Great news! My article on DIY research “Why It’s Good for Everyone” won the counterpoint contest recently run by the MRA’s Alert! Magazine. The article is reprinted in the MRA… Continue reading DIY Research Article a Marketing Research Association Winner!
Clients seeking to conduct a market research project typically choose one of two paths: do it in-house or outsource to a full-service market research agency. Pretty simple.
But now, a third option exists: out-tasking.
The US 2010 Market Research conference season will be starting soon. Luckily, this year they are a bit more spread out than last year.
The MRA’s big conference will be in Boston in June.
The AMA’s annual Market Research Conference will be in Atlanta in September.
And IIR’s The Market Research Event will be in San Diego in November.
I can hear the sighs of anticipated exhaustion already. Travel, sessions, expense reports. And the dreaded, overflowing inbox that faces you upon returning to work the next week.
Besides, we have to ask ourselves: do in-person events matter anymore? Look, I am in the business of online training—I LOVE online content. But I do believe that there is still a place for in-person events as well. And here is why:
Do these websites matter? Aren’t they just electronic billboards?
I think they do matter. A lot of people who buy and use market research visit agency websites. And frankly, they are more likely to visit an agency site than that of a professional association (such as the MRA or CASRO) or of a trade publication (such as Quirk’s or Research Magazine). So these agency websites are, intentionally or not, a key source of client education.
Websites are the virtual storefronts of market research agencies. It’s where you often get your first impression of a potential research supplier. You peek in the window and see if the goods are narrow or diverse, dated or current. You get an impression about personality and culture. You may even get a sense of trustworthiness.
But if you have ever looked at more than 2 or 3 agency web sites, you will see that the quality and content vary dramatically. Almost dismayingly so.
So how to compare them?…
The difference between good market research and great market research can be significant.
But sometimes the incremental time, cost and sweat of that extra effort simply doesn’t make sense. Sometimes, “good” is just perfect.
I was reminded of this last week at the Launch Camp conference in Cambridge. The event, for entrepreneurs seeking social media wisdom, had some interesting speakers, though the one from whom I learned the most was Dharmesh Shah, Chief Technology Officer and Founder of HubSpot (on Twitter as @Darmesh).
These days, there are innovators out there. Agencies using cooler tools, applying newer sample quality processes, and even offering new deliverables. Their methods may push you out of your comfort zone. Their proposals may be harder to read because they won’t be full of the same boilerplate you’ve been seeing for years.
The original article recommends NPS (Net Promoter Score) as the optimal standard for customer satisfaction with telecommunications providers. Ummm, no. So since I didn’t get to share on the TMCnet site, let me share some information here for those of you interested in measuring customer satisfaction in the telecommunications space. “There are many scenarios in which customers may be satisfied with certain service levels or offerings yet refrain from recommending or referring the larger offering to their friends.” Yes, this is very true…
If you need to set expectations with colleagues about the quantitative market research process, here you go (see bottom of post): the key steps layed out in a simple flowchart.
I have used this diagram to walk market research newbies through the process many times, and it always gets rave reviews. While the chart is pretty self-explanatory, a few items are worth pointing out…
As researchers, we talk a lot about matching the methodology to the first objective. But given low response rates and the preciousness of qualified respondents, we need to focus a lot more on matching the methodology to the audience.
