Tamara Barber of Forrester Research recently posted an interesting blog on "Research Panels vs. Research Communities - What's the difference?" that highlights something we've mentioned on the MROC Talk blog before, namely that there is a distinct difference between research panels and market research online communities. 

It's great to hear that other vendors and analysts covering the space are also onboard with the differences, as I think it will mean there is finally some clarification around the terms and ways these two methods are used in the industry...

What I particularly like about Tamara's post is her mention of the iterative nature of online research communities, and how that makes for a key difference between a research community and a research panel.  Research communities allow you to really explore a topic in-depth through numerous iterations around a similar theme.  This is one of the biggest benefits of an ongoing research community approach. 

If you get a chance, definitely check out the post and comments (particularly Diane Hessan's insightful comment about focusing on engagement over size).  A special "thank you" to Katie Harris for her mention of our blog in the comments :-)

If you're interested, you can also check out some of our previous posts on this topic below:

• When does a market research community become a research panel? 
  
• Research communities vs. research panels
• Rethinking qualitative research methods
• Qualitative versus quantitative feedback in online research communities

In a lot of our presentations we talk about how online research communities help clients be more proactive in their research approach. At times we get a lot of blank stares... I have a feeling people think we are crazy.
 
But, how many of you in the research world get the dreaded call at 4:30 on Friday asking if you can do a "disaster check" study by the middle of the next week? Do you ever ask yourself why we are in that position? Wouldn't a more proactive research process help us avoid those frantic (and oftentimes unrealistic) scenarios?

Online research communities give you the venue to be able to be more proactive... a few months before that ad is created, or the messaging is developed, or the concept is conceived - you could be running activities designed to understand what triggers your audience responds to, what gaps you need to overcome as a brand, what really motivates people, and what themes/communication ideas resonate best.

Would this completely eliminate the need for reactive research? Probably not, but at least you would be much more in tune with how concepts would be received... and your Friday afternoon would be much more fun.

Happy Friday,

- Ben

I realize this one is a bit of a stretch, but with all this talk of energy conservation and being more responsible global citizens... Pound for pound, MROCs are the greenest methodology out there.

Let's say that 1 moderator and 2 clients depart on a domestic focus group project in 3 cities (New York, Chicago, Los Angeles). They conduct 3 groups in each city with an average of 10 people per group who drive about 22 miles roundtrip to get to the group... here is how the carbon footprint breaks down:

Flights (JFK - ORD - LAX) = 8,859 lbs of CO2

Driving to focus groups (mid size sedan) = 1,779 lbs of CO2

TOTAL = 10,638 lbs of CO2

You could run the same study in a market research online community with virtually no negative environmental impact. You could also invite many more people/clients into your study if you wanted to.  Now, I'm not sure that "impact on the environment" should be the key criteria in deciding what research methodology to pursue, but you can't argue that it is more environmentally responsible! Feel free to use this argument in your next proposal.

- 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

We've been hearing some rumblings lately about how the term "community" is starting to lose a bit of luster in the market research industry.  Specifically, communities are associated with expensive, long-term initiatives that yield a ton of information which organizations have little ability to digest effectively. 

While we know this is the minority of opinions out there, it naturally has us concerned with how they are perceived.  We'd like to use this post to dispel some of the myths of online communities for market research...

Myth #1 - Online research communities are expensive

The key to this is to compare the cost relative to other methodologies.  The communities we run at PluggedIN generally cost about the same each month as two small focus groups (without travel costs).  However, a community can offer many more benefits than two focus groups.  For example, you can spend much more time (on average) with participants, dive deeper into a variety of research topics, get feedback much faster and learn more about participants than in a focus group setting.  

It's also useful to think about what these benefits mean to your organization on a larger scale.  For example, let's imagine a community cuts your product development cycle down by just 1-2 months.  Or imagine that it yields 2-3 highly promising new product concepts.  How much potential revenue does that represent? 

Finally, consider what it would cost to obtain feedback through other research methodologies.  How much can a community save over time by reducing the reliance on other methodologies to address a variety of research objectives?  In short, communities may seem expensive as a lump sum but once you dissect the cost a bit you'll realize how much value they can provide.   

Myth #2 - Online research communities include hundreds of members (typically between 300-500 people)

While research communities can ultimately be any size, they don't have to include hundreds of people.  In fact, we've had success with as few as 50 participants.  Larger communities can end up driving the price up without corresponding value to the overall study (given that communities are primarily a qualitative methodology).  We've found great results at around 150 participants, since it allows you to get enough meaningful feedback on each activity while still getting to know participants on a one-to-one basis.   

Myth #3 - Online research communities are designed to last for the long-term

Communities don't always need to be an ongoing affair.  In fact, they can be very useful when they are targeted around a set of objectives and shut down once those objectives have been satisfied.  While some companies can get a tremendous amount of value through an ongoing community, other companies simply don't have the need for a continuous research venue.     

Myth #4 - Online research communities are hard to manage

While there is indeed a lot of information that emerges from an online research community (particularly in a longer-term community), there are techniques for effectively managing the output.  For example, having a separate project management site for clients and researchers ensures everyone is on the same page throughout the study.  In addition, frequent summaries of activities help to distill the findings into manageable pieces for quick dissemination across the organization.   

In conclusion...

As with any new technique or technology, there tends to be quite a bit of hype followed by some backlash.  Some companies may have been burned in early community experiences where the community was larger and longer than it needed to be, and this may be where the current backlash is stemming from.  

However, we encourage everyone to think carefully about what is possible from a flexible methodology like an online research community, and how the investment can lead to many new opportunities for your organization.

What do you think?

What's your take on the buzz about communities?  Comments are welcome!

I’ve blogged before about the confusion around the term “online community ,” but thought it made sense to follow-up with some specific reasons why companies should consider setting up a separate online research community.

First, some background on why I’m writing this post… In the interest of creating efficiencies, some companies are using their existing online communities as a means of gathering research insights. For example, they might ask a question in a community on their corporate website about a new product or ad concept and hope for some directional information to guide their decisions. I’m all for efficiency, but this practice of using general online communities for research has a few drawbacks that are worth acknowledging.

There are some strong reasons to setup a separate online research community and treat it very differently from more “conventional” online communities. Read on for 10 reasons why it makes sense to setup and maintain a separate online research community…

Why setup a separate online research community?

Here are 10 reasons why it makes sense to have an online research community apart from your other online community initiatives:

1. Privacy - Online research communities provide companies with an ideal venue to test new concepts (products, ads, websites, etc…) before they are launched, without the fear of competitors gaining access. This level of privacy can be difficult to attain in a public community.
2. Control - In a private online research community it is far easier to guide the conversation around topics of interest to you and your stakeholders to get at your research and business objectives. If you tried to do the same in a public community, members might view you as exerting too much control over what they have been building on their own. It could hurt the dynamic of your other online communities to guide the conversation too much, whereas research communities have that built-in expectation. Of course, research communities also benefit from “losing control” on purpose (which is another blog post entirely…).
3. Shared Purpose - Setting up an online research community and being transparent about the purpose of the community (e.g., market research and consumer insights), gives you another shared purpose around which participants can bond. While it shouldn’t be your only shared purpose, it can be something that helps them make connections faster.
4. Smaller Size - The smaller size of most online research communities (generally less than 500 participants), allows for a much more “intimate” look at the audience and their needs. In a larger online community it is easy to lose track of people and the context for their responses to research activities.
5. Exclusivity - Going with the smaller size theme, members of an online research community may also feel more personally vested in the community, knowing that their voice is one of hundreds rather than thousands. The “exclusive” element can be a big driver of sustained participation in the research community.
6. Cost - Trying to build the tools that a researcher needs into an existing community (for example, on your company’s website) can actually be more costly than using a specially-designed (and separate) platform for conducting ongoing market research.
7. Technology - Going with the cost theme, there are certain tools inherent in an online research community that allow for better ways of conducting research. For example, sometimes we ask “unaided” questions in PluggedIN research communities to minimize the impact of group think. That may seem like a small feature, but it’s big when you’re trying to get an unbiased look at a concept/issue.
8. Context - In a private online research community you know the participants and their associated demographic/psychograhic data as a result of profiling every member before joining the community. This allows you to push targeted activities and understand the context for the answers far better than in a general online community. In a public community, you have no standard understanding of who they are beyond what they provide in their profile page. Some may tell you a lot, others nothing.
9. Environment - I used to travel quite a bit down to Austin to moderate groups and in-depth interviews at Dell’s corporate headquarters. While it was convenient and cost effective for Dell, I always got the sense that participants felt a little “awkward” giving their unbiased feedback in the Dell building with Dell logos everywhere you turn. The same can be said for communities. Conducting research on a corporate website has a different feel entirely than a dedicated site for research.
10. Separating research from marketing - Last, but definitely not least, is the idea that research objectives should be separate from marketing objectives. It’s hard to ask for honest, unbiased opinions on the one hand, while providing obvious mechanisms purchase a product or spread the word about a brand on the other hand. Leave those objectives for a buzz building or customer loyalty community, and leave research objectives for a separate research community.

My assumptions

Of course, I’ve made a few assumptions here about the online research community you are using. For example, the feature described in “Context” is something called “user lists” in our PluggedIN Research Platform, and the feature described in “Technology” is something specific to our discussion section. Depending on the technology you choose as a backbone for your online research community, these features may or may not be available.

I’m also assuming that you’re starting out with research and customer insights as a priority, when in fact these might be ancillary objectives for your organization.

Conclusion

I hope this list gave you some ideas for why it makes sense to keep an online research community separate from other online communities, particularly those that are used for marketing initiatives. I’d recommend taking a good hard look at your objectives first. If the majority are research-oriented then it might make sense to setup a separate research community for many of the reasons I’ve cited above. You can then leave the rest to other “marketing-oriented” online communities/social networks that many companies already have setup.

What do you think?

I’m sure there is something missing here… What would you add (or subtract) from this list? In your opinion, does it make sense to separate online research communities from online communities? Why or why not?