Worth Their Weight In...

by Beth Rounds and Lock Collins, Cambiar Partners

Over the past year, the Cambiar partners have been writing, presenting and blogging about The Winds of Change within the MR industry.  Leading companies across the value chain are listening, evaluating business models and setting strategy for the future.  In addition, new entrants, many from outside our industry, are adding to the mix as well as challenging the status quo.  With all the change happening, executives are also realizing that their talent needs are changing.  Joan Lewis, Global Consumer and Market Knowledge Officer, P&G, said in the recent ESOMAR Global Market Research Report, “the element of research that will have to change faster is the profile of people – people who can show integrated thinking, courage and leadership, with less emphasis on back-room analysis or sales. …what we need are more talented people who can build the industry.”  We agree! Where in the past the individual project was king, now the relationship dominates. Corporations expect their business partners to know the business, bringing a holistic array of information to bear on the issue at hand.

All this is good, but are MR executives really embracing this “New Talent for A New Age”concept?  I asked Lock Collins, Cambiar’s Human Resources Practice Leader to weigh in on the topic.

Beth: In the area of human resources and talent, what do MR executives want these days?

Lock:  Clearly clients are looking for  those unique individuals with grounding in market research combined with the ability to understand and discuss marketing with senior management the key business issues that they face.  In our industry, that’s a rare combination. Of course, they need to have a track record of success and must be passionate about the industry.

Also, it seems that we’re moving away from the traditional “hunter-farmer” models with companies structuring around account managers that “have it all”.  Desirable candidates can listen to a client’s problem, develop solutions, oversee the project team and provide insights.  These people are truly the “renaissance men/women” of the market research industry.  Add on top of this, individuals will need to have a POV on the New MR world and be story tellers.  This is a tall order for most!

Beth: Are clients starting to hire specialists or mostly generalists?

Lock: Right now, I think MR firms are still looking for generalists, especially at the account management level.  We’ve had discussions with firms regarding their interest in hiring researchers outside traditional marketing and business channels.  For example, some companies have hired graphic designers to support their reporting and presentations, and others are experimenting with hiring individuals that understand story telling — journalists for example.  I can see this trend picking up steam in the next couple of years as the new modalities gain acceptance.

Beth: No company can afford a wrong hire.  What recommendations do you have for improving a company’s success rates?

Lock: Managers have to be serious about interviewing and selection.  All too often hiring is treated way too casually.  There are a number of best practices in this area that I’d be happy to share at a later point, but in my experience great managers are looking for candidates who possess those intangible behaviors that will lead to success in the position.   We’re doing more to help our clients focus on the desired behaviors and characteristics, as well as a strong organizational fit vs. the traditional list of research methodologies and knowledge of the end-client’s industry.

Beth: On the flip side – it still seems like a competitive employment market.  Do you see any trends in what employees or prospects want from an employer?

Lock: Our sense is that individuals with 0- 5 years of experience may be operating in a traditional employment environment, not much different than twenty years ago.  At the more senior levels, where our practice is focused, candidates are consistently looking for a few things:

• Autonomy and the ability to develop solutions in an unconventional way – not the way “we’ve always done it”.  With this autonomy comes a blurring of work and personal life, with individuals wanting to working on their own schedule in their own location.  Some of our clients prefer to have employees engaged in the day-to-day activities of an office.  We’re finding that more and more of our clients, however, are expressing the flexibility for senior level employees to be located anywhere.
• Among our candidates, we are also noticing the desire to walk away from the large established research suppliers. Many more are now attracted to entrepreneurial opportunities in which they can “build something”.
• Finally, senior candidates are not looking for a job.  They are interested in moving a vision forward and financially sharing in the results.

Beth: There are a lot of recruiters out there.  What makes Cambiar’s Talent Practice different?

Lock: As part of any corporate strategy, executives look to the major trends that are affecting clients and research companies alike. The MR industry is poised for great change and we are starting to see how those macro trends play in to the types of talent that we will require in the future.  As we all know, a successful business strategy can’t stop at a new and improved sales and marketing plan. To borrow a concept from Jim Collins of Good to Great fame, having the right talent  in the right seats on the right bus is critical to the success of any organization.

Hitting it out of the park

by Beth Rounds, Cambiar

Recently I went to see the movie “Moneyball,” based on the true story of Oakland A’s General Manager Billy Beane.  And while I am not a hard core baseball fan, I went because I was intrigued by the story – how a leader (Billy Beane) used statistics and analytics (he was considered the precursor of the trend that has swept the baseball world—sabermetrics) to do the impossible – build a team of no names, win 20 games in a row and change the business of baseball forever.

Much has been written about the story and the broader messages about running a business. I’d like to “hit” a few ideas your way as you plan for 2012 and beyond.

What is so unique about the story?

He faced challenges head-on. The A’s were losing their best players to other teams with large payrolls. Instead of playing victim or ignoring the problem, Beane “claimed it”, found a solution and took a big risk by bringing in an Ivy League economics grad to analyze players stats, replacing the traditional way of assessing and recruiting talent. By caring more about a player’s ability to get on base, Beane challenged conventional wisdom and proved his detractors wrong.

He managed objectively. Prior to this time, scouts assessed players in a substantially more subjective manner. And, while experience and “gut feel” matter in decision making, Beane brought a new dimension to the sport. By analyzing players by the numbers and statistical probabilities, he brought objectivity to the table.

He was transformed as a leader. Billy had the strength of character and courage to stay the course even when his plan didn’t seem to be working.  He evolved as a leader, going from being a distant manager to one that was fully engaged with the sport, his team, and the players.

With much change happening in our industry, we should think more like Beane.  Ask yourself and your leadership team the following questions:

• Do we understand the changes that are impacting marketing research?
• Are we able to assess our current state and create a plan going forward?
• Are we willing to put everything on the table and challenge the status quo?
• Are we managing by the numbers? Do we know what drives profitable revenue?
• Do we have the right talent for the future? And if not, how do we create a plan for hiring new talent for this new age?
• Does our current staff have the right skills to surprise and delight our customers?

Business is about making intelligent choices. And now more than ever we need to challenge conventional wisdom in order to chart a new way forward. Beane chose an unknown and risky path, and in the end he changed his organization, himself, and the industry.  My kind of leader!  Your’s too?

Would love to hear your thoughts on this topic.  Contact me at: beth@consultcambiar.com

Additional resources related to this topic:

http://www.affinnova.com/blog/bid/106401/Transformation-is-Not-an-Option

http://www.fastcompany.com/1794118/8-strategies-to-fight-ordinary

http://www.fastcompany.com/1794942/how-to-be-distinctive-christian-louboutin-shoes

In a sure sign of its continuing resurgence as an association of relevance in the United States, the Marketing Research Association has mounted an excellent new conference aimed at the corporate researcher. Intelligent partnering with the Market Research Executive Board (MREB) and Quirk’s meant that not only did 400 delegates turn up but that there was a slate of generally good speakers to entertain and inform them.

Among the most widely acclaimed of these were Ian Lewis of Cambiar (full disclosure – I am Cambiar’s managing partner), Chris Frank of American Express and Andrew Abela of Extreme Presentations. Lewis set the stage by reviewing the future of research in the coming decade, replete with fresh data from the Cambiar Research in the Future Study. Chief among his points that resonated with the crowd: the gap between the desired state of corporate researchers to be true thought partners in their organizations and their relative lack of doing so. Lewis charted out a number of key trends that will materially affect research in the coming years, including the corporate researcher’s’ need to deliver more with less; the rise of DIY; the organic river of knowledge that will increasingly be available to organizations outside of the norm of what we currently think of as market research; a taxonomy of the new modalities that are available to us; the rise of the global middle class; and the need to find, recruit and train new types of talent for a new age.

Frank picked up on this theme by giving very practical advice to organizations on how to make sense of the tsunami of information with which they are faced – and the key questions that need to be asked in order to do so. Abela then carried this forward by giving his audience a radical view of the research presentation  -  no more than 5 slides, no bullets, no color, no clip art. Just a laser focus on content. The perfect presentation, he said, could have nothing added nor anything deducted from it.

Of great interest in interacting with participants here was the degree to which these clients are more willing to experiment with new modalities and new ways of approaching research than are their primary suppliers, the research agencies. It seems that, in this instance, clients are once again pointing the way to change to those that service them. There is a palpable hunger among client researchers to find ways in which to be more effective, more impactful and more provocative – and much discussion on the necessary mindsets, structures and tools that would enable this to take place.

Kudos to MRA, MREB and Quirks for a valuable new addition to the conference circuit.

Results from The Cambiar Future of Research Study

by Ian Lewis, Partner

Cambiar recently unveiled findings from “The Cambiar Future of Research Study” at the AMA Research & Strategy Summit in Chicago.  The study looked out to 2020 and heard from 160 corporate researchers who have a wide range of experience, level and industry backgrounds.  We also heard from research company executives, and I will be presenting the integrated results at the CASRO Annual Conference October 19 in Palm Beach, Florida.

What did we learn?

Researchers are expecting major change.  Almost 60% of corporate research VPs expects major transformation by 2020; 70% expect this to be evident by 2015.  One quarter of corporate researchers expects that the leading research company in 2020 does not exist today!  Another one fifth expects that Google or Facebook will be leading the pack.

Corporate researchers will be consultants more than researchers.  Virtually all corporate researchers believe that successful market researchers will have great consulting skills.  This trend is already manifesting: Best Buy, Novartis, Pepsi and Starbucks have all recruited former BCG or McKinsey consultants to leadership positions.

We’ll have global responsibilities.  Researchers believe that growth in MR spending will be driven from outside USA/Europe, and that jobs will have global or international responsibilities.

The future is about listening, measuring emotion, and mining knowledge.   Nine out of ten researchers believe consumer listening will lead to major changes.  Emotion measurement is expected to be part of the standard toolkit, although the jury is still out as to whether neuroscience and biometrics will be commonplace.  Three in four researchers expects that marketing issues will be addressed by mining existing knowledge rather than initiating a project. 

What about today? How are we doing?

Not well. Only 25% of corporate researchers are “very satisfied” with the role of their department.  We asked about barriers to success, and heard some fundamental issues.

What is the top Barrier?  “We are not operating as Thought Partners” (defined by Market Research Executive Board as an ongoing consultant to the business, an informed business partner, opportunity identifier or strategic thought partner).   There is a huge gap today between corporate researchers’ desired role as a Thought Partner (92% want this), and their actual role (37% have a Thought Partner role). Six in ten have an “in the trenches” role; they are brought in too late, treated as order takers, or have business teams that want to control information.

How can we become Thought Partners? Support from the top is a key enabler. Given that many research departments are operating in an “in the trenches” mode today, there is a need to negotiate a “Management Contract” with senior management about how research should engage and operate with the business. [I discuss this in High-Impact Research: The New Strategic Partner. Research World, March 2010].   

The TOP enabler is for research to identify and communicate insights that deliver business impact, going beyond the “What?” and “So What?” to the “Now What?”  This requires a different way of working, with a focus on collaboration, synthesis and storytelling.

What are the training needs? Top of the list are the journey from researcher to consultant; and storytelling and other impactful communication skills.  Additional training needs include synthesis skills, development of rich insights, and learning about new research modalities.

So, what should corporate research leaders do?  Here’s a short “to do” list:

1. Become a great consultant (or risk being replaced by one!)
2. Negotiate a Management Contract to enhance your role
3. Evaluate staff capabilities and implement training for consulting skills, storytelling, synthesis and insights for impact
4. Leverage and integrate new research modalities
5. LEAD!!  A sea change is coming

I would enjoy hearing from you.  Contact me at Ian@consultcambiar.com.

Keys to Success

Simon Chadwick, Managing Partner

One of the strongest and most frequent complaints we hear from market research clients is that suppliers “don’t get their business” – i.e. they don’t display a fundamental understanding of the client’s category, needs, competitive context or even internal processes and decision making. I often hear this in relation to new business pitches, where research companies come in ill-prepared to discuss their wares in the context of the client’s business and its needs. It’s also one of the top reasons that clients give for being less than satisfied with their current suppliers.

Recently, we were asked by a research supplier to define “getting the business”. What do clients mean by this and how should research companies act to show that they really do “get it”? Well, here are a few thoughts.

First of all, “getting the business” is a mindset. You are curious about the client; you have an insatiable desire to understand everything about them. You are able to put yourself in their shoes, to empathize with them. From that mindset comes meticulous preparation, whether what you are preparing is a pitch, a proposal or a report. What data can you find, from as wide a set of sources as possible, that will help you understand the client better? What previous research in their category is there that can help paint a picture of their competitive context? What has been published about them in the business and trade press? What do you know about their products? What can you find out about their financial health and their strategy? (A good tip here is to find podcasts or recordings of recent investor and analyst calls they have held).

Given this mindset, here are five things that demonstrate that you really do “get” the business:

1. You demonstrate an understanding of key financial metrics (P&L’s, balance sheets, ROI, etc.)

2. You show an understanding of marketing and have an appreciation for what marketers do and the situations they face

3. You demonstrate deep knowledge of the client company:

- its process (for example, in new product development or strategic planning)

- its culture (how do decisions get made? how open are they to innovative thinking and approaches?)

- you know who the key stakeholders are, their roles and their needs

- you understand and can speak the company jargon.

4. You show real understanding and learning of the brand and its category

- you know the brand’s positioning

- you are aware of the history and trends impacting the brand and the category

- you understand, and keep up with, the competitive landscape

- you are abreast of the key issues and opportunities

- you know what the knowledge base of the MR department is concerning the brand and the category — or, if you don’t, you make it your   business to do so.

5. Finally, you are aware of what role MR plays in the organization

- does it have a strong objective voice?

- to whom does it report?

- is it viewed as a strategic partner or a tactical necessity?

- what is the relationship between your client and their client — and what are their client’s primary needs?

Do and demonstrate all of this and you will show that yes, you get the business – and, who knows, you may get the business!  Good luck!

]]> http://www.consultcambiar.com/2011/08/to-get-the-business-%e2%80%93-get-%e2%80%9ctheir%e2%80%9d-business-2/feed/ 0 http://www.consultcambiar.com/2011/07/do-your-reports-and-presentations-create-action-and-business-impact-%e2%80%93-or-groans/ http://www.consultcambiar.com/2011/07/do-your-reports-and-presentations-create-action-and-business-impact-%e2%80%93-or-groans/#comments Tue, 19 Jul 2011 17:40:24 +0000 cambiaradmin http://www.consultcambiar.com/?p=509 by Ian Lewis, Partner

I led client research departments for more than twenty years, and the thing that made me “groan” the most was when I received a draft PowerPoint exceeding 50 pages – sometimes 100 pages!   I recently interviewed an Insurance CMO, and he told of Sunday afternoons in Maine laboriously poring through research decks by the fireplace.  Another CMO said “Research tends to deliver 50-page PowerPoint’s – that’s not the pace of the business.”  A third CMO went further to say “The presentation should take 10 minutes. The conversation should last for hours.”

Why are we still delivering an obsolete product?  Do market research companies have a secret deal with the companies that sell paper and toner?

Do your team’s reports and presentations spark action by your clients?  Do they utilize storytelling techniques to engage the audience and make an emotional connection that is remembered and passed along?  Do they contain insights that connect with business action and impact?  Do they get to the “Now What?” (What your client should do) or do they stop at the “What?” (What you did or found).

Based on my experience as a client who has faced “Death by PowerPoint” too many times, here are seven things that – in combination – will get you started on the road toward killer presentations.  These seven are focused on business context, structure, insight and storytelling.  Our next blog will expand on storytelling, plus speak to format, design and how reports are utilized by the client.

1. Set a limit of 15 pages (this is generous) – the rest goes in an Appendix or on the client’s portal
2. Use just ONE of these pages for Business Context and Methodology
3. Make sure you know the business context and decision to be made, and that you get to the Now What? (What the client should do)
4. Know who the audience is for the presentation, and how it will be delivered (in person, by webcast, phone, or just sent?)
5. Write the story BEFORE you begin on the deck
6. Collaborate.  Don’t try to come up with insights in isolation.  Any good management consulting company gets a senior team together to work on insights and the Now What? – So why do researchers tend to work alone?
7. Make sure you have a true insight – an “aha” that connects with business action of value- not just “findings” that are now labeled “insights”

Want to improve your impact?  Cambiar recently launched Communicating For Impact Training Program in response to a number of requests for consulting and training in this area.  Our highly interactive, three-step program combines training in insight development and communications skills so that your team can create reports and presentations that deliver business impact for your clients.    We review your team’s reports and presentations, then incorporate our feedback into an interactive seminar, and follow up with individual coaching to make it stick.  Contact Ian Lewis – ian@consultcambiar.com or Simon Chadwick – simon@consultcambiar.com for more information.

by Ian Lewis, Cambiar Partner

The next few years will see a paradigm shift for market research – to borrow from Andy Grove in “Only the Paranoid Survive” we are approaching a strategic inflection point.

As part of the ARF Research Transformation Super Council, a small group of us envisioned how research will look ten years from now.  The volume of available information will continue to grow exponentially, driving the need and opportunity for synthesis and knowledge creation.  Our fundamental premise is that research in 2021 will represent a continuous and organic flow of knowledge, which Kim Dedeker (Chair of the Americas for Kantar and former head of market research for P&G) named “The River”.  There are 1,000′s of tributaries that feed the river, representing individual information sources.

There will be a fundamental shift in how we approach business decision making and influence of strategy. We will move away from a project orientation toward an ongoing process of knowledge access and utilization. Value creation will be catalyzed from the organic knowledge found in the flow of the river.

Today we answer marketing questions by designing a study.  Tomorrow we first fish the river of information and only then decide if a study is needed – if so, it will be focused by what we learned from fishing the river.  That old 80/20 rule will be flipped – today we answer 80% of questions with a new study, tomorrow it will be 20%.

Corporate leaders will develop fluid, search-able knowledge collection capabilities – an insights-on-demand resource that will not require interruptions to initiate individual studies for most business questions.  These “corporate information rivers” will be private, not public – they will contain digital information (from social media, websites, mobile, etc.) and will also contain proprietary information from market and media research studies, competitive intelligence, customers, sales and other sources.

What will happen structurally to client market research departments? With so much information available, who in the client company will “own” this resource? Truly progressive research departments will take the lead and be rewarded with a bigger role, but less progressive departments will lose relevance and risk being dis-intermediated.

And what will happen to research companies? Will today’s research companies develop or acquire complete capabilities to become a true partner with progressive client departments?  Or will they fail to adapt and lose relevance along with the less progressive clients?  Advanced analytics will flourish, and new entrants will challenge entrenched research companies. Will tomorrow’s leading companies come from an advanced analytics heritage?  Will the leaders be IBM? Google? Facebook? Or will WPP just keep buying more stuff?  Or will it be a company that isn’t even on the radar? (E.g. Autonomy – http://www.autonomy.com/)

Nobody knows exactly how and when this will play out.  But we’re convinced that major change will be evident within five years.  Now is the time to stay on top of how clients and existing research companies are evolving, and to study new entrants, so that you can develop and implement your strategy.

For more, read the March 2011 JAR article “The Shape of Marketing Research in 2021” at http://www.consultcambiar.com/knowledge-center/

Coloring Outside the Lines

The Age of Creativity

By Simon Chadwick, Managing Partner

“We’re all doomed!”

“No, this is the age of Aquarius!”

These are, in a nutshell, the two opposing arguments that we hear and read at MR conferences, in the blogs and in our trade magazines. The one group would have you believe that the survey will be dead by 2020 (the title of a workshop at this year’s MRS Conference in London, Research 2011) and that researchers who don’t get that will end up like the dodo. Tom Ewing of Kantar more ghoulishly predicted that the survey (and, presumably, survey researchers) will be the “walking dead”. The other believes that this is just the start of an incredibly creative era in research and that our best years are ahead of us. Which is right?

I am naturally a “glass half full” person and so I tend to err towards the Aquarius group. But why this fuss and why now?

The answer is the plethora of new methodologies, techniques, sciences and approaches that seem to be invading the market research industry and sometimes even surrounding it with guns drawn, preparing to take down the poor old venerable survey and all the other traditional techniques that we have been using since the dawn of MR time. Neuroscience, biometrics, gaming, web analytics, text analytics – hell, anything “analytics” – crowdsourcing, netnography… you name it and it’s the next big thing in research.

Reactions to this tidal wave of innovation tend to fall into three categories:

1)    Traditional MR techniques (read the survey, focus groups, IDI’s any other methodology based in questioning people) are on their way out and unless the MR industry wakes up to this fact very fast, it will be wither and die on the vine, much like the buggy makers at the dawn of the automotive era

2)    All of this is just a fad, a rush of blood to the collective head of the industry, and after a while we will all calm down and realize that the survey is going to be just fine. Anyway, none of these methodologies can substitute for proper probability-based sampling and finely-honed questionnaires

3)    This is the new research paradigm and it’s exciting! In ten years time, research will look totally different and we will all be better off as a result.

My own belief is that there is some truth to all three reactions – as well as much hyperbole. It is likely that the survey (and other traditional techniques) will indeed play a smaller role in the totality of consumer research, especially as we become that much more adept at fishing in the “river” of organic information that surrounds us daily. But that is not to say that the industry will not adapt – remember that the very first auto makers (of which there were hundreds) were primarily buggy makers! As it does adapt, we will fairly quickly work out which methods and techniques are indeed fads (currently neuroscience is under this spotlight) and which actually do add weaponry to our arsenal. The survey itself will not disappear – after all, it has had some fairly notable successes in its career – but perhaps the science that lies at its heart will be deployed to some of the new techniques to increase their validity and credibility. John Samuels, the veteran and incorrigible British social researcher, foresees a future that is based on probability sampling but perhaps not on direct questioning.

What is not in question is that this is indeed an era of unparalleled creativity in research. Technology has unleashed the power of research in so many ways that now things that were clunky only a few years ago (ethnography, eye tracking) are much more feasible and scalable today than they ever were; and things that were unimaginable just five years ago (web analytics) are now a powerful tool. At the hub of all this are entrepreneurs and creatives who just relish the prospect of “shaking things up”.

All power to them, I say – it makes life much more interesting and fun for us crystal ball gazers who are wondering where it is all going to end (or begin)!

Contact Simon Chadwick at simon@consultcambiar.com

P.S.  Check out:

Ian Lewis’ contribution to March JAR Editorial: The Shape of Marketing Research in 2021

Cobbler's Shoes

by Bill Guerin, Partner

Contradictions fascinate me, because if I’m able to hold the associated tension in my logically Newtonian left brain, some resolving flash of insight eventually emerges in my right brain.

We all know the story of the cobbler’s shoeless children and the related irony that sometimes those who we expect would most naturally benefit from a situation go without.  And as I think about our industry (an occupational hazard), I’m struck by some surprising ways in which clients of market research firms may be going without – and I’m also curious as to how they might feel about that.

Let me explain….

I’m currently at 30,000 feet (literally) returning to the US after conducting a 5-week series of consultative sales and account management workshops in North America, Europe and Asia Pacific.  In reflecting on these recent experiences – as well as my 5 years sales consulting experience with Cambiar and work with 50+ market research firms and over 1,000 client-facing employees – I’m seriously wondering about a few apparent contradictions with market research firms:

1.   How can we routinely give exquisite advice to our clients on ways to uniquely position their brands in targeted markets, yet so many of us try to be all things to all people, struggle with defining our target markets and lack an original and compelling value proposition?

2.   What do our end clients think about us promoting to them the necessity of collecting, processing and acting on customer feedback, yet so few of us do the same with our clients?

3.   Why do we consult with our clients on optimizing their CRM platforms without doing much of the same in our business?

4.   When we know so well the economics of maintaining an existing customer versus attracting a new one in our client’s business, why do we oftentimes fall short in establishing and executing account strategies to keep and grow our clients?

5.   When we really understand the crucial importance of a strategic plan to lead and drive our client’s business – and help our clients put those plans in place – why do so few of us have similar plans to lead and drive our business?

6.   How can we be in the question-asking business, yet when we get in front of our clients and prospects we often miss opportunities to ask good, consultative questions that uncover their core needs?

7.   How can we guide an advertiser in creating a commercial that elicits a desired emotional and behavioral response, yet so often neglect to connect emotionally with our clients and prospects?

8.  When we create disciplined processes for our clients to take new products from initial concept to successful launch, why are so many of our own product development efforts fragmented and unsuccessful?

9.   When we regularly work with our clients to understand their drivers of performance and help them establish KPIs to monitor and manage their business, why do so few of us have a similar dashboard to run our own business?

These are just a few of the many contradictions I often see.  Please understand, my intent here isn’t to whine, bash, generalize or self-flagellate, but to provoke some creative thinking and dialogue around what might be possible if we consumed more of our own medicine – the advice “Physician, heal thyself” comes to mind here.

Or if we return to our friendly neighborhood cobbler, to have a thriving shoe business, perhaps we should first consider making delighted customers of our own children.

I suspect others have thoughts and perspectives to share – would love to hear them.

Contact me at bill@consultcambiar.com

Friend or Foe?

Winds of Change Series

by Beth Rounds, Partner

DIY (Do-It-Yourself) is certainly a hot topic these days with frequent announcements about new start-ups and product offerings.  Just this week, two more companies announced DIY solutions for online qualitative and panel management.  While early entrants, Survey Monkey and Zoomerang, defined the space, the DIY category has grown well beyond “quick and easy” feedback tools.   In fact, Cambiar estimates DIY end user spending to be $700-$800M worldwide, when you combine all license revenues from easy feedback, EFM/Enterprise, data analysis, qualitative and custom panel software.  Even if you take the non-MR license base (HR, event, education customers) out of the picture, it is still a substantial and growing area of our industry.

What’s driving corporate users towards DIY solutions?  Let’s look at some underlying facts:

Fact #1: Doing More with Less forces introspection and innovation. To understand this, we need to remember that doing more with less means corporate researchers are being asked to be more strategic and more consultative, while budgets or information needs are not necessarily down. This is good news for researchers that offer high value services, whether internal to the organization or as a research supplier.   At the same time, companies are turning to DIY for (a) non-value-add methods (most often for straightforward work, such as idea/copy testing or CSat) and, (b) interacting with their customers or consumers via an online panel.  Once built, they can interact with the communities and panels themselves, or they can rely on their suppliers to do so for them – sometimes both are done in the same company at the same time.   For corporate insights executives, it’s all about making trade-offs and strategic choices as to where they are going spend their resources.

Fact #2: MR Technology has come a long way – baby! If you’ve been to any Market Research conference in the last two-three years, chances are you noticed a real change in the exhibit hall. Joining the regular exhibitors like online panel providers, traditional software firms (IBM/SPSS, Confirmit, CfMC) and a small set of full service companies, are a whole new set of service providers that offer self-service or assisted serve options—most of these founded as SaaS software providers. Companies such as Revelation, Global Park, Vision Critical, GutCheck, MarketSight, Medallia, Survey Analytics, Evolve 24, Survey Writer, Nunwood’s Fizz, among others have sprung up in the past 5-10 years. Most, if not all, are enjoying higher growth rates despite the recession.   Their solutions are highly intuitive and rich in functionality.  Even the “low end” tools, such as Zoomerang and Survey Gizmo offer amazing features for the hands-on user. I suggest you take a look–you will be amazed.

Fact #3: DIY has gone way beyond a standalone tool to being integrated into the way we work. It’s pretty obvious that the younger generation of MR professional (for fun check out Beloit College Mindset list) is very comfortable with survey and reporting software, social media and mobile applications.  “Hands on” is more of the rule vs the exception with this group and will only increase in acceptance going forward.

What conclusions and implications can we draw from these trends?

1.      DIY technology can deliver  faster and better ways to gather and analyze information. It can also enhance respondent engagement, giving consumers more opportunities for deeper involvement, dialogue and co-creation.    Yet technology is just a tool and we desperately need to adapt our skills to this new environment.  A new type of researcher will evolve (see Ian Lewis’ latest blog) to include data synthesizing and storytelling.  If you need help in this area – Ian Lewis would be happy to share his insights on the topic.

2. The old adage “garbage in – garbage out” still holds true whether you are doing the work yourself or working with a research company.  Of course, if you do the work yourself, you have no one else to blame for any ‘garbage out’!!  There are also different ways to improve the process.  At TMRE, both Microsoft and 3M talked about Marketing – not MR – conducting DIY surveys.  Obvious risks are disintermediation of MR and bad quality research.  Microsoft MR spent a lot of time developing “guard rails” to protect against bad research.  3M MR took over conducting the research, providing a highly cost effective DIY solution managed by the MR dept.   For a supplier, offering a DIY capability that includes a guard rails component to help ensure quality could be attractive.

3. Training is now important than ever. Kudos to those companies, academic institutions and suppliers that offer research skills training – in person or via the web. A new venue – The  New MR Virtual Festival – offered an innovative, on-demand conference venue that has amazing potential for learning and sharing going forward.

4.      New and exciting opportunities exist for traditional suppliers to pair up with new technology players in order to create new offerings and business models – ones that combine value add consultative skills with new collection and delivery platforms.  If you aren’t aware of what’s out there – we can point you in the right direction.

What do you think?  Is DIY a Friend or Foe?   I vote Friend.