grit report

GREENBOOK RESEARCH INDUSTRY TRENDS REPORT

WWW.GREENBOOK.ORG/GRIT 2015 Q3–Q4

GRIT REPORT

Empower your organization with YouGov’s data

products and powerful custom research capabilities

Track your brand’s perception and performance in the US and 23 international markets daily with YouGov BrandIndex.

And use our newest product, YouGov Pr to better understand your customers and key consumer segments across 100,000 attitudinal, behavioral and demographic variables. YouGov Omnibus is a fast and cost way to survey opinions,attitudes and behaviors for a nationally representative sample or hard toreach segments.

And turn to the market expertise of YouGov Custom Research to help you make smarter decisions about your industry, customer

LEARN MORE ATTODAY.YOUGOV.COM/RESEARCH

BrandIndex

Pr

Omnibus

Custom Research

CONTENTS

CONTACTS:LEONARD F. MURPHY

Chief Editor & Principal Consultant

(770) 985-4904 [email protected]

LUKAS POSPICHAL

Managing Director


CHRIS KOSAR

Business Development Director


GREENBOOK

New York AMA Communication Services Inc.

234 5th Avenue

New York, NY 10001

WWW.GREENBOOK.ORG/GRIT

3 Welcome

4 Executive Summary

6 Methodology And Sample

10 Traditional Method Usage

20 New Technology Adoption & Usage

26 Training, Keeping Up &

The Researcher Of The Future

36 Client – Supplier Partnership

39 Research Transformation In Action

48 Financial Outlook For 2016

50 Voluntary Verbatims

62 Final Thoughts

64 Acknowledgments

COMMENTARY

15 Shared Goals Linked By A Shared Challenge

— Melanie Courtright, Research Now

19 Travel Companions — Dan Weber, itracks

21 Behavioral Science For Busines Impact

— Aaron A. Reid, Sentient

23 The Market Research Industry: Early Adopter

Or Laggard? — Matt Warta, Gutcheck

25 Surviving And Thriving In The Wave Of

Automation And Technology Integration

— Patrick B. Comer, Lucid

43 Killing The Error Of Omission

— Brett Watkins, L&E Research

47 What Price Relevance? Research

Transformation And How We Get From Here

To There — Jackie Lorch, SSI

1

OUR PARTNERS...

AMERICAS RESEARCH INDUSTRY ALLIANCE

LEONARD F. MURPHY

Chief Editor & Principal Consultant

[email protected]

(770) 985-4904

WELCOMEWelcome to the 18th edition of the GreenBook

Research Industry Trends Report, using data

collected in Q3 & Q4 of 2015.

GRIT adapts to the rapid changes in the

insights industry by exploring new topics such as

the nature of partnership, the use of and satisfaction

with panels, the evolution of survey best practices

in the mobile age, training resources used by

researchers, challenges that are keeping them awake

at night, and many other topics.

We keep tracking traditional method usage,

new technology adoption, and financial outlook.

Some results are intuitive but some are quite

surprising, indicating an industry that is embracing

change but struggling to reconcile its traditional role

and techniques with today’s demands.

As with the previous GRIT edition, we

shortened the survey itself, increased engagement

via design, and incorporated a higher proportion of

verbatim responses to allow for more richness and

depth. To a great extent, GRIT is a test case for how

to bridge the gaps between the past and the future

in both design and analysis to deliver an impactful

and insightful report; you, the reader, will be the

judge of how well we achieve that mission.

We continue our series of thought-provoking

commentaries written by a number of thought

leaders in the industry. These views on the

implications of various GRIT findings provide a

wider context for the report’s results.

GreenBook partners with many organizations

to make the GRIT Report evermore representative of

the industry on a worldwide level. While this is still

a challenge in some regions, we are making steady

progress towards that goal.

Our research partners include AYTM, Gen2

Advisors, Lightspeed GMI, mTAB, NewMR,

Q Research Software, Researchscape International

and Stakeholder Advisory Services. Our design

partner is Keen as Mustard Marketing.

All partners have contributed significant time,

energy, and resources to the GRIT effort and deserve

a big THANK YOU for their support.

As always, I think you will find the report

informative, provocative, and useful. Enjoy!

3

Go to www.GreenBook.org/GRIT

to read the GRIT Report online

4


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

THE AGE OF PURE QUAL OR QUANT IS OVER

PANEL PROVIDERS COULD USE MORE LOVE

RESEARCH STILL DOESN’T GET MOBILE

TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION: CLIENTS VS. PROVIDERS

THE CALL FOR CHANGE HAS BEEN CLEARLY HEARD

MOST IN-DEMAND SKILLS

Most researchers surveyed (68%) have used both methods in the past year, though pure qual

researchers outnumbered pure quants 2 to 1: 21% of researchers surveyed had conducted only qualitative research, compared to 10% who had conducted only

quantitative research.

What are the most in-demand skills? Here is

the rank order based on all those who indicated their organizations would be

hiring more of these folks.

Over three-quarters of clients and insights

providers say they need to transform all or part of their

business to remain competitive.

When we look at buyers/users and sellers/providers of research we see many similarities and some

interesting differences.

The columns with green arrows show where the tech use figures are higher for the

suppliers (providers) of research. This may reflect

greater awareness providers have about the techniques

that are being used.

The columns with blue arrows show where the users/buyers

of research (clients) have higher numbers for tech use.

These cases may reflect situations where clients are

not buying their services from traditional market research

sources.

Only 40% of survey researchers who use panel

providers are very or completely satisfied with their

providers.

The results show that we stillhave a way to go. 45% of

suppliers and 30% of clientsboth indicate that 75% -100% of

all surveys they deployare designed for mobile participation. That leaves

well over 50% of all surveys NOT mobile optimized.

GRIT respondents divide into three roughly equal groups:

those who say survey lengths are ideally less than 10

minutes, between 11 and 15 minutes, or over 16 minutes.

53%58%63% 53%

35%

10%13%

77%

12%47% 4%

2%

1-5 6-10 11-15 16+

LOI < 10 MINUTES IS IDEAL FOR 52% OF CLIENTS & 36% OF SUPPLIERS

Very or Completely Satisfied

Not at all, Slightly or Moderately Satisfied

SUPPLIERSCLIENTS

10% 26% 29% 35%

70%

55%

30%

45%

LOI (MINUTES)

Social Media Experts

Percentage of organizations recruiting expertise in these categories

Question: Do you think there is a need to transform all or part of the business to remain competitive?

Data Scientists

Designers And Data Visualization Experts

Marketing Or Business Strategists

NOT SURENO

YES

Mobile Surveys

Online Communities

Social Media Analytics

Text Analytics

Mobile Qualitative

Big Data Analytics

Webcam-based Interviews

Mobile Ethnography

Eye Tracking

Micro-surveys

Behavioral Economics Models

Research Gamification

Facial Analysis

Prediction Markets

Neuromarketing

Crowdsourcing

Virtual Environments/VR

Biometric Response

Internet Of Things Data

Wearables-Based Research

Sensor/Usage/Telemetry Data

54 4654 4654 46 53 38 26 26 26 40 27 25 27 25 27 25 28 17 17 12 14 17 17 12 14 17 17 12 14 17 17 12 14 17 17 12 14 17 17 12 14 22 15 16 9 11 10 5 5 5 6

72

50 41

38

36

32

3433 28

2723

21 1916

1511

10 108

9 7

SUPPLIERSn=810

CLIENTSn=212

% of the companies who were using technologyin 2015

WELL OVER 50% OF ALL SURVEYSARE NOT MOBILE OPTIMIZED

Quant only

Qual only

10%

21% A combination of Qual and Quant

69%

5

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

THE AGE OF PURE QUAL OR QUANT IS OVER

PANEL PROVIDERS COULD USE MORE LOVE

RESEARCH STILL DOESN’T GET MOBILE

TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION: CLIENTS VS. PROVIDERS

THE CALL FOR CHANGE HAS BEEN CLEARLY HEARD

MOST IN-DEMAND SKILLS

Most researchers surveyed (68%) have used both methods in the past year, though pure qual

researchers outnumbered pure quants 2 to 1: 21% of researchers surveyed had conducted only qualitative research, compared to 10% who had conducted only

quantitative research.

What are the most in-demand skills? Here is

the rank order based on all those who indicated their organizations would be

hiring more of these folks.

Over three-quarters of clients and insights

providers say they need to transform all or part of their


When we look at buyers/users and sellers/providers of research we see many similarities and some


The columns with green arrows show where the tech use figures are higher for the

suppliers (providers) of research. This may reflect

greater awareness providers have about the techniques

that are being used.

The columns with blue arrows show where the users/buyers

of research (clients) have higher numbers for tech use.

These cases may reflect situations where clients are

not buying their services from traditional market research

sources.


providers are very or completely satisfied with their

providers.

The results show that we stillhave a way to go. 45% of

suppliers and 30% of clientsboth indicate that 75% -100% of

all surveys they deployare designed for mobile participation. That leaves

well over 50% of all surveys NOT mobile optimized.

GRIT respondents divide into three roughly equal groups:

those who say survey lengths are ideally less than 10

minutes, between 11 and 15 minutes, or over 16 minutes.

53%58%63% 53%

35%

10%13%

77%

12%47% 4%

2%

1-5 6-10 11-15 16+

LOI < 10 MINUTES IS IDEAL FOR 52% OF CLIENTS & 36% OF SUPPLIERS

Very or Completely Satisfied

Not at all, Slightly or Moderately Satisfied

SUPPLIERSCLIENTS

10% 26% 29% 35%

70%

55%

30%

45%

LOI (MINUTES)


Percentage of organizations recruiting expertise in these categories

Question: Do you think there is a need to transform all or part of the business to remain competitive?

Data Scientists



NOT SURENO

YES

Mobile Surveys

Online Communities


Text Analytics

Mobile Qualitative

Big Data Analytics

Webcam-based Interviews

Mobile Ethnography

Eye Tracking

Micro-surveys



Facial Analysis

Prediction Markets

Neuromarketing

Crowdsourcing


Biometric Response

Internet Of Things Data

Wearables-Based Research

Sensor/Usage/Telemetry Data

54 4654 4654 46 53 38 26 26 26 40 27 25 27 25 27 25 28 17 17 12 14 17 17 12 14 17 17 12 14 17 17 12 14 17 17 12 14 17 17 12 14 22 15 16 9 11 10 5 5 5 6

72

50 41

38

36

32

3433 28

2723

21 1916

1511

10 108

9 7

SUPPLIERSn=810

CLIENTSn=212

% of the companies who were using technologyin 2015

WELL OVER 50% OF ALL SURVEYSARE NOT MOBILE OPTIMIZED

Quant only

Qual only

10%

21% A combination of Qual and Quant

69%

For this report, the analysis is

based on 1,497 interviews

Q3-Q4 2015 Q1-Q2 2015 Q1-Q2 2014 Q3-Q4 2013 Q1-Q2 2013 Q3-Q4 2012

GRIT SAMPLE SIZE BY WAVE

GRIT SAMPLE BY CLIENT VS. SUPPLIER

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

3000

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

0

IncompleteComplete

Research buyer or clientResearch provider or supplier

Perc

enta

ge o

f Res

pond

ents

Res

pond

ents

590 307 1996 0 0 01497 1551 1342 2229 1375 818

Q3-Q4 2015 Q1-Q2 2015 Q1-Q2 2014 Q3-Q4 2013 Q1-Q2 2013 Q3-Q4 2012

METHODOLOGY AND SAMPLEGRIT respondents are recruited by email and social

media channels via GreenBook and GRIT partners.

These lists are comprised of both research providers

and clients. The sample size for this latest wave

continues to be in line with previous waves, with

more of the respondents coming directly through

GreenBook than all other sources combined.

The mix of respondents has varied during the 13

years of this study, but within fairly narrow bands.

We hold relatively steady at 78% of respondents

identifying themselves as suppliers (n=1,167) and

22% identifying themselves as clients (n=330),

For this report, the analysis is based on 1,497

interviews, although for some questions, base

sizes may be higher or lower due to skip patterns,

rotations, routing, and other factors. Unless

otherwise noted, all analyses should be assumed to

be based on that size.

Here is a comparison of sample size over the last

several waves:

which is generally consistent with the last several

waves of the study. On the supplier side, 44% of all

respondents identify themselves as working within

a full-service market research agency.

6


North America46.23%

South America10.02%

Europe27.19%

Asia7.35%

Africa1.40%

Middle East2.20%

Oceania4.68%

GRIT RESPONDENTS BY TYPE OF FIRM

GRIT RESPONDENTS BY GEOGRAPHIC AREA

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0

44.4% 13.8% 9% 4.9% 4.4% 3.9% 3.4% 3% 2.9% 2.6% 2.4% 2.3% 1.5% 0.7% 0.6%

Full

Serv

ice

Res

earc

h P

rovi

der

Cor

pora

te In

sigv

hts

Pro

fess

iona

l

Res

earc

h Fr

eela

ncer

/C

onsu

ltant

Mar

ketin

g, P

R, o

r ot

her

user

of r

esea

rch

outp

uts

Sam

ple/

Pane

l Pro

vide

r

Man

agem

ent

Con

sulta

ncy

Res

earc

h

Surv

ey P

latf

orm

Pro

vide

r/Su

rvey

Sof

twar

e

Soft

war

e P

rovi

der

(Sta

tistic

al, T

ext A

naly

tics,

V

isua

lizat

ion,

etc

.)

Dat

a C

olle

ctio

n Se

rvic

es

firm

(CA

TI/O

nlin

e)

Adv

ertis

ing/

PR

A

genc

y R

esea

rche

r

Bus

ines

s In

telli

genc

e,

Ana

lytic

s, o

r B

ig D

ata

Solu

tions

Pro

vide

r

Aca

dem

ic o

r ot

her

Not

-fo

r-P

rofit

Org

aniz

atio

n

Oth

er D

ata

Col

lect

ion/

Fiel

d/Ta

b Se

rvic

es

Pro

vide

r

Seco

ndar

y R

esea

rch

or D

esk

Res

earc

h

Focu

s G

roup

Fac

ility

(p

hysi

cal)

Perc

enta

ge o

f Res

pond

ents

78% of respondents are

suppliers and 22% are clients

As always, we should remind our readers that

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 industry!), but

rather a snapshot of the widest swath of insights

professionals we can achieve. The report and its

findings are representative of this sample, and

although we believe it to be broadly representative

of the industry, there are most certainly some

geographical and industry subset gaps. With that

in mind, we consider it “strongly directional” and

recommend that you view it the same way.

With increased international participation, the

percentage of respondents from North America is

stable at 46%. There were some minor fluctuations in

other geographies (within a few percentage points)

with the next largest segment being Europe at 27%,

Latin America at 10% (up from the previous wave),

Asia at 7% (slightly down from the previous wave)

and all other geographies combined at roughly 8% of

the sample (slightly up from the previous wave).

7

Almost 40% of GRIT

respondents participated

via a mobile device

GRIT PARTICIPATION BY DEVICE

37% 63%Mobile PC

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0 Perc

enta

ge o

f Res

pond

ents

Due to the relatively small base sizes outside of

North America and Europe, we have opted not to

show regional breaks other than where we think it

adds comparative value. .

Almost 40% of GRIT respondents participated via a

mobile device (phone, tablet or “phablet”). GRIT was

optimized to be device agnostic in terms of the survey

design, although the length of survey was still around

15 minutes. Interestingly, the drop-off rate was higher

among PC and laptop users, indicating that a “mobile

first” design can mitigate completion rates and

increase respondent engagement.

For this round, we also tracked participation by

mobile vs. PC and the results are quite telling:

Later on in this report we will look at how GRIT

respondents view “mobile first” design, however,

based on our own sample, it must be pointed out

that it is increasingly important to account for a

large percentage of mobile device users within any

sample, whether it be B2B or consumer.

8


The age of the pure qualitative

or quantitative research is over

Qualitative research – unlike

quantitative research – is

still primarily a synchronous,

person-to-person phenomenon

TRADITIONAL METHOD USAGE

We asked a series of questions related to the usage

of “traditional” methods through the dichotomy of

Qualitative and Quantitative research approaches.

When it came to methods that the respondents have

used this year, 9 out of 10 have used quantitative

research methods, while just under 8 out of 10 have

used qualitative methods.

Option Response %

Qual 79%

Quant 90%

Option Response %

Qual only 21%

Quant only 10%

Both qual and quant 68%

Neither 0%

The age of the pure qualitative or quantitative

research is over. Most researchers surveyed (68%)

have used both methods in the past year, though

pure qualitative researchers outnumbered pure

quants 2 to 1— 21% of researchers surveyed had

conducted only qualitative research, compared to

10% who had conducted only quantitative research.

Despite many online methodologies, qualitative

research – unlike quantitative research – is

still primarily a synchronous, person-to-person

phenomenon. Respondents were asked to identify

the research methods they use the most (up to five

methods per respondent). The top four methods are

focus groups (a key method of 68% of qualitative

researchers in the past year), in-person in-depth

interviews (53% have used IDIs significantly),

telephone IDIs (31%), and in-store observations

(25%). Asynchronous, online interactions range

in popularity from interviews using online

communities (25%) to mobile studies (24%) and

bulletin board studies (21%).

Only 8% used blog monitoring as one of their go-to

qualitative methods, which is surprising given the

fact it is conducted passively and with no external

costs outside of researcher’s time.

QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

Option Response %

Traditional (in person) Focus Groups 68%

Traditional (in person) IDIs 53%

Telephone IDIs 31%

In-Store/Shopping Observations 25%

Interviews/Groups Using Online Communities 25%

Mobile (diaries, image collection, etc.) 24%

Bulletin Board Studies 21%

Online Focus Groups with Webcams 17%

Chat (text-based) Online Focus Groups 16%

Online IDIs with Webcams 12%

Monitoring Blogs 8%

Telephone Focus Groups 6%

Chat (text-based) Online IDIs 6%

Automated Interviewing (via AI systems) 3%

Other qualitative methods 19%

I haven’t used any qual techniques 0%

WHICH OF THESE METHODS HAVE YOU USED THIS YEAR?

HOW OFTEN HAVE YOU USED EACH OF THESE METHODS THIS YEAR?

WHICH OF THESE QUALITATIVE DATA COLLECTION METHODS HAVE YOU USED MOST THIS YEAR? (SELECT UP TO FIVE)

10


32% of quantitative researchers

have used face-to-face

interviews as a primary method

62% of researchers use

quota sampling for most or

all projects, 33% weight the

data, and 13% use multiple

panel providers per survey

Quantitative, in stark contrast to qualitative, is

dominated by impersonal, asynchronous automated

methods: 88% of researchers include online

surveys in their top 5, followed by 44% with mobile

surveys. Traditional CATI (Computer-Assisted

Telephone Interviewing) is a prime method of 39% of

quantitative researchers. Postal mail and IVR are not

widely used; 11% cited mail surveys and only 4% have

used IVR surveys.

Personal forms of quantitative research are still used,

despite being supplanted by online techniques: 32%

of quantitative researchers have used face-to-face

interviews as a primary method, and 24% have used

CAPI (Computer-Assisted Personal Interviewing).

Option Response %

Yes 88%

No 12%

Option Response %

Online Surveys 88%

Mobile Surveys 44%

CATI 39%

Face-to-Face 32%

CAPI 24%

Mail 11%

Biometrics / Neuromarketing 6%

Automated Measures / People Meters

6%

IVR 4%

Other quantitative techniques 11%

I haven’t used any quant techniques

0%

While 90% of researchers surveyed have been

involved in quantitative projects, 88% have been

involved with survey research (which leaves 2% of

quantitative researchers who did not use surveys).

Option

Response %

No projects Some projectsHalf of

projectsMost projects All projects Top 2 Box

Run cross-tabs 6% 16% 6% 30% 42% 72%

Use quota sampling 5% 21% 12% 44% 18% 62%

Weight the data 12% 42% 13% 25% 9% 33%

Use multiple panel providers for one survey

37% 41% 9% 11% 3% 13%

New to GRIT for this cycle is a question regarding

the frequency of certain tasks related to survey

research projects. For instance, 72% of researchers

run cross-tabulations for most or all of their survey

projects. When it comes to techniques used to

increase the representativeness of those surveys,

62% of researchers use quota sampling for most

or all projects, 33% weight the data, and 13% use

multiple panel providers per survey.

The inference is clear— researchers have adopted

convenience samples via panels. They deploy

multiple techniques to shape the data with the

purpose of being more representative of the target

SURVEYING SURVEY USERS

population. We will leave the debate on whether

that is an appropriate approach to others. For GRIT

respondents at least, these are common practices.

ARE YOU INVOLVED IN SURVEY RESEARCH PROJECTS?

HOW OFTEN DO YOU DO EACH OF THE FOLLOWING ON SURVEY RESEARCH PROJECTS?

WHICH OF THESE QUANTITATIVE DATA COLLECTION METHODS HAVE YOU USED MOST THIS YEAR? (SELECT UP TO FIVE)

11

Only 40% of survey

researchers who use

panel providers are very or

completely satisfied with the

providers that they work with

While some survey researchers can make do with house

lists and their own panel, 79% use panel providers.

Option Response %

Yes 79%

No 21%

Option Response %

Not at all satisfied 2%

Slightly satisfied 12%

Moderately satisfied 47%

Very satisfied 35%

Completely satisfied 4%

Timeliness of fielding

Purchase process

Ease of accessing

panel

Customer service

Quantity of respondents

Cost of panelQuality of

respondents

Not at all satisfied 2% 2% 2% 3% 5% 5% 7%

Slightly satisfied 11% 8% 12% 10% 17% 15% 26%

Moderately satisfied 33% 37% 36% 39% 41% 46% 42%

Very satisfied 44% 44% 42% 40% 31% 30% 23%

Completely satisfied 9% 9% 8% 8% 5% 5% 3%

Top 2 box 54% 53% 50% 49% 36% 34% 26%

Attribute CorrelationShared

Variance

Quality of respondents 0.545 30%

Customer service 0.468 22%


0.441 19%

Purchase process 0.43 18%

Timeliness of fielding 0.385 15%

Cost of panel 0.372 14%

Ease of accessing panel

0.357 13%

A majority of panel customers were very or

completely satisfied with timeliness of fielding

(54%), the purchase process (53%), and the ease of

Which attributes of satisfaction have the highest

correlation to overall satisfaction? The quality

of respondents is the primary driver, with a 0.545

correlation, explaining 30% of the shared variance

between the two measures. Next in importance is

customer service, with a 0.468 correlation (22% of

shared variance). Rounding out the top three is the

quantity of respondents available: 0.441 correlation

(19% of shared variance).


providers are very or completely satisfied with the

providers that they work with.

PANEL PROVIDER SATISFACTION

accessing panel (50%). Satisfaction was lowest with

the quality of respondents (26%), the cost of panel

(34%), the quantity of respondents available (36%),

and customer service (49%).

DO YOU ACQUIRE RESPONDENTS FROM PANEL PROVIDERS?

OVERALL, HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH THE PANEL PROVIDER(S) THAT YOU WORK WITH?

HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH EACH OF THE FOLLOWING ASPECTS OF WORKING WITH YOUR PANEL PROVIDERS?

12


While the cost of panel will

always inform purchase

decisions, it has less of a

role in overall satisfaction

While the cost of panel will always inform purchase

decisions, it has less of a role in overall satisfaction.

Cost had the second-lowest derived importance,

with a correlation to overall satisfaction of 0.372

(14% variance), just above the ease of accessing panel

(0.357, 13%).

A quadrant analysis of satisfaction vs. importance,

splitting each axis by its median value, provides a

useful way to group attributes (median values are

included in the higher quadrant for that dimension).

Key strengths, which are high in derived importance

and high in top-two box satisfaction, are customer

service and the purchase process. Weaknesses, which

drive overall satisfaction but score in the lower half

of attributes for satisfaction, center around the

quality and quantity of respondents available.

Of those items that are less important, assets

are timeliness of fielding and the ease of accessing

panel. The one vulnerability (lower in importance,

lower in satisfaction) is cost of panel.

Panel companies’ investment in providing

24-hours-a-day, 7-days-a-week customer service

through a mix of on-shore and offshore customer

service representatives has produced high

satisfaction. So has the development of online

interfaces that automate the purchase of panel for

many common respondent demographics.

However, much of the concern with panels

across social media and the blogosphere centers on

respondent quality, and that issue resonates with

the wider audience of market researchers surveyed

for GRIT.

SATISFACTION VS. IMPORTANCE

Discriminant analysis, also known as derived

importance, has greater predictive validity than

stated importance for understanding drivers of

overall ratings. However, items with low variability

– such as purchase process, which had the lowest

standard deviation of the seven attributes – may

have their real-world importance underestimated by

this analysis.

Weaknesses

Quality of respondents


Higher Importance

Lower Satisfaction

Lower Importance

Higher Satisfaction

Vulnerabilities

Cost of panel

Key Strengths

Customer service

Purchase process

Assets

Timeliness of fielding

Ease of accessing panel

QUADRANT ANALYSIS OF PANEL PROVIDERS: SATISFACTION VS. IMPORTANCE

13

Well over 50% of all surveys

are NOT mobile optimized

Clients in a 2:1 ratio to

suppliers report fielding

surveys of less than 5 minutes

WHAT PROPORTION OF THE ONLINE SURVEYS YOUR BUSINESS PRODUCES ARE DESIGNED TO WORK EFFECTIVELY ON MOBILE PHONES? CLIENT VS. SUPPLER

WHAT PROPORTION OF THE ONLINE SURVEYS YOUR BUSINESS PRODUCES ARE DESIGNED TO WORK EFFECTIVELY ON MOBILE PHONES? TOTAL SAMPLE

76% to 100%

51% to 75%

26% to 50%

1% to 25%

0%

13% 22% 15% 8% 42%0% 1% to 25% 26% to 50% 51% to 75% 76% to 100%

0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

ClientSupplier

40%

30%

20%

10%

0

Perc

enta

ge o

f Res

pond

ents

Perc

enta

ge o

f Sur

veys

Percentage of Surveys

Percentage of Respondents

Also new to this wave of the report was a series of

questions about how GRIT respondents are adapting

to mobile.

First, we asked how many of their surveys are

designed for mobile. This was a verbatim response

where they were asked to enter a whole number, and

for ease of analysis we have grouped responses into

five buckets.

The results show that we still have a ways

to go. 45% of suppliers and 30% of clients indicate

that between 75% and 100% of all surveys they

MOBILE BEST PRACTICES

deploy are designed for mobile participation, which

tells us that well over 50% of all surveys are NOT

mobile optimized.

A few differences standout between clients

and suppliers, perhaps understandably so. If we

accept the proposition that buyers of research

expect suppliers to drive best practice adoption for

all studies deployed through them, then the higher

percentage of suppliers ensuring mobile-friendly

surveys is good news, however it’s still a minority.

The numbers don’t look much better when looking

at the total sample (N=1,497), with respondents

confirming that only about 50% of all surveys are

designed to be mobile. That is certainly progress, but

we as an industry still have much work to do to fit

well in a mobile-first world.

14


GRIT COMMENTARY

SHARED GOALS LINKED BY A SHARED CHALLENGEMelanie CourtrightEVP, Products and Client Services, Research Now

Email: [email protected] | Twitter: @melcourtright | Website: www.researchnow.com

LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/pub/melanie-courtright/6/28a/42b

B etter, cheaper, faster. That’s what buyers want from panel

companies. And guess what? It’s what panel providers

want from buyers. Here’s the catch… These shared objectives are

inextricably linked by the survey instrument. Because there is a

third partner in this relationship that is often ignored – the survey

taker. If buyers want better, cheaper, faster data, then it’s time for

the survey to evolve to meet the needs of the survey taker -- Better

designed surveys, that are faster for respondents to complete, and

that are cheaper to field because they don’t result in expensive survey

abandons and panel attrition. It’s the only way everyone wins.

Online panels are no longer the new kid in town. With the first

digital panel established more than twenty years ago, the space has

matured quickly. You can now reach survey participants in nearly

every country in the world in moments, and count on them to give

you opinions that help shape business decisions great and small.

From billion-dollar due diligence, to food packaging feedback, to

advertisement testing, and most recently with helping elect our

world leaders, online panels are making an incredible contribution to

market research. They have lived up to the speed and cost promises,

and continue to disrupt with the addition of advanced technology.

Room for ImprovementGiven the amount of work conducted with panels every year, GRIT

dedicated a portion of their research to asking participants questions

about their panel relationships, including overall satisfaction, cost,

the purchase process, time in field, feasibility, customer service, ease

of access, and quality. Overall, scores were relatively similar between

agencies and corporate clients, with heavy use of the neutral point

for all measures. Buyers want more. Much faster. Still better. Even

cheaper. All while maintaining great service and yielding data that

has predictive power. The area with the largest opportunity for

improvement is the quality of respondents.

Quality data is a shared responsibility, and requires buyers and

sellers to truly partner. This is no different than it was for phone, in-

person, and mail survey research, but for reasons that we cannot fully

understand, when it comes to online research, our industry is quick to

blame the participant rather than analyse the research process.

A Simple FormulaResearch Now has spoken about quality from every aspect we can think

of, but today we want to boil it down to two simple steps: Reach people

where they live and ask them to do things they can and will do. It’s really

that simple. And this advice is no different than what we tell our clients

selling goods and services to these same consumers — Reach people and

understand them, then engage them based on that understanding.

z Reach people where they live – on their mobile devices. Globally,

this is the absolutely best place to reach them today, but requires

true understanding of where they are and how they use it. Re-

designing every interaction to respect that understanding is crucial.

z Ask them to do things they can and will do – which can be quite

a lot if we are open and honest. Panel members all over the world

are incredibly generous with their time and information if we

help them understand why we need it, and make it easy for them

to participate.

Both of these points mean shorter, better surveys. So while buyers

push for better and faster, survey participants and panel providers

are demanding the same in return. Better surveys that are shorter and

faster to complete; it’s no longer a good idea – it’s required to survive.

Research Now is more committed to the panel model than ever

before, investing more in 2015 than in our entire history. We are bullish

about the types of data and insights that can be gathered when you

combine a willing participant with a reasonable request for data.

Integrated data solutions, combining survey answers with matched

and appended data, as well as behavioral information from cookies,

tags, pixels, and meters has real appeal and potential, but requires a

healthy, trust-based relationship with an extremely large number of

people globally. The only thing standing in our way is finally learning

how to engage people in data collection that actually makes sense.

Being reasonable in our survey process. Asking them to do things they

understand. Being transparent about our activities and trustworthy

with the data. We all win, or we all fail, based primarily on how well we

design the survey.

15

The average length of

survey is 15 minutes

COULD YOU ESTIMATE THE AVERAGE LENGTH OF A TYPICAL ONLINE SURVEY YOUR COMPANY FIELDS?

COULD YOU ESTIMATE THE AVERAGE LENGTH OF A TYPICAL ONLINE SURVEY YOUR COMPANY FIELDS?

CLIENT VS. SUPPLIER

over 30

21 to 30

16 to 20

11 to 15

6 to 10

1 to 5

10% 26% 29% 19% 13% 3% 1 to 5 6 to 10 11 to 15 16 to 20 21 to 30 over 30 minutes minutes minutes minutes minutes minutes

0 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

ClientSupplier


Min

utes

The next question indicates that we may have

uncovered the reason why mobile is still not the first

thing surveys designers focus on; the average length

of surveys being fielded is also of concern.

In general, GRIT respondents are roughly

equally divided into one of three groups: their

company typically fields surveys of less than 10

minutes, of between 11 and 15 minutes, or over 16

minutes long. To dive a bit deeper, here is a full

breakdown of the specific brackets we identified:

Perhaps most surprising is the finding that clients in a

2:1 ratio to suppliers report fielding surveys of less than

5 minutes. Suppliers seem to be mostly conducting

longer surveys of between 6 and 15 minutes.

Overall, the average length of survey is 15 minutes, but as the range of responses clearly show more than a

third of all surveys are still longer, which means they are likely unsuitable for a mobile participant.

16


0 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Higher percentage of

research clients feels

that surveys should take

less than 10 minutes

WHAT DO YOU THINK SHOULD BE THE MAXIMUM LENGTH OF AN ONLINE SURVEY?

over 30

21 to 30

16 to 20

11 to 15

6 to 10

1 to 5

ClientSupplier

Percentage of Respondents0 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Finally, we asked GRIT participants what they

thought the maximum length of an online survey

should be. Importantly, we did not ask specifically

what the maximum length should be on a mobile

device, so it is perhaps our own oversight in making

that clear. The results might have been different if

we had explicitly stated that. However, since this

question followed a previous question specifically

related to mobile, we do expect that mobile was at

least a consideration in the responses.

The results could perhaps best be summed

up with “whatever we answered previously as the

average length, is the maximum length”, since the

results do in fact closely mirror one another overall,

although a higher percentage of research clients

feels that surveys should take less than 10 minutes

versus what is currently being deployed.

Again, 15 minutes is the average for what

should be the maximum length of a survey.

Considering the myriad studies by both

panel and survey software providers that support

the notion that the optimal length of a surveys

in a mobile-first world is less than 10 minutes, it

is encouraging to see that 52% of research clients

report that 10 minutes should be the maximum

length. However, only 36% of suppliers report a

similar goal, while another 32% of suppliers state

that somewhere between 11 and 15 minutes should

be the maximum length.

Often we hear suppliers stating that their inability

to migrate to a mobile first or shorter survey design

is due to client demand. GRIT data shows that this

might be true to some extent, but a large contingent

of clients seem to be embracing shorter, mobile-

optimized surveys.

Perhaps the key implication here is that suppliers who

are not responding with mobile-optimized, shorter

survey solutions to client requests are doing the client,

themselves, and the industry a disservice.

18


GRIT COMMENTARY

TRAVEL COMPANIONS

Dan WeberCEO, itracks

Email: [email protected] | Twitter: @itracks | Website: www.itracks.com

LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/itracks

A s a software supplier to the market research industry, I

sometimes find myself describing our company as the

manufacturer of “research” vehicles. Researchers drive those vehicles

while panel providers serve as the gasoline that fuels them. Research

could not happen without the contribution of each party and the

research journey can be positively or negatively affected by the

quality of each component.

Over the past 15 years, I must admit that the quality of the

research design, fielding, and reporting has caused the vehicle trouble

when making it to its destination. Online software can also present

challenges! Thankfully there are many drivers willing to provide

feedback to optimize performance.

How does the gasoline affect the research journey? When

online panels first emerged, there were evident issues in terms of

accessing quality participants. Thankfully, our industry implemented

programs (e.g. ESOMAR ’s 28 Questions/ MRIA Gold Seal) to establish

standards. Now GRIT’s most recent survey data indicates nearly 80%

of researchers use panels. However, only 40% of researchers who use

panel providers are satisfied with their providers. The two weaknesses

of high importance were respondent quantity and quality.

Running Out of GasThere is nothing more frustrating to a researcher than being

told that their project is feasible only to find it languishing in field as

deadlines loom. Quantity of panelists and feasibility remain a sticking

point amongst researchers. Only 36% of researchers are satisfied

with the quantity of panelists provided. Individual panel breadth will

remain an area of focus for panel companies to succeed.

Leaded or UnleadedI recall my Grandfather’s opinion about the virtues of leaded

gasoline and the perceived lack of quality being forced upon them by

the removal of leaded gas. Similarly, telephone sample was once the

most representative option, but now may be less desirable than online

sample due to landline removal, call display and other factors. Yet, a

general perceived lack of quality remains amongst research buyers of

online panel. Only 26% of the GRIT survey respondents were satisfied

with the quality of the respondents when purchasing online sample.

Better EnginesAs software providers, we must work with panel companies to

provide easy options for panelists to fuel the research. For instance,

some panelists prefer to respond using mobile devices and we must

offer “working” options to meet that demand. Far too often when

technology does not work, the onus falls on panel companies to

continue to sample to meet project requirements. Nothing is more

frustrating to a participant than putting in the effort to record a

video and then have the video upload fail. Therefore, itracks invested

heavily in developing technology to create a product that will reliably

upload large mobile videos in and out of WIFI zones. Additionally,

itracks’ new IDI technology makes it easier for panelists to access the

interview with an integrated telephone and easy access media view.

Another example is the qualitative recruiting process. More

immediate research opportunities, better reminder systems, more

device options, and quicker rewards fulfillment could increase

show and participation rates and ultimately the perceived quality

of panelists. Challenged with this, itracks and Research Now have

developed an on-demand recruiting method to capitalize on the

availability of participants at the moment they complete the screener,

allowing more panelists to participate when they are available.

Becoming Better DriversBeyond the obvious actions researchers can take such as reducing

survey length and monotony, researchers could perhaps step back

and ponder their own definition of quality. Far too often researchers

determine quality with such attributes as articulation, written

grammar, spelling, and even aesthetics. If we hand select “quality”

participants for our video interviews and focus groups, some panelists

may not look camera-ready, nor be grammatically and politically

correct, yet they may represent a significant portion of the client’s

market share. By determining our own version of quality, are we

ultimately robbing these panelists of their voice?

Journey TogetherWhile the numbers speak for themselves, it is my hope that the

combined efforts of all three parties will improve the opportunity for

online panelists to fuel quality research for our clients. While research

often takes us down the road less traveled, may we continue to be good

traveling companions.

19

Mobile Surveys

Online Communities


TextAnalytics

Mobile Qualitative

Big Data Analytics

Webcam- Based Interviews

Mobile Ethnography

Eye Tracking

Micro-surveys



Facial analysis

Prediction Markets

Neuromarketing

Crowd sourcing

Biometric Response


IofT/Sensor based Data Collection

Wearables Based Research

Sensor/Usage/Telemetry

TECHNIQUE USAGE

0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%-70% -60% -50% -40% -30% -20% -10%

Not Expected No Interest Not Sure In Use Considering


NEW TECHNOLOGY ADOPTION & USAGEWhen reviewing the market research approaches

and techniques in use or under consideration, we

need to keep in mind that the GRIT sample generally

consists of researchers with above-average interest

The chart below shows GRIT participants’ usage of various techniques and produces four categories of

adoption: Already Mainstream, Wide Level of Interest, Third Tier, and Niche.

FOUR CATEGORIES OF ADOPTION OF NEW TECHNIQUES

in change and new approaches. This means the data

do not necessarily provide an “audit” of the whole

research industry; rather, the data offer indication of

change and rate of change.

20


0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

GRIT COMMENTARY

BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE FOR BUSINESS IMPACTAaron A. Reid, Ph.D.Founder and Chief Behavioral Scientist

Email: [email protected] | Website: www.sentientdecisionscience.com

Twitter: @sentientinsight | LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/sentient-decision-science

A nd yet for all this help of head and brain, how happily

instinctive we remain… — Robert Frost, 1960

We all hear the critical cries in our industry to hone our analytics, to ad-

vance our storytelling skills in order to create impact from our insights,

and to be viewed as business consultants not “researchers”. And we see

the rise of mobile research and social media analysis providing us with

new sources of data to synthesize.

But what if the data that we’re analyzing to inform our impactful

storytelling is based on a fundamentally flawed understanding of

human behavior? What if our analyses place too much weight on the

role of reason and too little on the emotional and instinctive nature

of our non-conscious processes, thereby providing only surface level

insights and weak correlations with business results? Should we really

expect to become long lasting business consultants to our clients?

For more than forty years, behavioral scientists have known that

humans are systematically irrational and are driven by non-conscious

processes in the mind (and apparently the poets knew it long before

that!). And yet, the vast majority of methods we use to collect data rely

on conscious recall, and worse, the models we use to forecast future

behavior are still based on the rational economic theory of behavior.

You would think that an industry tasked with revealing the why’s

behind behavior would be falling over itself to incorporate insights and

methods from the behavioral sciences as our standard practices.

So does the 2015 GRIT report reveal researchers rushing to adopt

behavioral science based techniques?

Not exactly. From a new product adoption curve perspective,

behavioral science research techniques such as “neuromarketing” and

biometrics have yet to “cross the chasm” from an early adopter (3-16%)

to an early majority (16-50%) stage. The average adoption rate has

remained fairly constant over the past three years.

However, it is important to note that these data do not provide

clear insight on how uses of implicit association research are being

classified (some may be coded “neuromarketing” or missing). The

growth in the demand for Sentient Prime® implicit research technology,

coupled with the fact that implicit association testing is the most

broadly scaled and applied non-conscious technique would suggest

that its penetration is understated.

Nonetheless, we believe the keys to even broader adoption of behavioral

science based research techniques fall into four broad categories:

1. Sound Science.These techniques are very alluring: the non-conscious is cool, and

quantifying emotion sounds like a holy grail in consumer decision-making

research. But to avoid the shiny-new-object syndrome of trial without

recurring use, suppliers must practice sound science to produce the kind

of foundation that the industry can stand on for decades to come.

2. Market ValidationSentient invests significantly in both the scientific and business

validation of its non-conscious measurement techniques. Validation

should be judged according to a technique’s ability to provide greater

depth of insight and/or increased accuracy in predicting real market

behavior. Suppliers and clients partnering and publishing papers will

accelerate adoption.

3. Awareness of ApplicationsThe most common application associated with “neuromarketing”

is ad testing. However, Behavioral Science based research is currently

being used to great effect within: brand positioning, brand tracking,

package testing, concept testing, customer experience, attitude and

usage tests, and more.

4. ScalabilityThe increased penetration of biometric enabled wearables is

beginning to lower the hurdle of scalability for some techniques. But we

need not wait. Several techniques are already mobile and scaled globally.

Sentient Prime® implicit research technology measures non-conscious

associations on any smart device anywhere in the world, and online eye-

tracking is now available and easily coupled with implicit techniques

and facial coding.

So which will it be? Will behavioral science for business wither with

early adopters, or will it cross the chasm to broader industry adoption?

With sound science, continued validation, awareness, and scale we think

we’ll see the chasm crossed in future GRIT reports, however…

…if you find you must repent, from side to side in argument, at least

don’t use your mind too hard, but trust my instinct – I’m a bard.

— To a Thinker, Robert Frost, 1936

21

Analytics/big data and mobile-

enabled qualitative techniques

score well in terms of “In

Use” and “Considering”

Already MainstreamThis group consists of mobile surveys and online

communities, which as the trend data shows, has

already been the case for a couple of years.

Wide Level of InterestThis group has two elements, the first is the

analytics/big data group and the second is the mobile-

enabled qualitative group. Both of these groups score

well in terms of “In Use” and “Considering”.

The table below illustrates the trends in use of new techniques over the last 2.5 years:

% In Use Q1-Q2 2013 Q3-Q4 2013 Q1-Q2 2014 Q1-Q2 2015 Q3-Q4 2015

Mobile Surveys 42% 41% 64% 67% 68%

Online Communities 45% 49% 56% 59% 50%

Social Media Analytics 36% 36% 46% 45% 43%

Text Analytics 32% 33% 40% 38% 38%

Big Data Analytics 31% 32% 31% 34%

Mobile Qualitative 24% 22% 37% 43% 34%

Webcam-Based Interviews 26% 27% 34% 38% 33%

Mobile Ethnography 20% 21% 30% 35% 31%

Eye Tracking 22% 26% 34% 28% 28%

Micro-surveys 19% 25% 30% 25%

Behavioral Economics Models 25% 27% 21%

Research Gamification 15% 16% 23% 21% 20%

Facial analysis 9% 13% 18% 18% 18%

Prediction Markets 17% 17% 19% 21% 17%

Neuromarketing 9% 11% 13% 14% 15%

Crowdsourcing 13% 14% 17% 19% 12%

Virtual Environments/VR 17% 14% 17% 15% 10%

Biometric Response 7% 8% 13% 10% 10%

IoT/Sensor based Data Collection 12% 10% 9%

Wearables Based Research 7% 7% 8%

Sensor/Usage/Telemetry 7%

THE TRENDS

Third TierThis group shows substantive levels of adoption and

interest, but lack of mainstream breakthrough. This

group is comprised of eye tracking, micro-surveys,

behavioural economics, and research gamification.

NicheThe remaining items are all niche techniques at the

moment. Only a few of the GRIT participants are

using them and relatively few are considering them.

22


GRIT COMMENTARY

THE MARKET RESEARCH INDUSTRY: EARLY ADOPTER OR LAGGARD?

Matt WartaCEO & Co-Founder, GutCheck

Twitter: @mwarta | Website: www.gutcheckit.com

A ccording to the GRIT Report, the market research

industry is a strong adopter of new technologies and, in

many cases, embraces them. However, anecdotes and empirical

data suggest otherwise.

Technology Adoption Life CycleTo assess technology adoption in market research, Geoffrey

Moore’s timeless work called “Crossing the Chasm” provides a useful

model. He describes the Technology Adoption Life Cycle as having

five segments:

z Innovators (2.5% of market) – The Innovators are first to adopt.

They are intrigued by fundamental advancement and curious

about new technologies.

z Early Adopters (13.5%) – The Early Adopters buy products early

in their life cycle because they may address a need. They are

okay with “beta” products.

z Early Majority (34%) – The Early Majority focus on practicality.

They wait for innovations to be vetted by earlier adopters. Their

business is required to grow significantly and profitably.

z Late Majority (34%) – The Late Majority wait for an

established standard.

z Laggards (16%) – Laggards aren’t concerned with new

technology, whether for personal or economic reasons.

Adoption but Immature OfferingsThe data in the GRIT report suggests that our industry is

a strong adopter of technologies. Two thirds of the technologies

highlighted would fall in the Early Majority stage or better. If you

include those considering using these technologies, 57% are in the

Late Majority.

To many in our industry, the analysis above may not resonate. All

you need to do is read an industry blog or listen to conversations

at conferences, and the conclusion is there is not enough adoption

of innovation.

As another proof point, there aren’t any new technology

providers in market research generating $10s to $100s of millions in

revenue within a ginormous $40B industry, which you would expect

to see based on the aforementioned adoption data. So, what gives?

I argue that most of the offerings that are being adopted are seeing

limited use, because in Moore’s words, they are too “Generic” and they

have not achieved “Whole Product” status.

Moore defines the Whole Product as that which is required to

fulfill on the marketing promise. And for new technologies in market

research, that often means doing things faster, more affordably, at

scale, and with quality results – a lot to accomplish. And, the reason

the purveyors of the technologies listed in the GRIT Report haven’t

scaled is they can’t deliver on that promise. They are too Generic.

Clients Are Looking for the Whole ProductObservations and data suggest there is ample trial of

new technologies. After all, there is no shortage of conference

presentations or webinars where technology companies and their

innovator clients are giddy over the results from their isolated,

controlled experiments, and I’ve been there myself. It’s clear people

want to use these new technologies, or the data wouldn’t be what

it is. However, suppliers must provide the Whole Product in order

to move toward being a $100MM company capable of owning their

segment of technology. These companies must mature past a bare-

bones offering leveraged by early adopters to one that can deliver

on the marketing promise clients demand. The clients want to adopt;

it’s the supply that is lagging.

23

There are situations when

clients are not buying

services from traditional

market research sources

Base: Buyer/User=212, Provider/Vendor=810

When we look at research buyers/users and research

sellers/providers, we see lots of similarity and some


USERS AND PROVIDERS ARE NOT THE SAMEThe cells with client/supplier differences highlighted

in blue show “In Use” figures higher for research

providers. These may reflect the greater awareness

about actual use of many of the new techniques. For

example, it could be an indication of awareness that

a mobile survey was used in conjunction with an

online survey or that research gamification has been

employed to optimize the research design.

The cells with differences highlighted in red

show “In Use” figures higher for research buyers.

These instances may reflect situations when clients

are not buying services from traditional market

research sources. This could be the case for social

media analytics and big data analytics. Prediction

markets and crowdsourcing have a vibrant and

growing supplier pool outside of the mainstream

research industry and therefore appear in this group

as well.

The implication here may be that research

suppliers are missing in out on both new revenue

opportunities and a larger client base by not offering

these capabilities credibly.

% In UseBuyer/User

Provider Gap

Mobile Surveys 54 72 -18

Online Communities 46 50 -5

Social Media Analytics 53 41 12

Text Analytics 38 38 0

Mobile Qualitative 26 36 -10

Big Data Analytics 40 32 8

Webcam-based Interviews 27 34 -8

Mobile Ethnography 25 33 -8

Eye Tracking 28 28 0

Micro-surveys 17 27 -10

Behavioral Economics Models 17 23 -6

Research Gamification 12 21 -9

Facial Analysis 14 19 -5

Prediction Markets 22 16 6

Neuromarketing 15 15 0

Crowdsourcing 16 11 5

Virtual Environments/VR 9 10 -1

Biometric Response 11 10 1

Internet Of Things Data 10 8 2

Wearables Based Research 5 9 -4

Sensor/Usage/Telemetry Data 6 7 -1

The key change over the last 2.5 years has been the

arrival (in Q1 of 2014) of mobile surveys as the most

widely adopted new technique.

The most recent data suggests that researchers

begin to specialize by choosing the techniques that

best suit them. For example, the average number of

techniques mentioned as “In Use’ in Q1/2 of this year

was 5.8 but had dropped to 5.2 by Q3/4.

The data show no sign that the newest or

“hottest” techniques, such as wearables or internet

of things, are gaining any widespread traction yet.

24


GRIT COMMENTARY

SURVIVING AND THRIVING IN THE WAVE OF AUTOMATION AND TECHNOLOGY INTEGRATIONPatrick B. ComerCEO, Lucid

Email: [email protected] | Twitter: @comerpatrick | Website: www.luc.id

LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/patrick-comer-80845

O ne of the largest challenges that modern companies face is

handling the onslaught of new technologies that are both

automating and improving their core products and processes. Every

day another salesperson from a SaaS (Software as a Service), API, and

cloud-based platform is asking for 5 minutes to discuss the next big

thing to change the organization. The problem is that most of them

are really, really good and might actually improve the business. But

how am I going to vet, onboard, train, and maintain all these different

platforms that rarely play well together? It’s easy to throw your

hands up in despair, but those companies that are up to the challenge

will find huge advantages.

So why aren’t we drowning in a sea of SaaS? We’ve largely designed

our business around the opportunity:

Trends of the modern tech-centric company1. Integration – Typically, technology developers spend the majority

of the time building the core product of the business… in our case

Fulcrum. While this is still the case, we find more and more of the

engineering time is spent with integrations— product integrations

like connecting Fulcrum to ZappiStore but also process integrations

such as Fulcrum to Salesforce and NetSuite. Multiple months

of effort can be eliminated if that connection has already been

released by one of the companies: Desk to Slack for example or

Namely to Netsuite.

2. Hiring researchers that can code – Historically, there was a specific

divide between the tech team and the business units… those that

can code and those that cannot and ne’er the twain shall meet. We

are seeing a huge shift away from this model in two ways— first,

the tech teams are more integrated with the business units. It’s

hard to build a product if you don’t understand the client needs.

More interestingly, we are hiring more coders into the business

units because they can pull together MVPs or integrations before

they become fully productized.

3. Stitching it all together – What used to be the domain of the CTO,

IT, and Product Development, is now core to the long-term viability

of the modern business. Now it’s the CEO’s job to understand and

maintain that vision. Companies will succeed on their ability to

support multiple 3rd party platforms, stitched together by APIs and

managed in the cloud. The pain of onboarding and training the next

SaaS platform is now a strategic advantage, and Lucid is positioning

itself to be one of many platforms and products in the mix.

How to approach SaaS onboarding in your business1. Automating your core product – Over the past 15 years, numerous

platforms have developed to automate the research process.

Everything from Qualtrics to ZappiStore gives researchers and their

clients high value capabilities. In fact, each manual function now has a

robust toolkit – Reporting, Sampling (Fulcrum), Survey Programming,

and Visualization. The challenge is not in the tools themselves but the

cost of ownership beyond the licensing fees: onboarding and training,

maintenance, and integration with existing infrastructure. The cost of

a failed onboarding is extraordinarily high, which is why Lucid invests

so heavily in those teams.

2. Automating your core business functions – The same can also be said

of business processes – you know, the standard back office of your

company: accounting, recruiting, IT, payroll, communications. Here at

Lucid, we’ve onboarded multiple platforms: Jazz, NetSuite, Namely,

Salesforce, Github, Slack, AWS, Gmail, Concur, and many more. Each

of the platforms can dramatically improve the efficiency, speed, and

cost structure of the business, but each additional platform also

compounds the total cost of ownership.

Integration, integration, integrationClients are continually asking for more speed and efficiency while

maintaining quality. Eventually, most research will literally be ‘real-

time’ and automated from end to end. We started our approach to

this opportunity by integrating our product directly into the related

research platforms. We quickly realized that all our core business

functions also needed a platform and that these functions in addition

must be integrated into the overall research and business ‘stack’. For

example, in order to compete on speed and efficiency, accounting

needs to be streamlined and integrated with the research process.

Strategically, those companies that can ride the wave of integrations

will be well-positioned to compete in the global marketplace.

25

It’s a good time to be a

designer, data scientist

or strategy consultant!

MOST IN DEMAND SKILLS

TRAINING, KEEPING UP & THE RESEARCHER OF THE FUTURE Just as virtually every other aspect of the insights

industry is changing, human capital needs and

related resources are evolving as well. GRIT asked

a series of questions related to this broad topic,

focused on specific roles, general skills, training

We asked GRIT respondents to tell us if they

expected to be hiring more, less, or have no change

at all in several broad skill descriptions. When

comparing client vs. suppliers, minimal differences

were noted, so we’re opting to instead look at the

totals. The lack of differentiation between client and

Designers and data visualization experts 62.80%

Data scientists 57.64%

Marketing or business strategists 53.47%

Social media experts 52.58%

Bilingual (or poly-lingual) employees 47.52%

THE MOST IN-DEMAND ROLES

resources, information sources, and advice for young

researchers. The responses provide a compelling vision

for the emerging skills and support needed for success.

Experts in the mechanics & technologies of data collection 40.18%

Sociologists or anthropologists 25.50%

Neuroscientists 21.33%

Process (e.g. supply chain) Strategists 21.13%

Moderators or field interviewers 19.44%

supplier hiring projections is interesting, as it means

that they will likely be competing against each other

for the same key personnel in the future.

What are those most in demand skills? Here is

the order based on the total responses that indicated

their organization would be hiring more:

26


WHAT CHANGES DO YOU EXPECT TO SEE IN THE MIX OF PEOPLE

WORKING IN YOUR ORGANIZATION IN THE FUTURE?

Experts In The Mechanics &

Technologies Of Data Collection

Sociologists Or Anthropologists


Process (eg., Supply Chain) Strategists

Data Scientists

Moderators Or Field Interviewers

Bilingual (Or Poly-Lingual) Employees



Neuroscientists

More The same Less

0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%Percentage of Respondents

At the other end of the spectrum, niche specialists

such as anthropologists, neuroscientists and

traditional qualitative workers will certainly still

have roles, but likely won’t be in massive demand. In

fact, as the chart below shows, this same group has

more to be concerned about, because they were also

ranked as the profession that would be hired for less

than any other by an almost 2:1 margin.

27

Ability to understand,

analyze, and use various

types of data stands out as

the most necessary skill

CLIENT SIDE SKILLS SUPPLIER SIDE SKILLS

SKILLS NECESSARY FOR SUCCESS

We asked “If you had to identify one new or

emerging skill necessary for the researcher of the

future, what would it be?” We received 705 verbatim

responses to this question. A basic word cloud

of both the client-side and supplier respondents

shows that the ability to understand, analyze, and

use various types of data stands out as the most

Suppliers more often suggested that design

capabilities, general comfort with technology,

understanding of complex business issues,

awareness of new media, and general business skills

were also vital.

necessary skill, while understanding the process of

research is a close second common theme.

Beyond the first and second most common

themes, some differences arise as clients focus on

storytelling, visualization, analytics, data science,

and business impact.

Digging a bit deeper, we decided to look at the word

or phrase occurrences in these verbatims rather

than traditionally coding them to get to a “hierarchy

of concepts” within the responses. For all intents,

this produces a “Top 50 Skills” list— the most in

demand skills that research organizations will be

hiring for in the future.

28


TOP 50 MOST IN DEMAND SKILLS

Concept

Occ

urre

nces

Ver

batim

s

% V

erba

tims

Data synthesis 196 166 23.75%

Technical ability 60 57 8.15%

Research fundamentals 60 51 7.30%

Business leadership 42 39 5.58%

Advanced analytics 39 36 5.15%

Insights 38 37 5.29%

Multiple skills 35 34 4.86%

Anthropologists 35 35 5.01%

Business acumen 34 31 4.43%

Understanding humans 33 30 4.29%

Design Thinking 31 27 3.86%

Media focused 30 30 4.29%

Nontraditional data 30 30 4.29%

Storytelling 28 26 3.72%

Recommending 26 25 3.58%

Use social media 25 25 3.58%

Technology 23 21 3.00%

Omnichannel 21 21 3.00%

Relationship analysis 20 20 2.86%

Thinking 19 19 2.72%

Digital expertize 18 17 2.43%

Big Data analytics 16 16 2.29%

Client service 15 15 2.15%

Client understanding 15 14 2.00%

Concise findings 15 14 2.00%

Concept

Occ

urre

nces

Ver

batim

s

% V

erba

tims

Flexibility 15 15 2.15%

Understand business 15 14 2.00%

Data visualization 14 14 2.00%

Knowledge 14 13 1.86%

Survey design 14 13 1.86%

Emerging techniques 14 14 2.00%

Presenting 14 14 2.00%

Information aggregators 13 12 1.72%

Integration 13 12 1.72%

Marketing expertize 13 13 1.86%

Consensus building 13 13 1.86%

Social analysis 12 12 1.72%

Social Researcher 12 12 1.72%

Scientists 12 9 1.29%

Influence 12 12 1.72%

Strategy 12 12 1.72%

New methods 11 11 1.57%

Common sense 10 9 1.29%

Visual analysis 10 9 1.29%

Actionable insights 9 9 1.29%

Communication skills 9 9 1.29%

Consumer-centric 9 9 1.29%

Data source agnostic 9 9 1.29%

Category experts 9 9 1.29%

Multiple sources 9 9 1.29%

29

Suppliers are almost twice

as likely to offer internal

training as clients

DO YOU CONDUCT ANY SORT OF RESEARCH TRAINING FOR YOUR STAFF?

WHAT COMPANIES OR ORGANIZATIONS DO YOU HIRE FOR TRAINING?

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0

ClientSupplier

Perc

enta

ge o

f Res

pond

ents

44% 70% 33% 26% 34% 22%Yes, internal

trainingYes, we use 3rd party research

training courses No

MOST USED TRAINING RESOURCES

Also new in this GRIT edition, we asked participants

about their use of training resources in their

organization. The traditional wisdom regarding

career paths in market research has been to start

as a supplier and eventually make the jump to the

client side, and based on these results it is apparent

why: suppliers are almost twice as likely to offer

internal training as clients, and clients are more

likely to not offer any training resources at all. Both

parties use 3rd party research training courses at

about the same rate.

Does this mean clients value training less? Not

all. It seems that within client organizations there is

perhaps a greater assumption that you simply have

the requisite skills necessary to do the job, and of

course, there is a stable of suppliers to support you

in doing so, and those suppliers are the experts with

the needed training.

This is borne out by responses to the follow-

up question we asked: “What companies or

organizations do you hire for training?”

The number one response was “Research

Suppliers”, with the important nuance in the

verbatim of the responses that generally training is

assumed to be part of the supplier engagement. No

mention was made if that was truer for technology

solutions vs. service offerings.

Consultants, The Burke Institute, online

learning programs, and unspecified university

programs make up the rest of the top 5 training

resources, with the remaining 15 being a mix of

various trade association or specialized research

training sources.

Resource Number of Mentions

Research Suppliers 41

Consultants 26

Burke Institute 22

Online courses 16

University Programs 12

RIVA 11

University of Georgia 10

AMSRS 8

Training Software 8

Webinars 7

AMA 6

ESOMAR 6

CEB 5

Conferences 5

MRA 5

Research Rockstar 5

Sawtooth 5

SPSS 5

Independent Trainers 5

MRIA 4

With rapid changes in technologies, best practices,

and use cases it’s safe to assume that credible training

offerings from multiple providers will continue to be

needed by both clients and suppliers.

30


Getting experience on the

job is the number one advice

to young researchers

WHAT ADVICE WOULD YOU GIVE TO YOUNG RESEARCHERS?

Get on-the-job experience40%

38%

Get training, read books and blogs

27%

23%

Mentoring / shadowing / learn from others

21%

22%

Gain a solid understanding of methodology

21%

14%

Be a good communicator / storyteller

3%

2%

Learn new, innovative research methods

3%

2%

Be curious and think outside the box

7%

1%

Other0%

0%

0 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%

ClientSupplier


N=149 Clients, N=664 Suppliers

ADVICE FOR YOUNG RESEARCHERS

When we think about the future of research, we

often focus on the evolution of the methodological

mix employed by clients and research firms. But

the future of our industry depends very much

on the next generation of practitioners. What we

teach them today will affect how they do business

tomorrow. We wonder how young researchers are

being introduced to the world of market research as

they enter the workforce.

In this edition of GRIT, we asked both clients

and suppliers what advice they would give to

young researchers. Their open-ended answers

were remarkably similar to one another. Getting

experience on the job is the number one advice to

young researchers, mentioned most often by both

clients (40%) and suppliers (38%). “Roll your sleeves

up and jump in” was a typical response. Same as “No

substitute for involvement in varied projects at a

junior level.”

About a quarter of clients (27%) and suppliers (23%)

mentioned getting some form of internal or external

training and reading books or blogs. Mentoring and

learning from senior researcher was cited by about

one in five clients (21%) and suppliers (22%). Gaining a

solid understanding of methodology was mentioned

by 21% of clients but only 14% of suppliers.

Interestingly, both clients and suppliers were

much less likely to mention non-traditional skills in

their advice, like focusing on storytelling, learning

new methods and thinking outside the box, than

traditional skills.

31

Researchers rate conferences,

webinars, websites and white

papers as the most important

sources of information

Sem

inar

s O

r C

onfe

renc

es

Web

inar

s O

r V

irtua

l Eve

nts

Tech

nolo

gy W

ebsi

tes

Or

Pub

licat

ions

Indu

stry

Web

site

s

Whi

te P

aper

s

Face

-To-

Face

Bus

ines

s N

etw

orki

ng E

vent

s

Trad

e O

rgan

izat

ion

Even

ts

Blo

gs

Bus

ines

s N

etw

orki

ng

Com

mun

ities

Lik

e Li

nked

In

E-m

ail D

eliv

ery

Of B

log

Subs

crip

tions

Indu

stry

Prin

t Jou

rnal

s

Soci

al N

etw

orki

ng S

ites

Like

Fa

cebo

ok &

Goo

gle+

Twitt

er

MOST IMPORTANT SOURCES OF INFORMATION

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0

Most Important to ClientMost Important to Supplier

Perc

enta

ge o

f Res

pond

ents

STAYING ABREAST OF CHANGES IN THE INDUSTRY

We continue to track the information channels that

GRIT participants consider to be important for staying

abreast of changes in the industry, an important

part of ongoing education and awareness of learning

opportunities for both clients and suppliers.

The majority of both segments rate conferences,

webinars, websites and white papers as the most

important sources of information, with some relatively

small variations between them. Slightly fewer

consider events by trade organizations, blogs, and

LinkedIn as most important. At the bottom of the

list, rated most important by less than one third of

participants, are social networks like Facebook or

Twitter, although they still capture roughly 25%

of the “Most Important” vote, as you can see in the

chart below.

32


New media channels, especially

Twitter, have seen solid growth

compared to the 2014

Seminars Or Conferences

Webinars Or Virtual Events

Face-To-Face Business Networking Events

Industry Websites

Technology Websites Or Publications

White Papers

Trade Organization Events

Business Networking Communities Like LinkedIn

Blogs

Industry Print Journals

E-mail Delivery Of Blog Subscriptions

Social Networking Sites Like Facebook & Google+

Twitter

IMPORTANCE OF STAYING ABREAST OF DEVELOPMENTS IN RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES: TOTAL (N+642)

0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Very Important Important Moderately Important Hardly Important Not Important at all

Social Media, blog subscriptions, print journals and

blogs don’t receive much recognition from GRIT

respondents overall, as they are rated “Hardly

important” or “Not important” more frequently than

other sources by wide margins.

However, new media channels, especially Twitter,

have seen solid growth compared to the 2014 wave

when we last asked this question.

White Papers 15

Blogs 12

Webinars Or Virtual Events 11

Twitter 10

Social Networking Sites Like Facebook & Google+ 8

Technology Websites Or Publications 5

Seminars Or Conferences 5

Trade Organization Events 4

Business Networking Communities Like LinkedIn 4

Industry Websites 0

E-mail Delivery Of Blog Subscriptions 0

Industry Print Journals -4

33

Sem

inar

s O

r C

onfe

renc

es

Web

inar

s O

r V

irtua

l Ev

ents

Face

-To-

Face

B

usin

ess

Net

wor

king

Ev

ents

Indu

stry

Web

site

s

Whi

te P

aper

s

Tech

nolo

gy W

ebsi

tes

Or

Pub

licat

ions

Trad

e O

rgan

izat

ion

Even

ts

Bus

ines

s N

etw

orki

ng

Com

mun

ities

Lik

e Li

nked

In

Blo

gs

Indu

stry

Prin

t Jou

rnal

s

E-m

ail D

eliv

ery

Of

Blo

g Su

bscr

iptio

ns

Soci

al N

etw

orki

ng

Site

s Li

ke F

aceb

ook

&

Goo

gle+

Twitt

er

2014 VS. 2015 MOST IMPORTANT SOURCES

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

Top 2 Box 2014Top 2 Box 2015

Perc

enta

ge o

f Res

pond

ents

The key takeaway here seems to be that when it

comes to networking, researchers prefer it face-

to-face and when it comes to learning, curated and

structured virtual channels are at the top of their

lists. Social media and social networks are growing

in acceptance, but are not considered mainstream

resources yet.

34


“A partnership is a relationship

between two individuals with

different reasons for wanting

a common outcome.”

CLIENT – SUPPLIER PARTNERSHIP“Partnership”– What is it? How do you get there?

These are some of the questions that we tried to

understand in this edition of the GRIT Report. And

like with all partnerships, there is no single clean,

decisive answer.

In defining a partnership, suppliers and clients

generally agree that a partnership is “mutually

beneficial”, a “win-win” or some other version of that

idea. The following quote explains it further:

“A partnership is a relationship between two

individuals with different reasons for wanting a

common outcome.”

The quotes showed a number of these different

reasons— from timely payment of invoices to

research that conforms to client protocols to cost

efficiency to meta-analysis to improved actionability.

One can only infer the common outcome of meeting

the wide spectrum of client needs.

HOW CLIENTS DEFINE PARTNERSHIP

36


Partnerships are difficult to

define, but the key themes are

time, trust, communication,

cultural fit, and risk

Clients and suppliers see the same situation two

different ways— most suppliers say they have

partnership with clients, many clients say they don’t.

There are perceptual differences, as well as practical

differences in this dichotomy. There is a good

amount of transactional work in our industry and

this isn’t necessarily seen as “partnership worthy”.

In contrast, there are times when both the supplier

and client are truly engaged:

“Yes – I work with organizations that challenge

me and my team to be better, stronger insights

professionals” or “we include the key suppliers in

strategic plan discussions so they can bring more

value to our organization. We also partner with them

in developing innovative methodologies and tools”.

These two examples show a deeper client/supplier

engagement – one that seems to get a step closer to

“mutually beneficial”.

HOW SUPPLIERS DEFINE PARTNERSHIP

37

KEY ATTRIBUTES OF SUCCESSFUL PARTNERSHIPS These kinds of partnership, where they exist, are

built over time and lead to trust. But how does one

start and maintain such a relationship? Here a list

of key attributes of successful partnerships that

were identified from the richness of the verbatim

responses:

We think we can boil these attributes down to

three core ideas that are vital for any partnership

to thrive:

1. Communication — is important on both sides;

suppliers must show that they are actively

engaged and clients must show a desire to

support the supplier. As one supplier said:

“If clients do not want to or are unable to

communicate with you informally outside of

running projects, there is little partnership

potential”.

2. Cultural fit — no matter how good the work is,

time must be spent getting to know each other to

make sure that there is alignment for both sides.

“A lot of buyers make the mistake of going only

for price or only for brand – there needs to be a

balance between cultural fit and price/ brand, plus

real empathy between both parties”.

3. Risk — if there is no need to change, there

is no need for a new partnership. Each new

partnership is shaped by a certain amount of

risk associated with change. Each side needs to

recognize the nature and level of risk aversion

within each other’s organization.

All in all, partnerships are difficult to define, but the

key themes are time, trust, communication, cultural

fit, and risk.

Themes

Occ

urre

nces

Ver

batim

s

% V

erba

tims

Client Service 468 375 32.16%

Partnership spirit 353 307 26.33%

Good business 235 199 17.07%

Shared risk 192 191 16.38%

Results 218 177 15.18%

Preferred supplier 182 147 12.61%

Relationship building 158 142 12.18%

Understanding 124 117 10.03%

Project focused 117 101 8.66%

Buyer beware 116 98 8.40%

Aligned Goals 94 89 7.63%

Key stakeholders 72 71 6.09%

Deliver 79 70 6.00%

Helpful 73 67 5.75%

Trust 75 67 5.75%

Value 66 65 5.57%

Impactful insights 60 59 5.06%

Mutual benefit 61 58 4.97%

Time 57 52 4.46%

Information exchange 50 49 4.20%

Strategic 50 49 4.20%

Knowledgeable 51 49 4.20%

Going beyond 53 49 4.20%

Common interest 46 46 3.95%

Success 49 46 3.95%

Discretion 48 43 3.69%

Marketable 43 40 3.43%

38


RESEARCH TRANSFORMATION IN ACTION

Three fourths of insights

providers say they need to

transform all or part of their

business to remain competitive

More disruptive

63%

57%

Will stay the same

25%

28%

Less disruptive

6%

10%

No opinion6%

6%

0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

OVER THE NEXT THREE YEARS, DO YOU THINK THE MARKET RESEARCH/INTELLIGENCE MARKET WILL BECOME ...

DO YOU BELIEVE YOU NEED TO TRANSFORM ALL OR PART OF YOUR BUSINESS TO REMAIN COMPETITIVE?

DO YOU BELIEVE YOU NEED TO TRANSFORM ALL OR PART OF YOUR ORGANIZATION TO CONTINUE TO PROVIDE YOUR INTERNAL CLIENTS WITH THE VALUE THEY EXPECT?

No opinion/Not sure

No

Yes

Insights ProviderInsights Buyer


N=898 Insights provider, N=214 Insights buyer


10% 11%

13% 12%

76% 76%

Disruption occurs when there is a need for change

and the opportunity for an innovator to introduce a

transformative catalyst – often a better model, tool

or process than that currently used. Typically, the

disruptive approach is cheaper and faster than the

product or service it replaces.

The implications can range from terrifying

to exhilarating depending on your view of the

world. Underscoring the prevalence of disruption

in our industry, almost two-thirds (63%) of insights

providers believe the market research/intelligence

industry will become more disruptive over the next

three years, a viewpoint shared by insights buyers.

The call for change has been clearly heard. Fully three fourths of

insights providers say they need to transform all or part of their


INSIGHTS BUYER

INSIGHTS PROVIDER

39

Transformation is not a singular

event but rather a series of

ongoing decisions that lead to

a culture of impactful change

within an organization

In an era of disruption,

sharpening strategic planning

skills is an imperative

WILL THIS TRANSFORMATION BE AN EVOLUTION OF YOUR ORGANIZATION OR A SUDDEN REVOLUTION?

4%

6%

19%

23%

76%

70%

No Opinion/Not Sure

Revolution

Evolution

Insights Provider

Insights Buyer


The pressure to change isn’t just felt by insight

providers. An equal number of insight buyers

express the same sentiment about the requirements

to continue providing their internal clients with

the value expected by their organization. The

expectation of ongoing disruption combined with

the need for transformation to stay relevant is a

challenge we must embrace if we are to emerge as a

vibrant industry known for providing the ROI our

users expect and demand. Failure to address this

mandate will result in an ever-increasing negative

spiral toward the only possible endpoint – lack of

relevance. So where to begin?

business processes and a continual re-evaluation

of our “people policies” are all key elements of a

strategic business review.

At Gongos, for example, the process begins with

a 10-year envisioned future and then three-year

goals that are broken into annual goals and specific

quarterly tasks necessary to meet those goals. As

Camille Nicita, President and CEO of Gongos said,

“we are always trying to answer the question – what

should the next best version of us look like?”

Transformation doesn’t happen overnight. It is

takes deliberate planning and strategy followed

by relentless implementation. The best in our

business take time to plan for the future. Strategic

planning, broadly defined, is the planning of all

the activities of a business to ensure competitive

advantage and profitability. While the devil is in the

details, certainly an understanding of the changing

value drivers for our businesses, the competitive

environment in which we operate, macro-business

environmental issues, the need to redesign key

There are no magic bullets for transformation.

Keeping a business relevant in any industry is a

challenge. We have to continually demonstrate and

prove our value as providers of insight. Failure to do so

leads our users to seek alternative approaches.

Even those considered to be innovators

today, may not be seen as such in five years unless

they develop processes by which to ensure their

organization continually pushes the boundaries of

innovation as the mechanism to remain relevant. The

act of transformation is not a singular event but rather

a series of ongoing decisions that lead to a culture of

impactful change within an organization. Insights

buyers and providers agree on this fact – they see

transformation as evolutionary not revolutionary.

40


HOW WOULD YOU DESCRIBE THE CALIBER OF YOUR ORGANIZATION’S STRATEGIC PLANNING CAPABILITIES?

DOES YOUR ORGANIZATION CURRENTLY HAVE A CUSTOMER ADVISORY BOARD THAT PROVIDE INPUT TO THE STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS FOR YOUR BUSINESS?

Very strong (Top 5%)

13%

8%

Strong33%

38%

Average34%

30%

Weak12%

16%

Non--existent3%

2%

No opinion/ Prefer not to

answer

5%

4%

0 10% 20% 30% 40%

Do not know/ Prefer not to answer

Yes

No

15% 14%

24% 38%

61% 48%


Insights BuyerInsights Provider




Yet according to the findings from this wave of

the GRIT survey, a self-assessment of strategic

planning capabilities reveals almost an equal split

among insight providers and buyers who say their

organization’s skills are strong and those who say

they are not.

Should customers be part of the strategic planning

process? About one-fourth of insights providers say

“yes” indicating they have a customer advisory board

that provides input to the process.

41

Without an organizational

push of some sort, innovation

is unlikely to happen with

sufficient rhythm to fuel the

process of transformation

IS THERE A FORMAL PROCESS TO SPUR INNOVATION WITHIN YOUR ORGANIZATION? (AMONG THOSE RESPONDING)

IN THE PAST TWO YEARS, HAVE YOU INTRODUCED A NEW PRODUCT OR SERVICE TO THE MARKET/YOUR ORGANIZATION?

0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Yes36%

40%

No53%

49%

Do not know/ Prefer not to answer

11%

10%

Yes73%

82%

No22%

11%

No opinion/ Not sure

5%

7%

0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%







Insight buyers appear to place a higher value on

the input of a customer advisory board. Without a

doubt, it is important that the voice of constituents

who use our products and services be heard in the

strategic planning process. A valid criticism of our

industry is that we listen to ourselves a little too

much. Understanding the impact of what is going

on outside our industry is a much more difficult, and

often painful, task.

In an era of disruption, sharpening strategic

planning skills is an imperative and will lead those

who excel in this endeavor to increasing revenue and

achieving a healthier bottom line.

Innovation and transformation are intertwined.

Getting the creative juices flowing can often be a

struggle. What works for one organization may not

work for another. According to the GRIT findings,

more organizations do not have a formal process to

spur innovation than do.

Routinely, CEOs say the magic is releasing

the innovative spirit among their employees. Some

use a “shark tank” approach allowing individuals

to pitch new ideas, some designate a small group

of highly creative individuals to pursue new ideas,

while others say hiring individuals from outside the

industry is a key element to injecting innovation

within the organization. Still others maintain that

support for innovative efforts must be at the core

of the firm’s DNA as R&D departments produce very

mixed results. This appears to be an area in which

many organizations need greater focus. Without

an organizational push of some sort, innovation is

unlikely to happen with sufficient rhythm to fuel the

process of transformation.

Transformative actions can take many

forms. The introduction of new products and

services is a common path followed. According to the

GRIT findings, more than 70% of insight providers

have introduced a new product or service to the

market in the past two years.

42


0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

GRIT COMMENTARY

KILLING THE ERROR OF OMISSION

Brett WatkinsPresident, L&E Research

Email: [email protected] | Website: www.leresearch.com

LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/pub/brett-watkins/1/51a/b82

W e are wrong and we know it. Marketing research has always

been plagued by error and assumptions; random sampling

almost never is, all kinds of bias – observer, response, fatigue, scale.

The list of issues goes on and on. Just as importantly, marketing

research has been wrong by omission; that is to say that we could only

ask questions – and evaluate the answers. At the end of the day, it is a

calculated and reasonable “wrong”.

But we are getting better... and that shows no sign of slowing.

Some of the improvements over the past several years are about the

process (better sampling, improved questions); many others are about

killing the error of omission – and to L&E, this is the exciting part.

New sources of data about consumers allow for vectors of

knowledge that did not exist even 3 or 4 years ago. Behaviors can be

established from any number of sources: mobile tracking, receipt

scanning, in-store video – the list goes on and on. Social Media allows

a sneak peek into peoples’ lives that lets us see how they wish to be

perceived – and not just through their words, but also the images they

associate with their life. Emotions and the emotional triggers can

be identified through non-conscious methods from facial coding, to

neuro methods and wearables.

As costs continue to fall from competitive pressure and

technological advances (I just saw a Virtual Reality viewer for $20),

it will be easier to put more of these pieces together to get a clearer

picture of the “whole truth” – which has long been the goal in our

industry. Let’s take a look at two examples:

Combining technologiesEye tracking technology lets us identify the area of a document

or image that is getting attention. Facial coding technology allows

us to understand the emotion a person is feeling at a particular

point in time. Independently, each of those technologies answers an

important question. Together they answer the question of the specific

driver of that emotion. One particular client takes it a step further

and integrates in-depth interviews based on laddering to understand

the “why” of the emotional triggers. In this example, there is little

error of omission, as multiple approaches within a single respondent

engagement have answered the what, the how, and the why.

Behavioral researchBehavioral research has generally been based on observation

(expensive) or diaries (questionable). The mobile phone and in

particular, mobile panels, change all this. Now, behavioral research

can be conducted in connection with shopper journey, use tests, day

in the life, etc., with reasonable completeness and accuracy. Scanner

technology (the same kind used in Expensify) allows people to scan

their store receipts instead of using a diary for their purchases. Each

of these methods provides valuable information about a person’s

life. The combination of these two methods provides a more holistic

perspective of a person’s consumption life – as it lays out multiple

places, multiple experiences, and multiple purchases – in the context

of all their purchases (not just a category). The error of omission is

still there, but smaller and easier to forgive.

Understanding everything that motivates a person is hard.

Psychologists can spend years trying to understand someone and still

not have full confidence that they have it right. But we can get better

at understanding – as we should – for our businesses, for our clients,

and for consumers.

Market research is now particularly well positioned to do this

using a holistic approach that combines qualitative, quantitative,

behavioral, non-conscious and observational data; shifting the

conversation from “we could be wrong for all of these reasons” to “we

think we’re right for all of the data points we have to use”. That’s a big

(and exciting) difference – and the GRIT data tells us it’s now a reality.

43

More than one-third of insights

providers agree that 50% of

current full-service market

research suppliers will be out

of business within five years

SOME SAY THAT 50% OF CURRENT FULL-SERVICE MARKET RESEARCH SUPPLIERS WILL BE OUT OF BUSINESS WITHIN FIVE YEARS. DO YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE?

0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Agree37%

32%

Disagree52%

51%


answer

12%

17%




This mark is exceeded by the more than 80% of

insights buyers who indicated they introduced a

new product or service to their organization. From

an innovation perspective, success is less relevant

than the attempt – as long as there is learning

from each effort and sufficient courage to know

when an effort will not be successful. This results

in a cycle of learning that will eventually produce

winning products and services that are the result of

an effective process rather than the hit or miss of

random ideas.

Jim Bryson, CEO of 20|20 Research believes

a big part of introducing successful products and

services is understanding the structural trends in

the market and capitalizing on a need that is not

yet fully understood by clients. Jim and his team

continue to bring innovation to the qualitative

research services they offer by visioning new

applications for technology as it becomes available.

At the same time, many CEOs caution against

straying too far from the core DNA of the firm.

Transformation can fail if your organization

deviates too far from its roots and loses its footing in

the market.

Where does all this lead us? Unfortunately,

more than one-third of insights providers agree

with the statement that 50% of current full-service

market research suppliers will be out of business

within five years. The viewpoint of insight buyers

isn’t all that different.

“There is a lot of innovation in our industry, but most innovation is not

commercially successful. In the market research industry, a successful

cutting edge product or service typically needs two components: meeting

a clearly articulated need and capital for sales and marketing. The lack of

one or both of these cause most industry innovations to fail.

To get ahead of the adoption curve, firms must look for the intersection

of technology trends and market research trends. This intersection is a

sweet spot that requires less sales and marketing capital and can result in

explosive growth.”

Jim Bryson CEO, 20|20 Research

44


IN FIVE YEARS, HOW DO YOU THINK YOUR ORGANIZATION WILL EMERGE FROM THE CURRENT DISRUPTION IN THE INDUSTRY?

0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Leader42%

38%

Survivor47%

42%

Victim4%

5%


answer

7%

16%




“Some companies may not survive changing times, but I am optimistic

for the future. I hope these 5 years are a crucible, from which many

companies will emerge offering better, faster learning methods with a

tighter focus on business impact. If that happens, we’ll all have healthier

businesses and more rewarding jobs.”

Joan Lewis Former Senior Vice President and Officer of Global

Consumer and Market Knowledge, P&G

Where there is risk, there is also opportunity and, for

the most part, respondents to the GRIT survey say

they will emerge from the current disruption in the

industry as anything but a victim.

In fact, many (42%) insight providers believe they will

emerge as a leader. Trends identified in this latest

edition of the GRIT survey and exposed at events, in

blogs, and by the daily work of emerging companies

are the keys to unlock the door to the future.

46


0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

GRIT COMMENTARY

WHAT PRICE RELEVANCE?RESEARCH TRANSFORMATION AND HOW WE GET FROM HERE TO THERE

Jackie Lorch Vice President, Global Knowledge Management, SSI

Email: [email protected] | Website: www.surveysampling.com

L arry Friedman, former Chief Research Officer at TNS NA said

in a recent interview that he hopes in five years our industry

mindset will no longer be “What questions should I ask in my

survey?” but “What is the right type of data and where do I get it?”

“Sometimes surveys will be part of the solution,” he adds, “but they

will be shorter, more focused, and integrated with social and

digital data.”

That would be quite a transformation in just five years –

especially since research transformation is often discussed, but

there is less clear evidence of it. For example, the industry has

been slow to take up mobile technology to capture opinion in

the moment. Researchers “get” the possibilities, but seem to lack

resources to experiment and experience the benefits. Two thirds

of respondents say they are doing mobile surveys. Yet less than

a quarter of the studies SSI supports are suitable for mobile –

in spite of the availability of tools like SSI QuestTest to ease

the transition.

There are some contradictory messages here. The need to

transform is clear (76% of insight providers believe they will have to

transform to stay competitive and the same percentage of insight

buyers say they will have to transform to deliver value to their

internal clients). But how that will happen is less clear: only 37% of

all responders say they have a formal process to spur innovation

in their organization. Three quarters of those interviewed think

change will happen via evolution rather than revolution. Is

transformation possible within five years given an evolutionary

pace of change?

What’s lacking in the transformation discussion is specifics.

How exactly does a company go from managing labor-intensive,

survey-centered projects to delivering a stream of integrated

information and insights from multiple sources, with surveys just

one element in the mix? Researchers not already far down this path,

with a technology infrastructure to support it will struggle to make

the change within five years.

Are buyers in a better position to change?A third of respondents think 50% of current full service market

research firms will be out of business within five years – yet only 4%

of insights providers and 5% of buyers think their company will be

one of the victims. More buyers have advisory boards than providers

(38% v 24%). Are providers less aware of their environment and

therefore the scope of change required?

Perhaps asking which group “gets it” is entirely the wrong

question. We segment research into buyers and providers – and,

further within providers, into researchers and service suppliers. If we

are serious about transformation is it time to look beyond this linear

“supply chain” view? The real transformers may be the ones who

“blow up” this decades-old model, creating a cooperative eco-system,

where multiple contributors deliver value where it’s needed most.

What will a transformed company look like?Transformed companies will use technology to enable agile

action. One example at SSI is a technology platform allowing new

panels in new countries to quickly and seamlessly integrate with

existing panels. The company of the future will likely offer solutions

on a modular basis – turnkey yet scalable, with standalone parts –

or a single all-encompassing solution depending on the particular

customer need. The product set will be more complex in many ways

and this complexity can only be achieved with technology to power it.

GRIT is a global report, yet discussions about research

transformation often neglect the importance of globalization as a

key driver of change. Global research places additional demands on

technology to support the complexity and (increasingly important)

the legal requirements inherent in global research.

Transformation in the medium for the messageFinally, with more data visualizers being hired according to this

report, maybe we can call time on dull, chart-filled presentations. SSI

research shows more decision-makers – especially those under 35 –

prefer to view data infographic-style. We know our data’s solid—we

need to be bold and let it shine with creative, visually sharp delivery.

What to make of the sometimes mixed messages in this report?

We may not have all the answers but the need to challenge current

beliefs is clear. Are we ready for what’s next?

47

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0

SUPPLIER REVENUE PROJECTIONS TREND

CLIENT SPEND PROJECTIONS TREND

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0 Q3-Q4 2015 Q1-Q2 2015 Q1-Q2 2014

Q3-Q4 2015 Q1-Q2 2015 Q1-Q2 2014

Increase over current year No change over current yearDecrease over current year

Increase over current year No change over current yearDecrease over current year

Perc

enta

ge o

f Res

pond

ents

Perc

enta

ge o

f Res

pond

ents

FINANCIAL OUTLOOK FOR 2016

“The great news for the research industry is that

the vast majority (73%) of research firms expect

research-based revenue to increase in 2015 compared

to 2014, even as only 37% of client firms see an

increase in research spending. How to explain the

discrepancy in expectations?”

That was the opening to this section of the

GRIT report in the last phase of the study. 9 months

later and expectations for 2016 revenue have been

tempered, with just over 60% of suppliers expecting

an increase, roughly 30% projecting no change,

and about 10% (the highest we have recorded since

trending began) expecting a decrease.

But if suppliers have become more realistic,

clients look to be more optimistic with over 45%

reporting increased budgets (up almost 10 points

from the last wave), another 40% expecting no

change, and only 13% (down from 19% previously)

expecting a decrease.

That is all good news, right? Well, there is still

a significant disconnect between how clients and

suppliers are reading the budget tea leaves. But all

in all, the news is good for most, and although we’ll

need to keep an eye on those worrying stagnant and

downward pointing numbers as we move into 2016,

the majority of GRIT participants fully expect to see

solid revenue in the coming year.

48


Both clients and suppliers

stated quality as the most

important consideration

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0

PRIORITY OF QUALITY, TIME, COST

Quality (1st) Time (2nd) Cost (3rd)

ClientSupplier

Perc

enta

ge o

f Res

pond

ents

The saying used to be “cheaper, faster or better—

choose two”, but technology is increasingly

removing the need to choose at all, with multiple

new approaches, frameworks, and solutions in the

marketplace that often (but not always) can deliver

on all three fronts. And since we know that many

suppliers are feeling pressed by this trifecta, we

thought we’d just ask the question of which was

more important.

Here is the good news: in close to equal

measures (less than a 10 point gap between them)

both clients and suppliers stated quality as the

most important consideration well over two-thirds

of the time. That makes quality “table stakes”— it

has to be good.

That said, speed and cost come in roughly at

the same level; it’s a coin toss on which may be more

important, but make no mistake, they are both

important, with time being a bit less so for clients.

It’s certainly possible that tradeoffs may occur

under the pressures of business reality, but the data

tells us that GRIT respondents want “cheaper, faster,

better”, and they do want all three.

CHEAPER, FASTER OR BETTER: WHAT DRIVES DECISIONS?

We asked those expecting a decline why, and there

was surprising consistency across clients and

suppliers with the responses falling into four basic

buckets:

1. Budget cuts

2. Cost competitiveness

3. Cheaper/faster tech disruption

4. Big data

If there were a list of “usual suspects” in this

industry, this would be it.

Conversely, we also asked those expecting an

increase why they were optimistic. Their responses

could be bucketed as… almost exactly the same list!

Whereas the “budget cuts” answer is replaced with

“innovation/new methods”, the rest of the themes

stand. So, as we’ve previously pointed out, disruption

is as much of an opportunity as it is a challenge.

49

Researchers are dealing

with is an ever proliferating

choice of research

techniques and means of

gathering research data

VOLUNTARY VERBATIMS

As in the last few waves, the end of the GRIT

questionnaire offers participants a battery of

voluntary verbatim questions they can choose to

respond to if they wish. GRIT participants are a

engaged audience, and we usually receive hundreds

of deep, rich, thoughtful responses.

In this final section of the report, we pulled out some

of the major findings from each question, with a few

quotes to underline our take. These responses add

not just context and nuance to the rest of the report,

but in some cases, unique data points that would

have been almost impossible to get in any other way.

The overriding sense from reading though all the

comments from researchers about how their jobs

are changing is a sense that the industry is in a

state of revolution.

What researchers are dealing with is an ever

proliferating choice of research techniques and

means of gathering research data. Much of which

they are not so directly in control of.

The traditional role of the researcher was once

dominated by the process of gathering research

data for their clients, but so much research data is

emerging from non-traditional 3rd party sources,

tech business, and companies themselves are

generating a lot more of their own research data,

the position of the researcher as being the font of

information is shifting.

“10 years ago we were only collecting data from

surveys – we are now incorporating data from

multiple sources where next year survey data

collection will no longer be the dominant source of

data we collect”

“Research used to be about surveys and getting

people to answer them (at least for me). Now we

have to think about the sources of data available

to us to compliment or replace some of those

traditional surveys so we can be more directive with

our survey questions.”

“We are moving away from traditional research and

more into existing multi-sourced data sets. Sales

data, customer service data, machine/telemetry data,

social intelligence, web searches, THEN potential

qualitative or quantitative (but not always).”

“We are no longer translators between companies

and their customers and need to reinvent ourselves

and prove our added value.”

HOW ARE THE JOBS OF RESEARCHERS CHANGING?

50


Be an innovation leader.

Presented by GreenBook, Insight Innovation eXchange is a global event series focused on advancing the business value of insights through innovation. We pull together the most promising and most important new ideas in market research.

We work with our Corporate Partners (companies like Coca-Cola, Citi, eBay, Ericsson, Johnson & Johnson, Merck, Procter & Gamble, and Unilever) to develop an agenda that provides tangible solutions to real business needs. Then, we identify the right innovators and thought leaders to get up on stage, share and demo creative solutions, and kickstart conversations that create real business impact.

Watch videos from past events and learn more about our upcoming events by visiting us online at InsightInnovation.org

AmsterdamMarch 3-4, 2016

iiex-eu.insightinnovation.org

PhiladelphiaApril 5-6, 2016

iiexhealth.insightinnovation.org

AtlantaJune 13-15, 2016

iiex-na.insightinnovation.org

“I don’t think many traditional

research companies in their

existing form will be around

in 10 to 15 years’ time”

There are two ways of looking at this, as a threat

to the traditional research company function or

pointing towards a much more expanded role for

researcher generally.

Some researchers did express fear that

research companies in their existing format would

struggle to survive. And some felt like the game was

actually lost.

“In a sense research has got too big! Too many

choices of approach”

“I don’t think many traditional research companies

in their existing form will be around in 10 to 15 years’

time”

“Consumer insight professionals within large client

organisations are living awful times: credibility is

lost, we don’t sit at the right tables anymore, we are

simply used to confirm decisions already made, our

budgets continue to shrink, our career plans are

going nowhere. Our profession is dying.”

Some researchers are beginning to witness their

insight departments being restructured or taking on

a wider role.

“Insight can come from a variety of sources (big

data, qual, quant, DIY, internal surveys etc.). This

means, the MR department is transforming into

“customer and market insights department”.”

“We found our IT department sitting on data, good

at processing it but not good at using it other than to

dashboard it”

But many of the views expressed were a lot more

optimistic about a new strategic role for researchers,

moving to becoming more the synthesizers

of information, taking up more strategic and

consultative roles.

“As more of the traditional work is being upended,

we are now being called upon to provide a longer

term, meatier, view of the world. There are fewer

projects, but they are more interesting. In some

ways, it harkens back to early in my career, when

research focused on the big picture.”

“We are leveraging greater quantities of data, and

thus developing more interesting insights.”

“We are now helping clients analyze data that does

not come from primary research”

“Growth of information inherently requires more

important role for researchers, just not the same

role as before. We have to become the analysts,

the interpreters, the storytellers and the marketers

of insights. ”

“A couple of years back the IT department started

to massively expand, they were the ones processing

all the new data being generated, they were moving

into a more pseudo insights role in the organisation,

but the company slowly started to realise that IT

were not necessarily the best placed people in the

business to think though and understand the data, to

deliver insights that could drive the business forward

and so these resources are now slowly being moved

back under the research department’s control.”

HOW ARE RESEARCHERS RESPONDING?

HOW IS THE RESEARCH DEPARTMENT CHANGING?

52


“The diversification of

techniques means we become

research multitaskers”

In response to the ever growing number of more

innovative & creative approaches to conducting

research and gathering data means researchers are

doing much more mixed-mode research. In response

to this, researchers are having to become polymaths.

“The diversification of techniques means we become

research multitaskers”

“The corporate researcher role is changing rapidly.

My company (and others) rarely cares about the

results of any single research study. This “study

mindset” has limited the MR profession for too

long. Insight comes from many places. One of

these places is primary research studies, but it is

only one. The modern corporate researcher must

know primary research but must also understand

secondary research, competitive intelligence, data

mining/big data and potentially many other sources

of information that can lead to insight.”

“We are being asked to facilitate the organization

and development of large scale behavioral

initiatives. This includes not only the research, but

also the communication strategies and the actual

design execution of the research. So we are using

copywriters, designers, business consultants and

neuro-marketers to APPLY the research. We think of

ourselves as a behavioral design agency more than

a behavioral research firm.”

This is impacting how research departments are

organizing themselves becoming a lot less siloed,

more collaborative and more virtual in nature.

“Having researchers who are more well-rounded and

relying less on departmental silos. (One researcher

can program, run data analysis, write reports, etc.)”

“Many more collaborative efforts, more partnering

with those who maintain a quality focus”

“More virtual relationships than ever before between

vendors, clients, etc. Working independently and full

project ownership to achieve results for the client”

“We are working more often with third parties/

agencies than directly with client SMEs; producing

multiple shorter deliverables rather than single

lengthy research report”

Polymath researchers A more collaborative approach

The range of research solutions on offer is leading to

less formal approaches to insights gathering.

“Working life is getting faster, more chaotic, and

‘good enough’ is becoming more prevalent.”

“We are seeing a move to a lot more informal,

innovative, less robust approaches.”

“We are changing from ad hoc to continuous work

with clients, from re-active to pro-active, from survey

to conversations, from general target groups to

specific audiences, (still) from offline to online, from

CAWI to communities. Lots of stuff going on, and

challenging to keep track on innovation, and to

separate actual innovation and change from short

term trends and “buzz”.”

Adopting less formal techniques / good enough research

53

With access to more real time

data, speed it becoming a

researchers’ mantra, in both a

positive and negative sense

With access to more real time data, speed it

becoming a researchers’ mantra, in both a positive

and negative sense.

“Over past 2 years there has been a significant need

to increase the pace of insight delivery, driven by

faster-paced business cycle. Projects that would

have taken 4 weeks 3 years ago need to be turned

around in days. We need to find ways to crunch the

cycle time or we will be left behind by the business.”

“Working life is getting faster, more chaotic, and

‘good enough’ is becoming more prevalent –

because of time pressure, but also because what you

are doing will have such a short lifespan.”

“Speed is becoming even more important. As the

business owners get more access to information and

they see the self-service tools like Google surveys

there is less tolerance for traditional timelines.”

“People want things faster and faster. My

stakeholders are getting very close to a point where

they set a decision date based on an unattainable

date and have no interest in hearing about trade-offs

of their artificially expedited timelines.”

“We are broadening the scope of research services

to offer more ways to connect back to the same

goal – building compelling, evidence-driven, and

action-worthy reports for our clients that utilize

whatever research methodologies it takes to write

the story in the time we have. This means we need to

do smaller quantities of more stuff. Instead of doing

24 TDIs, we’re doing 8 webcam interviews with KOLs

+ a simultaneous online quant/qual forum with the

remaining 16, and we’re evolving the research plan

as we go. No such thing as hard quotas anymore.

Like a search engine, we learn and evolve after every

new piece of input.”

Speed is a mantra

The trend towards development of more analytical

skills and technical resources is the second most

mentioned change researchers are observing in

their organisations.

“Technology and Data Science is playing a much

bigger role in delivering market research.”

“We are becoming more technical.”

“Almost all human-driven processes that are

repeatable are being replaced by automation

and APIs.”

Most new means of gathering data result from

technological innovation and research companies

are now often competing with tech businesses. The

process of analyzing data is becoming a lot more

complex and so research companies are competing

with pure-play data analytics companies to process

the data and deliver back insights. Competing

on both these fronts requires technical skills and

expertise that many research companies do not

possess.

“The era of a research companies tinkering around

with spreadsheets and producing cross tabs is

over, we need to up our game.”

“Most of my work is being rapidly being caught

up with by computer systems and programs. As a

result, my role is shifting towards learning how to

best utilize and harness them.”

“We are moving towards analytics and away from

traditional data collection.”

Shift towards tech-driven research & analysis

54


Bigger research organisations

are rapidly buying the skills

necessary to compete

The third most observed trend is that research

companies are becoming more strategic and

consultative.

“We are getting asked to think strategically more

often. Rather than a list of questions, our internal

customers are coming to us with problems or

business scenarios and asking us to help them think

it through.”

“We are including marketing consultancy as a strong

backbone of our daily work.”

“We see our work becoming more strategic and

consultative in nature. Our clients actively seek us

out for their most complex and strategic challenges.

This move “up-market” has shifted our margins in

a positive direction. At the same time, this strategic

positioning doesn’t translate well to doing quick-and-

dirty projects for them.”

“We’re working at a higher level than before. Being

paid for customer insight but actually offering brand

and marketing consultancy.”

In response to the ever-growing role of technology,

bigger research organisations are rapidly buying

the skills necessary to compete, as witnessed by

technology company takeovers and mergers that

dominate the research industry news.

Research businesses are also beginning to

work a lot more collaboratively with companies

that offer the specialist tech and analytical skills

and becoming access points to research technology

solutions in the process.

“We are moving from being our clients’ research

company to becoming their research technology

supplier.”

“Clients are expecting suppliers to be aware of all

the new technology and that is a real challenge

when you are a small supplier.”

Becoming more strategic & consultative

Acting as access points to technology solutions

Rresearchers expressed

concerns about research

businesses spreading

themselves too thin

56


As clients are making more

insights-driven decisions,

they are demanding more

actionable insights

There is a general sense that as clients are making

more insights-driven decisions, they are demanding

more actionable insights from research companies

as a result.

“The demand is for insights over charts & numbers.”

“Less data delivery, more insights/stories are wanted

by clients.”

“Less data, more interpretation and strategic support.”

“Less data delivery, more insights/stories are wanted

by clients.”

“More thinking, less reporting. More strategic, less

tactical. More actionable insights as the key to

growth.”

And this is supported by comments from clients:

“My team has pushed their main research agencies

to better support our business from tracking

reporting to really understanding what the “so what”

is and what we can act on to make a difference.”

The demand for actionable insights

With the proliferation of research techniques and

increasing volumes of data, many researchers

expressed concerns about research businesses

spreading themselves too thin and that the

amount of time available to think and analyze is

being squeezed.

“Less time is spent actually analyzing data.”

“More speed, less thought.”

“On the client side, expectations around big data

and its uses are increasing, however ability to

extract useful and actionable insights are not

keeping pace.”

Less thinking / less real analysis

An area identified by a number of researchers is

the growing importance of insight delivery and

of the role researchers have in selling insights

across an organization.

“I find we are doing more of what the corporate

researcher used to do. More presenting, more

influencing, more interaction with “the business”.”

“Work is changing from generating insights more to

internal work with the business teams to ensure that

the insights are applied in business”

“We don’t sell research. We don’t sell

methodology. We sell business solutions.

There’s more upfront stakeholder engagement,

storyboarding analysis, and more interactive

workshop sessions to share results.”

Marketing insights across organizations

Another emerging trend is the growth in more

sophisticated reporting and the demand for

data visualisation.

“With more and more data sources, the role of

researcher is to tie it all together and for that,

data visualisation techniques are becoming

increasingly valuable”

“We are focused more on visualizing data and

research results outside of the standard PowerPoint

charts and graphs.”

“There is an increased demand and we are providing

more reporting via interactive reporting tools

(dashboards) for our clients.”

The demand for Visualisation / better reporting

57

“The job of researcher is

becoming more interesting!”

There were several mentions of the rise of self-

serve (DIY) research and the all-round decline of

methodological rigor. Some mentioned a general lack

of experience with too many different techniques

to master. A number of researchers talked about the

decline of the types of long-term relationships they

used to have with clients.

At the same time, it also appears that “The job

of researcher is becoming more interesting!”

“My work requires greater intellectual capital and

brain power. I need to be more knowledgeable. I

need to be in touch with things.”

“A sense that research companies are starting to win

back a bit more control.”

“Working at a higher level than before.”

“We’re leveraging our experience to become

not only research providers, but also true data

synthesizers that are able to draw stories from

multiple disparate data sources.”

Other trends identified


NIELSEN CONSUMER NEUROSCIENCEOFFERING A FULL SUITE OF NEUROSCIENCE SOLUTIONS AT A GLOBAL SCALE

FACIAL CODING

EEGfMRI

VOICE ANALYSIS

MOTION

RESPIRATION HEART RATE

SKIN CONDUCTANCE

IMPLICIT TESTING

EYE TRACKING

• EEG

• BIOMETRICS

• EYE TRACKING

• FACIAL CODING

• fMRI

• IMPLICIT TESTING

www.nielsen.com/consumerneuroscienceEmail us at [email protected]

HOW WORK IS CHANGING: WHAT IS BEING TALKED ABOUT

Juggling new data sources/diversity of research techniques 50

Adopting a more strategic/consultative approach 39

Things getting faster 37

Automation & technology 36

Move to analytics 27

Using more innovative/creative approaches 20

Growing price pressure 19

Observing the shift to online and mobile solutions 17

The demand for actionable data / incite driven approaches 16

Less formal techniques / more short cutting 12

The importance of Story telling 11

Being more collaborative 10

More mix mode research 9

Marketing incites across organisation 7

Less thinking / less real analysis 6

Rise of sell serve 6

Visualisation / new ways of reporting 6

An industry undergoing a revolution 5

Marginalisation or research teams 5

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50Number of Mentions

N=262

59

Behavioural economics is seen

to have had more influence

on market research than any

other idea in recent years

“I wish clients would help me

be a better partner by sharing

information and bringing me

into relevant meetings.”

When asked about what is influencing researchers

most, it’s interesting that in this age of Internet

“books” remain the single most important source of

influence, ahead of blogs, conferences, webinars.

In terms of topic, behavioural economics is

seen to have had more influence on market research

than any other idea in recent years by quite some

margin. It was the only subject to achieve double-

digit mentions

“Advances from the behavioural sciences have

a profound effect on the nature of our work –

informing new directions and refinement on research

methods. The rate of adoption, and the obstacles

to adoption, of behavioral science based research

techniques are important trends influencing our

marketing messages and R&D on research methods

and research products.”

“Getting back to basics of understanding human

behavior. Bringing emotional elements back into

research that has become very rational.”

It is difficult to escape from platitudes when analyzing answers to this question, but a few key themes did

emerge that are also echoed elsewhere in this GRIT report:

Big data & data science was the second most

mentioned topic:

“Marketing science. People who are using data

experiments to identify patterns across multiple

categories and countries. It astounds me how

many experienced researchers ignore marketing

science and continue to give poor, ill-informed

advice to clients.”

The single most mentioned individual (Daniel

Kahneman’s theories aside) was Byron Sharpe:

“Books – the key one is “How Brands Grow” by

Byron Sharp. It’s helped re-invent how we think

about brand and market growth strategies.”

The most mentioned book was “The Lean Start

Up” which reflects the changing nature of research

organisations.

WHAT IS INFLUENCING MARKET RESEARCHERS THESE DAYS

WHAT ARE THE WISHES FOR THE RESEARCH INDUSTRY

A desire for more effective “partnerships” between

clients and research companies was expressed on

both sides of the table.

“Act more like partners rather than using agencies as

simple vendors.”

“Embrace a partnership philosophy.”

“I wish clients would help me be a better partner

by sharing information and bringing me into

relevant meetings.”

“I wish that they would be less focused on the

selling part and more on the partnership – learning

more about my business and asking me the right

questions so they can propose solutions that fit my

business. I can’t tell you how many suppliers I’ve had

‘info’ sessions with and spent the whole time talking

about what they do, and it was completely different

than what I might need.”

Partnerships

60


“Be bolder, more innovative,

quicker, and make better

use of technology”

Research companies desire

to be treated more like

consultants and receive briefs

that focus on business issues.

Some want research done quicker, others lament the

lack of time to do effective and thoughtful research.

There is a clear call from clients and research

companies alike to be more open to new ideas and

techniques and be more flexible.

“Find a way to speed up their services. Fielding is

now generally quick; the rest of it takes a long time.”

“I wish I could deliver insights faster.”

“Please allow appropriate time for robust research”

“I wish I could be spending more time developing

insights and helping business partners fully leverage

consumer and distribution partner feedback”

“I wish they would reach out to us sooner to help

them design the research plan. Often times the

projects are rushed and this impacts the results.”

“Get their heads out of the past and their minds

into the present and future. Think more open-

mindedly and innovatively, especially with regards

to technology and how it can help them and their

business succeed”

“Be bolder, more innovative, quicker, and make

better use of technology”

“I wish the end buyer would be more open to new

methodologies & technologies that support the

evolving marketing research industry...and truly

strive to be part of the evolution.”

Call us earlier!

A general wish was expressed by research companies

to be brought into the thinking process earlier.

“I wish our clients would call us to help them think

through their insights needs earlier in the process.

Too often they call with a fully formed thought /

approach already in mind, and more often than not,

there may be a better / more creative and customized

way to gather the insights they need.”

“I wish we had more opportunity to guide business

direction during the development process by

incorporating more consumer input.”

Faster / More time Be more open to new techniques

Consult us

Research companies desire to be treated more

like consultants and receive briefs that focus on

business issues.

“I wish they would write briefs that clearly outline

why they are doing the research from their

businesses point of view, and share their budget so

we can work through how best to meet their needs

within their budget. We aren’t out to gouge them

when they share their budget, often we propose

more value for money solutions when we do know

the budget than when we don’t. We are taking a

guess as to the scope clients are after when they

don’t share their budget, whereas when we know it

we can think innovatively about how to get them the

best value for the budget they have.”

“Providing more intelligence toward strategic

decision making for my clients as opposed to

focusing on carrying out methodologies.”

61

The commercial research

landscape does have

periods of stability, but

now is not one of them

FINAL THOUGHTS

Our good friends at CASRO recently said:

“Technological and methodological advancements

continue to drive change in the business world,

and the commercial research arena is no exception.

Omnipresent devices that capture and deliver

digital information have accelerated the speed,

opened access to new respondents, and expanded

the nature of measurement within traditional

quantitative and qualitative marketing research.

The impact of these advancements is arguably an

evolutionary one. Other advances have produced

new data sources, new analytical approaches, and

new platforms for understanding what consumers

want and for predicting what they will buy. Some

regard these developments as revolutionary and

even disruptive.

The commercial research landscape does have

periods of stability, but now is not one of them.”

We couldn’t have said it better ourselves, and this

latest phase of the GRIT Report shows the truth

of the statement. But while the insights industry

may not be as stable as compared to the past, the

constant of change brings its own stability, and its

own adaptations. GRIT continues to show that while

the evolution continues, many are riding the wave of

change successfully and there is an unbridled sense

of (cautious) optimism for many, tempered with a

healthy acknowledgment that our rich history isn’t

an anchor tying us down, but rather a touchstone as

we get our bearings for the journey ahead.

Like the rest of the industry, we will continue

to transform and develop the GRIT Report to

ensure we’re meeting the needs of you, our key

stakeholders. As we move into 2016, we’re already

planning some significant changes in our own

process and the questions we want to explore

with you. We look forward to continuing to work

with you as we chart the future of the research

industry together!

62


INNOVATIO

N

Qualitativeresearch

Quantitativeresearch

Usabilitytesting

Ethnographicresearch

Marketopportunity

Competitiveintelligence

Big Datasolutions

Brandresearch

SIS WORLDWIDE HEADQUARTERS11 East 22nd Street, 2nd Floor, New York, NY 10010t: +212-505-6805 | www.sisinternational.comUS/Americas: [email protected]: [email protected]: [email protected] Asia: [email protected]: [email protected]://twitter.com/SISIntlResearch

FrankfurtLondonManilaMexico CityNew YorkSeoulShanghaiSingapore

AutomotiveB2BConsumerCosmeticsEducationFinancial

Food & beverageHealthcareIndustrialPharmaceuticalRetailTourism

BIG DATA SOLUTIONS

MARKET RESEARCH

MARK

ET IN

TELL

IGEN

CE

MARKETINTELLIGENCEAND STRATEGY

INNOVATION MARKETRESEARCH

YOURSUCCESS

SIS HELPS YOU TO PROSPER

C

M

Y

CM

MY

CY

CMY

K

SIS Greenbook Ad 2015 Press-Ready.pdf 7 10/19/15 3:17 PM

Go to www.GreenBook.org/GRIT

to read the GRIT Report online

ACKNOWLEDGMENTSConcept Originator,

GRIT Executive Editor:

Leonard Murphy – GreenBook

Authors:

Dana Stanley – GreenBook

Gregg Archibald – Gen2 Advisors

Jeffrey Henning – Researchscape

International

Jeffrey Resnick – Stakeholder

Advisory Services

Jon Puleston – Lightspeed GMI

Leonard Murphy – GreenBook

Ray Poynter – Vision Critical

University

Project Coordinator

Emily Fullmer – GreenBook

Design Partner

Keen as Mustard

Sample Partners:

ACEI

AIM

AIP

AMAI

ARIA

Asia Pacific Research Committee

(APRC)

Australian Market & Social

Research Society (AMSRS)

AVAI

BAQMAR

BVA

CASRO

CEIM

ESTIME

feedback

Gen2 Advisors

GIM Gesellschaft für Innovative

Marktforschung

Lightspeed GMI

LYNX Research

MRIA

MROC Japan Inc.

MRS

MSU MMR

NewMR

NGMR

NMSBA

NYAMA

OdinText

PROVOKERS

Qualitative Research Consultants

Association (QRCA)

SAIMO

Sands Research

The Research Club

Researchscape

Toluna

University of Georgia/MRII

UTA

Vision Critical

Wisconsin School of Business

Data Collection:

Lightspeed GMI

Data Processing:

mTAB

GMI Interactive

Q Research Software

Translations:

BVA

ESTIME

Gen2 Advisors

MROC Japan Inc.

Infographic:

AYTM

Publication:

GreenBook®

Commentary Providers:

GutCheck

iTracks

L&E Research

Lucid

Research Now

Sentient Decision Science

SSI

64


RESEARCH & PRODUCTION

AYTMwww.aytm.com

AYTM’s platform is designed with the user

experience in mind for both the survey creator and

the survey taker. We are mobile-friendly by design

and have pioneered techniques to make the complex

simple and beautiful. Our live statistics pages give

you results in real-time, with stress-free exports

into Powerpoint and embeddable charts that are

perfect for data dashboards. Our CASRO-approved

proprietary panels provide access to over 25 million

consumers in 26 countries around the globe.

Whether you’re looking for a do-it-yourself (DIY)

solution, some light consultation, or an expert-run

project, we have the tools, sample, and expertise that

will get you reliable results quickly.

Gen2 Advisorswww.gen2advisors.com

Gen2 Advisors is consulting and advisory firm

supporting the insights industry. We support

corporate researchers by identifying new suppliers,

tools, technologies, and methodologies to support

the changing nature of marketing, budgets, and new

information opportunities. Suppliers can look to us

for guidance on the impact of industry trends and

market opportunities.

Keen as Mustard Marketingwww.mustardmarketing.com

The only full-service marketing agency for market

researchers. We offer marketing and positioning

strategy, branding, design, digital marketing, PR and

content services to the market research and insights

industry. We are thrilled to be design consultants to

GRIT for the new look report.

Lightspeed GMIwww.lightspeedgmi.com

Quality-seeking researchers, marketers and brands

choose Lightspeed GMI as their trusted global

partner for digital data collection. Our innovative

technology, proven sampling methodologies

and operational excellence facilitate a deep

understanding of consumer opinions and behavior.

From award-winning survey engagement to fieldwork

management, we add value at every stage of the

research process.

65

mTABwww.mtabsurveyanalysis.com

mTAB® LLC serves the needs of many Fortune

500 companies across the globe. Our web based

software solutions remove the cost and complexity

of processing and querying large data sets, making

survey data more accessible and useful.

NewMRwww.newmr.org

Helping co-create the future of market research.

Combining the best of the new with the best

of the old.

Q Research Software Limitedwww.q-researchsoftware.com

Q Research Software is for market researchers to

analyze quantitative data. Q greatly enhances the

productivity and quality of analysis and reporting

by combining intuitive interfaces with the latest in

advanced methods.

Stakeholder Advisory Services, LLC.www.stakeholderadvisory.com

Stakeholder Advisory Services helps clients leverage

the insights of stakeholders to understand, manage

and monitor their reputational risk. We are dedicated

to helping organizations address reputational risk

in order to maximize their potential for business

strategy success and sustainability.

Researchscape Internationalwww.researchscape.com

We provide you feedback from prospects and

customers so that you can make key business

decisions about your market. Our consultants write

the questionnaire, collect results from your target

audience, and send you a detailed report. Starting

at $1,995 for surveys of your house email list or for

surveys of 350 U.S. consumers.

66

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 providers are part of AIM.

AIP www.aip-global.com/EN

AIP continues to be the leading online fieldwork

agency in Asia. AIP recruits and manages

proprietary panels in 12 countries across Asia.

Our research only panels are actively managed

to the highest global standards. When running

research using panels from AIP, our clients have

the peace of mind with knowing who recruited and

managed your respondents. Combined with our

dedicated multi-national/lingual consultants who

are specialized in global projects – AIP ensures your

survey is asking the right questions, to the right

people, in the right language.

AMAIwww.amai.org

AMAI is the only professional association in Latin

America focused on applying industry intelligence

to business and social issues. Founded in 1992,

AMAI originally emerged as the institutional

center of Mexican market research, opinion and

communication communities; it now encompasses

the entire industry, as well as data processing for

decision-making.

ARIAwww.ariaalliance.org

Americas Research Industry Alliance (ARIA) is an

alliance of pan-American research associations

established to support and improve the business

and integrity of the market, opinion and social

research industry.

Asia Pacific Research Committee (APRC)www.aprc-research.com

The main purpose of the Asia Pacific Research

Committee is to further promote the development

of Asia-focused marketing research technologies and

insights through creating additional opportunities

for cross-border exchanges amongst marketing

research associations and communities within the

Asia Pacific region.

67

AMERICAS RESEARCH INDUSTRY ALLIANCE

Australian Market & Social Research Society (AMSRS)www.amsrs.com.au

The Australian Market & Social Research Society

Limited (AMSRS) is a not-for-profit professional

membership body of over 2,000 market and

social research professionals who are dedicated

to increasing the standard and understanding

of market and social research in Australia. The

Society assists members to develop their careers by

heightening professional standards and ethics in the

fields of market and social research.

AVAIThe 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.

BVAwww.bva.fr/en/home

BVA provides expert advice thanks to sharp knowledge

of the sector and methodological innovations.

As a pioneer in many areas (behavioral, non verbal,

digital,...), BVA offers quantitative and qualitative

solutions in all business sectors that can untangle

consumer’s mind and lead to actionable and strategic

recommendations.

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.

CEIMwww.ceim-argentina.org.ar/index.php

CEIM (Camara de Empresas de Investigacion 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.

68

ESTIMEwww.estime-neurobiomarketing.com/en

We have 24 years of traditional expertise in LatAm

with 10 years pioneering consumer neuroscience

developments in Europe and the Americas to

research US Hispanic & LatAm Markets with full

capabilities of EEG, GSR, ET and HRV equipment

tied to proprietary neuropsychology modeling,

all teamed with a dedicated group cognitive

neuropsychologists and industry-specific experts.

This primes our Firm to provide our Clients with

deeper and broader understanding of their markets

and customers, while maximizing their ROI across all

marketing efforts.

feedBACKfb.com.co

We are an agency with 17 years of experience in

Market Research. Our mission is to apply consumer

knowledge to concrete marketing decisions. We

focus on four areas: Semiotics, Neuromarketing,

Qualitative and Quantitative.

GIM Gesellschaft für Innovative Marktforschungwww.g-i-m.com

GIM, Gesellschaft für Innovative Marktforschung,

started life in 1987 as a small specialist company

and has since grown into one of Germany’s leading

market research institutes. We offer qualitative and

quantitative market research and can thus provide

the appropriate research solution for your needs and

area of investigation.In every phase of each project,

we optimize our methods on an on-going basis. We

always employ the most suitable solution, be it

ethnography, focus groups, in-depth interviewing,

conjoint, multivariate procedures, tracking-studies,

car clinics or research at the POS.

LYNX Research www.lynxresearch.biz

Choosing a marketing research partner is hardly

simple. Almost every firm promises tested methods

and an efficient team to help you achieve your

objectives. The BIG problem with this is that they

often miss the personal care and attention that will

turn a solid project into something that is the envy

of your clients and colleagues. And this individual

commitment is the distinction between the research-

craftsmen at Lynx and everyone else.

MRIAwww.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.

69

MROC Japan Inc.www.mrocjapan.com

MROC Japan is the online marketing insights

company specialized exclusively in community

research in Japan. By providing ‘Supporter Online

Meeting (SOM)’ by MROC 360, the hybrid methods

both quantitative and qualitative from listening,

observing, & co-creating to nonconscious/emotional

analytics, the company tries to help the clients

put the voice of the customer at the heart of their

marketing strategy.

MRSwww.mrs.org.uk

With members in more than 60 countries, MRS is

the world’s largest research association serving all

those with professional equity in provision or use of

market, social and opinion research, and in business

intelligence, market analysis, customer insight and

consultancy.

MSU MMRwww.marketing.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.

NGMRwww.linkedin.com/grp/home?gid=31804

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.

OdinText www.andersonanalytics.com/odintext

OdinText is a patented Next Generation Text

Analytics software platform built especially for

Consumer Insights, CS and CRM professionals.

Request more information or a demo at

www.odintext.com

70

PROVOKERSwww.provokersite.com

Provokers isa brand positioning & consumer

understanding challenger. We nurture ideas,

thoughts and processes to provoke a difference that

really makes the difference.

Qualitative Research Consultants Association (QRCA)www.qrca.org

QRCA is dedicated to fostering strong education

and shaping the industry with innovative

techniques and tools. QRCA members are involved

in the design, implementation and analysis of

qualitative research around the globe. Our goal is

to promote excellence in the field of qualitative

research by pooling experience and expertise to

create a shared base of knowledge.

SAIMOwww.saimo.org.ar

SAIMO is the institution founded in 1996 that brings

together all professionals in marketing and opinion

research in Argentina.

Sands Research www.sandsresearch.com

Sands Research Inc. is a pioneer in applying

cognitive neuroscience technology for unique

insight into television and print advertisements,

retail environments, product packaging and product

design. Combined with pre- and post- questionnaires,

we provide a comprehensive, objective analysis of

the consumer’s response to advertising, packaging,

displays and sensory inputs (food, beverage and

cosmetic product testing).

The Research Club www.theresearchclub.com

At the heart of The Research Club is our desire to

connect people within the Market Research Industry.

There’s nothing we like better than bringing people

together for their mutual benefit. We’ve been

connecting people since 2007 and believe that our

relaxed style of networking events is key to building

strong relations. We now host over 30 events each year

for our growing membership of 13000+ and collaborate

with the many of the industry’s leading conference

organisations across the globe.

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.

71

University of Georgia | MRIIwww.georgiacenter.uga.edu/mrii

University of Georgia & MRII are proud education

partners of GreenBook. The Principles of Market

Research is an online certificate course administered

by the University of Georgia and is designed to

teach the Market Research Core Body of Knowledge

MRCBOK©. Over 8,000 research practitioners

have enrolled in the program from 104 countries.

New Online Course: Principles of Mobile Market

Research. This online course explores emerging

mobile technologies and how they can be applied in

market research. GreenBook is a proud supporter of

the Principles programs, presented by the UGA and

MRII.

UTAwww.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.

Vision Criticalwww.visioncritical.com

Vision Critical provides a cloud-based customer

intelligence platform that allows companies to build

engaged, secure communities of customers they can

use continuously, across the enterprise, for ongoing,

real-time feedback and insight. Designed for today’s

always-on, social and mobile savvy customer, Vision

Critical’s technology helps large, customer-centric

enterprises discover what their customers want so

they can deliver what they need.

Wisconsin School of Business- The A.C. Nielsen Center for Marketing Researchbus.wisc.edu

The A.C. Nielsen Center at the University of

Wisconsin-Madison was established in 1990 and

is built on the legacy and funding of the Arthur

C. Nielsen Jr. family, pioneers in the field of

marketing research. It was created to train students

in the specialized ideas, issues, and techniques of

marketing research, as well as to help discover and

disseminate new marketing research knowledge.

72

COMMENTARY PROVIDERS

GutCheckwww.gutcheckit.com

GutCheck is a global, online agile market research

solution that enables our clients to get quick

consumer reads to address business questions,

whenever they need to be answered. Whether it’s

scheduled research or an un-planned question,

our flexible quantitative and qualitative platform

enables us to instantly recruit your target audience.

Our full-service team designs and moderates the

discussion to give you the insights and confidence

you need to react and move your business forward.

itrackswww.itracks.com

itracks is a world-leading expert in online focus

groups and the patent holder for qualitative

applications. Leading market research professionals

and Fortune 500 companies recognize itracks’ online

applications as the most client-focused, reliable,

and flexible available. The sophisticated suite of

qualitative, quantitative, online community, and

panel services are easy to use and come equipped

with a wide range of multi-media capabilities.

L&E Researchwww.leresearch.com

L&E Research connects clients with customers,

consumers, medical professionals, patients, business

professionals, and more - for virtually any market

research project. We are Impulse Survey Top

Rated with offices in Raleigh, Tampa, Charlotte,

St. Louis, Cincinnati, Columbus and Baltimore. We

make efficient and accurate connections through

the ongoing development of our software and

technology solutions. Our diverse member database

of over 400,000 respondents ensures that you find

the respondents you need for your project.

Lucidwww.luc.id

Lucid is a software company delivering the power

of human answers on a massive scale. We built

Fulcrum, the first global marketplace for market

research sample (that means human beings who

answer questions), and introduced programmatic

buying and selling to the market research industry.

We also created Federated Sample, a full-service

sample provider that, using our proprietary

technology, empowers our clients to do world-class

market research. Over five billion questions have

been asked and answered on our global platform.

Human data on this scale gives us an amazing

opportunity to solve problems with software.

73

Research Nowwww.researchnow.com

Research Now is a digital data collection company

specializing in engaging people around the world

to provide data and opinions that inform business

decisions. Our mission is to help the world’s

business create better products and services one

decision at a time.

Sentientwww.sentientdecisionscience.com

Sentient Decision Science is a behavioral science

based research and consulting firm. Sentient was

created to bring the visionary advances from the

behavioral sciences to the business community in a

practical and accessible form in order to move global

business forward.

Sentient is a globally recognized pioneer in the

development of advanced implicit research

technology which taps the consumer subconscious

and quantifies the effects of emotion on choice. Our

implicit research technology is coupled with deep

knowledge on the fundamental drivers of human

behavior to provide unrivaled insight for our clients.

SSI www.surveysampling.com

SSI is the premier global provider of sampling, data

collection and data analytic solutions for survey

research, reaching respondents in 86 countries via

Internet, telephone, mobile/wireless and mixed-

access offerings.

SSI staff operates from 25 offices in 18 countries,

offering sample across every mode, online and CATI

data collection, questionnaire design consultation,

programming and hosting, online custom reporting

and data processing. SSI’s 3,300 employees serve

more than 3,000 clients worldwide.SSI is the premier

global provider of sampling, data collection and data

analytic solutions for survey research, reaching

respondents in 86 countries via Internet, telephone,

mobile/wireless and mixed-access offerings.

74

ADVERTISERS

Aha! www.ahaonlineresearch.com

The Next Gen Online Qual Platform

This next generation online qual research platform

enables clients, marketing research consultants,

and ad agencies to easily create engaging online

consumer studies with amazing response rates. The

customizable platform features a comprehensive

suite of social and mobile-friendly activities

including storytelling, collage building and

community tools such as pin boards, wishing walls

and bulletin boards. Drag and drop technology, the

dashboard navigation, and analytic tools are state

of the art. And you get hands-on support from

experienced researchers throughout the process.

C+R Researchwww.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. We

offer an array of customizable techniques for both

qualitative and quantitative research, and have

focused areas of knowledge and expertise in youth

and family, Latinos and Shopper Insights. Our goal

is to equip our clients with the insights they need to

confidently develop successful brand strategies and

grow their business.

FocusVisionwww.focusvision.com

FocusVision is the leading global provider of

qualitative and quantitative technology solutions to

the market research industry, providing an online

survey platform, research facility video streaming,

webcam focus groups, ethnography streaming and

mobile device usability studies. Our services allow

research professionals to engage with respondents

in any place, at any time. FocusVision has over 300

employees and offices in the US, the UK, Bulgaria,

Singapore and Brazil.

Instant.lywww.instant.ly

Instantly™ is the world’s largest audience and

insights platform, providing researchers and

marketers with immediate access to consumers

and automated insights tools to make faster, better

decisions. Instantly is based in Los Angeles, with

offices in the United States, Europe and Asia.

75

THE NEXT GENERATIONONLINE QUAL PLATFORM

Nielsenwww.nielsen.com/consumerneuroscience

By using the latest neuroscience technologies in

combination with traditional survey methods, we

help brands understand consumers’ non-conscious

and conscious emotional responses, memory

activations and attentional patterns, empowering

them to better navigate the increasing complexity

of modern consumer behavior. Our insights

provide actionable results and an unprecedented

understanding of consumer related decision-

making, allowing our clients to build deep, lasting

connections with their target audiences.

RealityCheck Consultantswww.realitycheckinc.com

RealityCheck is more than a qualitative consumer

research firm. We’re a global partnership of

experienced creative facilitators, human-to-brand

translators, strategic conceptual analysts, and

storytellers. Our brand experience allows us to

provide the kind of insightful clarity and strategic

direction that can transform a business.

From moderation and recruitment, to field

management and analysis, RealityCheck uses

cutting edge techniques and technology to humanize

market research.

SIS International Researchwww.sisinternational.com

SIS International Research is a leading global

market research and strategic intelligence firm.

Founded in 1984, the company provides full-service

custom market research services, competitive

intelligence, on-demand intelligence answering

services, emerging markets research, consulting

services and global research media. SIS International

continuously conducts ad hoc custom research in

over 120 countries for over 50 industries.

YouGovwww.global.yougov.com

YouGov is an international, full service online

market research agency offering custom research,

omnibus, field and tab services, qualitative research,

syndicated products and market intelligence reports.

Founded in the UK in 2000, YouGov is considered

the pioneer of online market research. Our unique

fully integrated online model has a well-documented

and published track record illustrating the accuracy

of its survey methods and in turn the quality of

its client service work. We can conduct research

in all continents and our online model allows

clients to get international results faster and more

cost-effectively than traditional methods, with no

compromise on quality.

76

Insightful Partnership

R

WE HAVE ALL YOUR HARD-to-REACH AUDIENCES

[email protected] (866) 872-4006

grit report

Documents