.com

Q is analysis software for market researchers. From basic tables, plotting and mapping to segmentation with latent class and trees. Q is quicker, smarter, better. Report by exporting to PowerPoint or online dashboards.

Researchscapewww.researchscape.com.

Researchscape International drives publicity with PR surveys that help organizations build awareness, demonstrate thought leadership, and generate leads. Researchscape professionals write the questionnaire according to research-industry best practices, field it to a representative panel of U.S. consumers, and analyze the results. Researchscape clients benefit from “Do It For You” research at “Do It Yourself” prices similar to the cost of renting survey respondents.

TheForbesConsultingGroupwww.forbesconsulting.com

Forbes Consulting provides its clients with marketplace advantage, driven by superior psychological consumer insight. With our proprietary MindSight¨ Technologies, we leverage neuroscience to uncover insights about the emotional drivers of decision-making and behavior - using a technique that is affordable, fast and globally scalable.

VisionCriticalUniversitywww.visioncritical.com

At Vision Critical¨ we power insight communities, online groups of customers and prospects that help you get to the heart of how your customers think, and why they do the things they do. Insight communities can be local or globla, targeted or broad, short-term or long-term, and can include hundreds, thousands or even millions of people.


Innovative Technology SolutionsMarketing Research Support Worldwide

Commentary Providers

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

CASROwww.casro.org

Founded in 1975, CASRO represents 330+ research organizations in the U.S. and abroad, all of which annually reaffirm their adherence to the internationally respected CASRO Code of Standards. CASRO member benefits include a strong government and public affairs program, expert legal guidance, an industry-specific insurance program, benchmarking surveys and superb staff training and networking opportunities via webinars and conferences held throughout the year.

Civicomwww.civi.com/marketingresearch

Civicom is a leader in serving the marketing research community with advanced virtual communications solutions. We maintain a strong industry presence in facilitating IDIs and Focus Groups (CyberFacility¨), Online Bulletin Boards (Chatterbox¨) and Mobile Research. We offer a proprietary Transcription System (TranscriptionWing™), Translation, and Recruiting Services(CiviSelect™).

ClearSeasResearchwww.clearseasresearch.com

www.myclearopinonpanel.com

Clear Seas Research is a full service business-to-business marketing research supplier offering solutions designed to provide decision-makers in construction, food & beverage, packaging, security, manufacturing, and gaming industries, with the information required for strategic decision making. With unique panel access to industry decision makers via myCLEARopinion, Clear Seas Research is focused on providing brand positioning, new product development, customer experience and marketing effectiveness research solutions.

Confirmitwww.confirmit.com

Confirmit is the world’s leading SaaS vendor for multichannel Voice of the Customer, Employee Feedback, and Market Research applications. The company targets Global 5000 companies and Market Research agencies worldwide with a wide range of software products for feedback / data collection, panel management, data processing, analysis, and reporting.

GutCheckwww.gutcheckit.com

GutCheck is an on-demand community solution that recruits specific customers in minutes and delivers robust insights in hours. Our software and services provide a real-time, turnkey solution that enables researchers and marketers to deliver the high quality answers of traditional research vehicles at a fraction of the time and cost.

IpsosSMXwww.ipsossmx.com

We provide our clients with research focused on social engagement and consumer interactions. Our goal is to help clients inspire and accelerate business growth by putting the consumer voice at the heart of your organization.

KLCommunicationswww.klcommunications.com

KL Communications is a collaborative research agency that specializes in co-creation via communities and CrowdWeaving™.

L&EResearchwww.leresearch.com

L&E Research provides superior recruiting nationwide with top rated facilities in Raleigh, Charlotte, Tampa & St. Louis since 1984.

pureprofilewww.pureprofile.com/business

For over a decade, Pureprofile has facilitated authentic connections between customers and brands. Committing years of groundbreaking software development has made Pureprofile leaders in data driven technology and engagement solutions that are redefining modern relationship marketing.

Tolunawww.toluna-group.com

Toluna is a pioneer in the dynamic world of marketing research, data collection, reporting and visualization. Toluna pioneered world’s largest social voting community where people have fun and feel valued while expressing their views. For brands, this leads to deeper, richer insights that inform the important decisions they make to strengthen their businesses.

uSampwww.uSamp.com

uSamp is the technology leader in sample and insights solutions providing automation, mobile and global solutions for marketers. Based in Los Angeles, with five offices in the United States, Europe and Asia, uSamp has been recognized in Inc.’s 500|5000 exclusive ranking of the nation’s fastest-growing private companies.


Advertisers

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

AIMRIwww.aimri.net

AIMRI is the unique worldwide trade association for professional Market Research agencies. Members of AIMRI offer both Local and International research either through their own resources or by acting as the lead agency in a suitable consortium for major International Projects.

C+RResearchwww.crresearch.com

At C+R Research, a full-service marketing insights agency, we’ve been helping brands grow for over 50 years by delivering great research, deep perspective and committed client service. We’re known for best-in-class methodologies, high-quality analytical insights and delivering senior-level attention throughout every phase of our clients’ projects.

Communispacewww.communispace.com

Communispace is the consumer collaboration agency uniquely equipped to harness the power and inspiration of consumers to drive business growth. Headquartered in Boston, MA, Communispace has been the fastest-growing consumer insights firm in the US for the last four years, delivering unparalleled consumer engagement and business impact, with more than 700 communities launched to date.

Decipherwww.decipherinc.com

A marketing research services provider, Decipher specializes in online survey programming, sampling, data collection and data reporting. Utilizing proprietary Web-based applications, Decipher integrates state-of-the-art technology with traditional research techniques. Decipher is all about uncovering opportunities in whatever territory is explored with clients. As a true partner, Decipher isn’t interested in just data, but also about what that data represents for each client.

Dubwww.dubishere.com

With over 600 communities hosted on IdeaStream™ in 2012 alone, it’s easy to see why agencies and brands the world over say it’s their platform of choice on which to engage consumers for insight, ideas and collaborative innovation. IdeaStream™ is an intuitive web-based platform that fits with your needs, be they short or long term.

Gongoswww.gongos.com

Gongos’ approach to consumer intelligence supports decision-making for Global 1000 companies. The company offers clients multiple levels of engagement to address their ongoing business challenges: custom research, data integration and insight curation. O2 Integrated, its decision sciences practice, harmonizes enterprise and research knowledge through consultative retainerships.

Questerwww.quester.com

Quester is the industry’s leading innovator of qualitative research. Hundreds of online conversations are conducted at a time with state-of-the-art moderating technology and the language (not the text) is analyzed by linguists to expose golden nuggets of intelligence otherwise missed.

ResearchNowwww.researchnow.com

Research Now, the leading digital data collection provider, powers market research insights. We provide access to millions of quality respondents around the world through online panels, as well as mobile, digital and social media technologies.

SchlesingerAssociateswww.schlesingerassociates.com

Schlesinger Associates provides outstanding recruitment for any qualitative or quantitative methodology. Our offices are strategically located across key markets the US, the UK, France and Germany. An uncompromising commitment to your success sets us apart.


The Next rEvolution in Insights Starts Here.

2 days in Santiago »300+ global experts »

Santiago de ChileApril 8-92014

Learn more atwww.iiex-latam.org

Corporate Partners

70+ provocative presentations »100+ inspiring speakers »

The GRIT Report tries to fill in the information gaps with data so that stakeholders can make informed decisions with a higher probability of success. And like all research efforts, the data is just part of the picture: there must be a contextual frame of reference to tie it all together.

There are only a handful of us around who are not in the business of market research any longer but are making the market research industry our business. In essence that means that I talk to a lot of people, I read a lot about topics important to MR, and I have the privilege of being asked to help many folks solve their business issues as they relate to insights. What I learn forms my own context, so when I read GRIT it’s through the lens of what I know to be true from my own experience.

Here are some of the lessons I learned in 2013 that impact my view of GRIT data. Perhaps it will be useful as you put your own pieces together.

Insightsarebeginningtobesexyforinvestors:1. As more and more of the mechanics of research shift toward scalable technology and IP, investors are beginning to find our industry interesting. Every week now brings news of new investments in analytics, data collection channels, and insight-enabling technology. Often those businesses don’t fit into the traditional definition of market research, but make no mistake: they are insights plays and money is pouring in at an accelerated rate. That is good news for those embracing tech and looking for growth capital, not so good news for service-based businesses operating in an increasingly competitive and margin-squeezed environment.

Final Thoughts by the Editor

Leonard MurphyChief Editor & Principal Consultant, GreenBook

Email: [email protected]: www.linkedin.com/in/leonardfmurphyTwitter: lennyism Website: www.greenbookblog.org

GRIT Commentary

Clientsaretakingthebullbythehorns:2. More and more client organizations are becoming very actively involved in transforming the industry. Dozens of global brands are engaged in some type of future-proofing of their insights capabilities. Whether through funding innovation labs, startup accelerators, or direct investment, brands are taking an aggressive role in helping create the solutions they need to fuel insights-driven competitive advantage. Single-source data, neuroscience, Big Data, image analytics, wearables, 3D printing, interactive visual displays, virtual reality, and omni-channel media engagement is where their interest lies.It’saboutrelationships,butcheaper,faster&better3.

areimportanttoo:We certainly see the desire for the skills and expertise listed in the “Drivers of Supplier Selection” section, but since I am often asked to help brands identify and engage with new suppliers, I know the cheaper, faster & better factors are paramount. Suppliers need to understand that the same old, same old just isn’t acceptable anymore, no matter how good you think your relationship is or how captive the client is to your trackers or norms.

I believe that the future is bright, just different. In a world driven by data and characterized by complex human behavior we can and should be the heroes if we can let go of the past and embrace the possibilities of the future. If you take nothing else away from this edition of GRIT I hope you’ll hold on to this: As long as we stay focused on delivering business impact, value, and innovation, MR will be just fine.


http://www.twitter.com/lennyism

in a single phase of research.

Pub: GRIT Pocket Guide GRIT/0114Ad purchased: full page, 4-colorFile Format: PDF/X-1aBleed: 8.50 x 11.125 inTrim: 8.25 x 10.875 inLive: 7.75 x 10.375 in

The best thing to happen to your pocket since the pocket protector.

For more about Research Nowor for a custom quote, contact us at [email protected].

This app is research whiz certified.

2 statistical calculators:

Data on 38 countries:

Calendars:

DOWNLOADFREETODAY

© 2014 Research Now. All rights reserved.