This past weekend I finally got around to watching the first few episodes of "Mad Men" at the suggestion of friends.  I nearly shed a tear when a scene in the first or second episode involved the company's market researcher presenting their findings to Don Draper (the leading man and ad executive), who then promptly discarded the report into the trash.  It left me with the sinking feeling that this has probably happened at some point over the course of my career (although likely not nearly as dramatic :-)  It also made me think of the state of research now, and how we can make ourselves more visible and strategically relevant to organizations.  

Fast forward to this morning, when I caught a recent article from Adweek on how "Clients Could Make Better Use of Research." The article points to a recent BCG study suggesting that most companies are approaching their market research from a largely tactical perspective, while missing the strategic insights that are possible through research.  I've seen this play out in market research online communities (MROCs), where the initial objectives are very much on a strategic level, but slowly start to move toward quick hit tactical activities once internal clients realize that the community is an excellent resource for these types of insights.  It can be difficult to keep the focus on the strategic once this start to happen, although it can definitely be done.  Here are a few suggestions for how:

1. Set aside a set of activities each week for "big picture" objectives - A big advantage of MROCs is the ability to get tactical insights quickly and cost effectively, and this benefit shouldn't be ignored...  However, it's important to set aside time for "big picture" objectives each week.  Consider ways of carving out time in the facilitation plan to address these objectives weekly, and standing your ground when tactical activities start to encroach on these strategic exercises.  
2. Review the objectives whenever possible - Use weekly community meetings or weekly/monthly webinars as an opportunity to review the objectives.  While internal clients might get sick of hearing the same message over and over, they'll eventually get the point that there are strategic objectives in play and the time must be spent to uncover these types of insights. 
3. Clearly tie findings with strategic objectives - Whenever possible, try to tie back specific summaries and insights to the initial objectives, rather than just reporting on them as standalone summaries.  For example, in a recent community we made a separate section of the report that was dedicated to one specific strategic objective, and were sure to include this in each monthly report.  This helps communicate how these objectives are being addressed, and stresses the importance of them as well.  

MROCs represent a new opportunity for market researchers to gain visibility across our client's organizations.  However, it requires that we all take a leap of faith and change the way we uncover findings, deliver them and ultimately rally internal stakeholders around research findings.  This is something that we're working actively on here at PluggedIN...  Be on the lookout for a new product we're launching in January that will help companies move from Stage 1 of BCG's scale (the tactical research organization) to Stage 4 (strategic).  In the meantime, I hope these suggestions help!

--Matt

Bad decisions happen, yes, even after research is done. Truthfully, they can result from any methodology, but one way to prevent this in research communities is to really recognize the value and limitations of your community.

The Value

Since communities are great qualitative tools, they allow you to better understand why people behave, decide and act the way they do. Communities are great for exploring pros/cons, barriers/opportunities, so keep it all in perspective and don't ask your community to do something it can't.  Instead of asking your community, "how much do you like this concept?" or "would you buy this?", instead ask your community "what exactly does this concept do for you?"  or "how could we make it more relevant for you?" These are questions a community can more realistically answer.

The Limitations

Also, you need to be transparent about who is in your community. Results are not necessarily projectable to a larger audience, and they may even represent a somewhat biased or involved consumer. However, these very consumers may have a better sense of who you really are, so they also may have the most insightful suggestions for your brand moving forward.

After all, research is supposed to inform decisions, not make  decisions for you. So, ask yourself what information can your community offer that helps you make a better decision?

- Ben

I've blogged a bit before about the difference between a market research online community and an online research panel, but a recent discussion around the office sparked some more thoughts on the debate.  First, let me explain a bit of the background for this post...

Most of the community requests we get tend to be on the "smaller" side (i.e., sub 300 members).  These requests are generally from companies looking to supplement (or sometimes replace) their existing online and offline qualitative research through a MROC.  However, from time-to-time we get requests for very large (over 1,000 member) communities.  Upon receiving a recent request for a very large community, I started to wonder at what point a community starts to become a panel.  Allow me to explain...

What a MROC means to me...

I see the beauty of communities being the connections between members, and the resulting insights that occur through those connections.  I also see the benefit being a deep understanding of the individual and their needs, which is the goal of most qualitative research initiatives to begin with...  

However, when communities have many hundreds or thousands of members, those connections run the risk of breaking down.  Can you imagine the experience of a research participant who is asked to read through a discussion with 500 responses?  What is the likelihood of getting that valuable "across the table" discussion.  I know I wouldn't wade through more than 100 responses to a discussion if I was a research participant, even if I was very interested in the topic and shared a lot in common with other participants.  I just don't have the time...

In my experience, when a community exceeds about 300 members it starts to become a panel.  Connections between members don't happen as frequently, it becomes slightly less "personal," and it can become almost a Q&A session.  I don't mean to use the term "panel" in a derogatory manner, as there is always value in collecting feedback from a targeted group on a continuous basis - no matter the method.  However, I feel a true "community" should act and feel differently than a panel.

Comparing this experience to a focus group...

For anyone who has yet to experience or moderate a MROC, the only experience I can liken this to is if you were moderating a focus group and for each question in your guide you simply went around the table asking for answers in order.  Very large "communities" run the risk of feeling like a "serial interview," and less like a natural conversation.

This, of course, is just my two cents on the topic...  I can also see why some organizations want or need a larger research community; namely, that you can take the data from the qualitative discussions and validate it through surveys - all in the same venue.  The resulting cost and time efficiencies can be very enticing.  Plus, you can always take a very large community and sub-divide it into smaller groups of targeted people (given the right platform).  However, for my money I'd take a small group of committed participants any day :-)

What do you think?  When does a community become a panel?  What are the tradeoffs between a small and large community?  Comments are open (and welcome)!  

--Matt

Let's imagine you've decided that a Market Research Online Community (MROC) is a good fit for your organization...  You've read all about the benefits of a MROC, developed your objectives and metrics for success, selected a MROC vendor and are ready to get started.  What's next? 

Most companies can (fairly) easily digest the findings from a set of focus groups...  However, MROCs are a bit different, as they present a steady stream of customer insights that may have far reaching implications for your company.  The issue then becomes:

• How do you explain this new research resource to your internal stakeholders?  
• How do you level set expectations for appropriate content/topics to explore in your MROC?
• How do you effectively distribute the findings across your organization?

How do you explain this new research resource to your internal stakeholders?

To borrow a bit from Chip and Dan Heath (authors of Made to Stick), it helps to put your MROC in light of an existing "schema."  For example, you may want to talk about how a MROC is like an ongoing focus group with a larger sample size than normal.  We touched on this before in our post on "A Focus Group on Steroids."  That will help set the expectation early on that a MROC is primarily a qualitative tool. 

Also consider showing them a sample deliverable from a community, to help stakeholders understand exactly what they can expect from the output.  Finally, a mock-up and guided tour of the pre-launch site (with a bit of "seed" content for reference) will help sets the stage for what is to come.  Most (or all) of this can be accomplished in a single afternoon meeting...

How do you level set expectations for appropriate content/topics to explore in your MROC?

You'll want to quickly outline what is appropriate and not appropriate to explore in a MROC.  Typically, MROCs are qualitative in nature, meaning anything that you would normally cover through a survey should probably be left to a survey.  That's not to say that surveys cannot (or should not) be run in a MROC; rather, it is important to caveat the output to ensure decisions are made with the appropriate data.

In general, a simple document explaining how to use the community with some specific examples of "ideal" community questions will help set expectations properly early on.  We like to seed the facilitation plan with examples of relevant activities to help get people thinking about how to use their MROC.  Again, this is something that can be accomplished over the course of a kickoff meeting.

How do you effectively distribute the findings across your organization?

Last, but definitely not least, is how you plan to distribute findings.  Unlike focus groups and other "point in time" qualitative research methods, the findings from a MROC are continuous.  Left unattended, they can accumulate into very large reports that get lost on a company's intranet.  The key is to deliver findings in "bite size" pieces in the form which your stakeholders are most likely to pay attention. 

For example, if your company's culture is driven by email communication (as most are) then you have a variety of options at your disposal.  These options might be in the form of a monthly email announcing the report (and providing a link to download directly from the email), weekly emails with topline findings and highlights of activities to come or even "twitter-like" bursts of insights throughout the week/month to keep people intrigued by what is happening in the community. 

If your company is a bit more "hip" to technology and social media, then you could experiment with various means of distributing findings via those channels (more on that in future blog posts...).

The takeaway...

You'll have to do a bit of prep work to get your company ready for a MROC, but it will be well worth it in the form of happy stakeholders who are more knowledgeable about your target audience than ever before...  

- Matt 

I read a very compelling (and exhausting) discussion thread on LinkedIn about the skills required to "discover new consumer insights." (Note: you may have be to be a member of the consumer insights group)

The opinions were very interesting, and I do agree with the premise that there is a certain amount of skill and technique when it comes to uncovering consumer insights (open-mindedness, creativity, empathy, curiosity, appreciation of history, ability to connect the dots, etc.). There was a great quote on how best to start the insight process that said you should...  "throw a net and start a sifting process"

I realized that communities can be this "net." They provide researchers with a resource that encourages a variety of conversations (from researcher to customer, customer to customer, and researcher to researcher).  I think through all of this collaboration, experimentation, and chatter, researchers are in a much better position to spot actual insights (and use their skills!).

Let's face it, qualitative research is not always an exact science, but communities put us in the best position to be able to spot an insight, and build on it. We would all like to believe that simply listening to customers results in an idea, but many times it is the conversations we have about these customers, or the thoughts that occur when we take the time to connect that dots that are the true pathway to the idea.

-Ben

Market research needs to be more captivating

I think we can all agree that you can learn more about someone over a drink at a bar than you can if you take that same person into a focus group room and interview them for an hour. The environment and overall participant experience is so important, even though your questions may be the same.

Online qualitative needs to be more captivating

I think this has some definite implications for online qualitative research, especially as companies seek an extended relationship with respondents. The environment and member experience is so crucial because you want people to stick around for weeks/months rather than hours/minutes. Also, many people assume that because online is more convenient then it must be more engaging, but this is not entirely true. Some of the most technical bulletin board/forum software is also some of the least user-friendly and least entertaining for participants to use over the long term.

People don't love the research experience

Additionally, market research is not widely respected by the general population (speaking mostly for the US audience, here). Many don't like the thought of participating - and who would blame them? They associate market research with annoying phone calls, check box surveys, long batteries of open-ended questions (yes, even in qualitative forums)... It's telling when Facebook has a group called "I work in Market Research & no I don't stand in the street with a clipboard." There is a disconnect between how researchers and participants perceive the experience.  I think we all need to consider the participant experience more carefully and do all we can to make it less repetitive, more engaging, more entertaining, and genuinely more fun.

Market research online communities have a opportunity to change perceptions

One of the great things about online market research communities is that they provide a more engaging, less "clinical" experience for participants. We hear from our community members that they think the experience is fun and captivating, especially compared to conventional surveys, discussion forums, and other modes. Also, in research communities (whether 2 months or 2 years) your core members feel more vested in the goal of the research than they do with other modes. Having research participants that want to participate, are genuinely having a good time, and are vested in the direction of your research objectives is an ideal situation.

Perceptions won't change automatically

However, even with this more engaging tool we still need to be vigilant about the member experience. Part of this may be the look/feel of the community site, but more importantly it is about the way you incorporate the various tools (e.g., discussions, blogs, polls) and the type/mix of activities that you run that ultimately help make research more fun and captivating.  

Chime in if you have any specific exercises/activities on this. I know we have posted a few in the past.

- Ben

There's the old adage that once your mom understands (or uses) some new technology that mainstream adoption is soon to follow.  That's a comforting thought considering a conversation I recently had with my mom about what we're doing at PluggedIN. 

She was asking how PluggedIN is coming along and if the economy is impacting how we're doing.  I told her business is fine despite the economy.  Then I started to explain some of the benefits of research communities to help her understand why more companies are turning to them.

My example for the value of research communities

I decided to compare it against something she knows (focus groups), so I gave her the example of how a focus group only lasts for a couple of hours and costs thousands of dollars, and how a community can do more to help most companies at roughly the cost of a focus group (or two) per month.  I also told her how much faster we can turnaround our results because of the community.  Finally, I explained how it helped us get to know the participants better because we could learn about them over time. 

To my surprise, she just "got it."  She started to ask me questions about what kinds of people participate and the kinds of questions companies ask - questions that let me know she really did understand what they are all about and how they help companies, participants and researchers alike.

Taking a step back...

It's really easy to get lost in research lingo, to think about "best practices" in community management and where the industry is heading.  Sometimes it's worth taking a step back and explaining things to good ol' mom to see if she gets it before taking the message to the masses.

What do you think?

Are we at the point where everyone just "gets it?"  Will research communities ever become the "mainstream" way to do things in the market research industry?

A lot of clients ask us why we first became interested in market research communities. I guess the story begins back in early 2002 when Matt and I were working at Harris Interactive. We were predominantly working in qualitative research and roaming around the country doing face to face focus groups, telephone interviews, usability studies , ethno… you name it. We also had a ton of experience with early online qualitative research like bulletin boards and chat groups.

New Direction in Qualitative Research

We always felt that market research (and qualitative especially) was a bit behind the times in terms of technology. While bulletin boards and chat groups were growing in popularity, they were still modeled after traditional point-in-time qualitative methods and relied heavily on the ability of the researcher to ask the right questions. We saw a lot of potential in online communities because they allowed us to develop a more continuous connection with respondents and run faster research, but they also signaled a different direction in the researcher/respondent relationship.

The Dynamic of Research Communities

Research communities give respondents a greater voice, different ways to express themselves, and more control of the conversation.  Research communities also give researchers a continuous venue to experiment, ask questions, develop long term understanding, and a way to listen to conversations they didn’t necessarily start.

So that is why we started PluggedIN and ventured into the market research community space.  I like to say it was a leap of faith, but the writing was more clearly on the wall… plus it doesn’t matter how great the “Heavenly Bed” is on the road, there is nothing better than my Sealy (even if my wife dominates 75% of it) : )

I just arrived back in the office from a day-long meeting with a client about the first set of findings from their online research community. The goal of the meeting was to present the initial set of community findings, understand what they mean for their organization and brainstorm ways to dig deeper in future months based on the feedback.

While marathon meetings like this can be a bit exhausting, it’s worth it when you hear stakeholders across all areas of the company (e.g., marketing, product development, customer satisfaction, etc…) react to the findings and realize that they now have this extremely valuable ongoing research community that can be used to gather insights much more efficiently and effectively than before…

What struck me as particularly interesting was a comment that came out in one of the early meetings. It was a comment made as we were providing some background on the community and what it was designed to do for their company. In this meeting a member of their core team drew the comparison of the research community to a “focus group on steroids.” I think that’s a great metaphor for an online research community, and here’s why…

Why this metaphor works

Here are some reasons why “a focus group on steroids” is a great way to think about an online research community…

• It draws on an existing schema - First, it uses an existing schema/concept (focus groups) that people know well, and applies it to a brand new methodology that can be tricky to immediately comprehend for anyone outside of a market research or consumer insights capacity.
• It sounds less “risky” - Similar to the above, a focus group is something that people know and are comfortable with. That increases their likelihood of accepting the findings as something that are valid and worth paying attention to.
• It sets the stage for the qualitative findings - It clearly identifies a research community as a qualitative research methodology designed to understand the “why” and “how,” and helps people understand that the community findings cannot be projected to a wider audience.
• It succinctly describes a benefit of an online research community - The “steroids” aspect clearly indicates that an online research community is superior to a focus group in many ways. This association can be made both in terms of quantity of feedback (which is almost always true of a research community) and quality (which is generally true, although focus groups can also generate valuable research insights in their own right).
• It’s memorable - It’s easy to remember and just “sticks” once you hear it. That’s a good thing when you’re hoping to draw attention to the availability of a research community across your company.

What does this mean for you?

Are you a researcher or consumer insights specialist who is having trouble “selling” the idea of an online research community internally? This might be a good metaphor to use to help convince your stakeholders that this is something worth pursuing. Of course, you can always elaborate on the metaphor by sharing some of the benefits of online research communities we share on this site.

Has this worked for you?

What do you think? Does this metaphor make sense? Have you used other analogies to help people quickly realize what a research community is and how valuable it can be? Feel free to leave a comment with other suggestions!