Online Market Research Methods

Online market research methods continue to evolve.  Here’s what I’m thinking about the most common qualitative methods right now.  They’re being presented as stand-alone ideas, but certainly can be used as part of mixed-method designs.

Focus Groups (with or without webcams)

How it works: Focus groups happen in real-time and are moderator-directed.  Clients view online while sessions take place and can send messages to the moderator throughout.  Webcams make viewing sessions more interesting for all involved.  Written exercises or anchoring thoughts can be done using (private) chat features.  “Whiteboards” are available for showing materials.  Some projective techniques may be harder to employ.

When to use: When you have a geographically-dispersed or hard-to-find target and you need the interaction of a traditional focus group discussion.

Bulletin Boards

How it works: Boards are set up, most typically, for a 3-5 day period, although they can certainly go longer.  Participants know they need to logon 2-3 times a day (or less depending on study design), at their convenience, to answer questions posted by the moderator; answers are typed.  (Participant time commitment might be 20 minutes to an hour per day.)  The moderator can control whether people need to respond to a question before seeing others’ responses.  Participants are encouraged to review others’ answers, make comments, etc.  Fostering interaction is critical to the success of this approach.  “Whiteboards” for showing materials are also available in this setting.

When to use: Especially good for hard-to-reach targets (IT professionals, doctors, etc.), when materials presented may evolve over the course of the board, when there’s broad geographical requirements (such as international studies), and/or when added privacy will allow for more candid responses.

Video Diaries

How it works: Over the course of the study, participants view pre-recorded moderator questions at their convenience.  Talking to the webcam, they can take their time answering with their thoughts, feelings and opinions.  Follow-up questions can be sent to participants by the moderator, although there is less probing by the moderator in this method than in focus groups or bulletin boards.  There is no participant interaction; this is another form of an in-depth interview.  It can also be viewed as a more updated, richer approach to man-on-the-street interviews.

When to use: When you think participants will find this format the best way to open up on a subject.  Can be useful in conjunction with focus groups to help make participants more aware of their thoughts/feelings on a subject prior to exploration of a related issue (e.g., new product launch in an existing category or brand repositioning).

Journaling

How it works: A cousin to video diary, although journaling happens in a written format and there is even less moderator involvement.   Guidelines are set-up by the moderator at the start and then they take a back-seat.  (As with bulletin boards, reminder emails to encourage participation and to keep them on task can be sent, but typically this is kept to a minimum.)  Participants can journal from anywhere they have Internet access, and are encouraged to do so on a regular basis for the full study period (which can go for a couple of weeks to months).  This method is somewhat closer to ethnographic research than other methods.

When to use: For more open-ended assignments, where there’s a general topic or two.  Good for “know the consumer” research and/or for topics where people’s reactions might vary by time of day (such as how they decide what/where to eat or childcare issues).

Blogging

How it works: A private, project-specific blog community is set-up.  Each participant has their own blog, where they can write, upload images, videos, etc.  They are given topics/issues to blog on (again in general terms).  Participants are encouraged to comment on each others’ blog postings.  The moderator can ask follow-up questions.  Blogging is a cousin of journaling, although there is more participant interaction; it’s also a cousin of bulletin boards, although in this case the interactions are less moderator-directed.  Because participants need to get into the swing and spirit of the project, the length of the project should be longer (at least a few weeks in my opinion).

When to use: When a hybrid method is needed that can combine some of the benefits of journaling and bulletin boards – which can create a synergy all its own.

Mobile Research

How it works: Questions are sent via text message to participants’ cell phones.  Answers tend to be short given text-messaging restrictions (approximately 160 characters – slightly more than a Tweet). Participants do not interact with one another.  The moderator may ask follow-up questions.

When to use: When we know we’d get a better quality answer by having someone text as something is occurring vs. waiting for them to get back to a computer and relying on memory.  Currently cost effective for multi-question studies.

Communities

How it works: A large number of people (N=400+) are invited to participate in a community; typically participants know the sponsor.  (They might even be recruited from a Facebook fan page.)   Participants are strongly encouraged to interact with one another absent any formal research project in social-network type areas of the community; reports on these activities can be sent to clients on a regular basis.  Sub-groups of community members are recruited to various studies during the course of the community’s life.   This qualitative method represents a blend of directed and less-directed research activities, with the potential for great creativity in research design.  Once the community is established, quicker timelines on individual projects are possible (recruiting is very fast).

When to use: It’s recommended that if a company can construct at least a six-month research plan, with frequently scheduled projects, an online community should be considered.  (Example: when developing a new product line from ideation to product roll-out.)

Your thoughts?  Any experiences you’d like to share?
PSGWMUKXJDY8

Situational Decision-Making Model

The classic learning model is comprised of three elements:  Think -> Feel -> Do.  People learn about a product or service, come to feel a certain way, and then take action.  A very linear, logical approach.

In the 80s, Dick Vaughn spearheaded the FCB Grid which identified alternative learning models, such as  Feel -> Think -> Do (for categories like luxury cars and perfume) and Do -> Feel -> Think for (instant gratification products like candy bars).  Still linear, however.

In the 90s, based on the research I was conducting, I started counseling clients that the decision-making process was actually iterative – often with lots of back and forth between the thinking and feeling components.  It’s often the case that we rationalize our feelings with thoughts and our thoughts with feelings.

But that’s only one dimension.  What’s the situation a consumer finds themselves in?  What are they actually thinking and feeling about?  How they prioritize, based on their situation, can provide marketers will critical consumer insights.

Take restaurants for example.  The diagram below shows quite a number of attributes that might be considered when deciding where to eat.

Here are several situational examples:

1. I don’t have a lot of time to eat and I’m alone.
2. I’m dining out for a special occasion and don’t have a lot of time because we’re going to the theater immediately after dinner.
3. I feel like full-service Thai in a family-friendly setting.
4. I’m driving on a highway and I’m hungry; the next rest-stops are in 5 miles and 50 miles.

Where someone “enters the decision-process” – how they prioritize what’s important to them in that situation – will determine which set of restaurants they will choose from.  In our four examples, I might have some of the same restaurants on my first two lists.  If children are in the party I might have some of the same restaurants (Thai only) on my second and third lists.  Example #4 highlights how taking action can supersede nearly all other variables.

What are the decision criteria in your category?  How can you use this approach to effectively segment and communicate with your customers?

Your thoughts?

Greener Transportation

In September, I came across an article at PSFK.com about wearable solar panel vests.  It seems that “boda bodas,” cyclists that help transport people along the borders of African countries to various immigration offices, are particular targets for this vest – but any outdoor worker could benefit.  It’s been invented by Kenyan Dominic Wanjihia.

This vest is a flexible solar panel that harnesses the sun for various things, such as phone recharging (for the boda boda operator so clients can always reach him or for clients while in transit) and lighting (an emergency light while on the road at night or at home to help save on power bills).  Of course, since he’s wearing the vest, his investment won’t get stolen.

At the other end of the spectrum comes news from CarTechBlog.com.  While electric cars garner a lot of interest in the West, recharging times don’t hold a lot of appeal.  (They can run in excess of a few hours.)  The Fraunhofer Institute in Germany is improving something called a “redox flow battery.”  It uses two electronic fluids; the exchange of protons though a membrane creates electricity.

Okay, I’d admit the technical part is way over my head.  But what sounds great is that when you need a “recharge,” you’d go to a station where they would pump out the “discharged” fluid and fill your car with new “charged” fluid – in a matter of minutes.  Still not cool enough?  Well, the plan is that they could recharge used fluids on-site using solar cells or wind turbines.  No more oil tankers.  I have no idea of the downsides of this new battery and it doesn’t address how to recycle the used batteries, but it sounds like this could be an exciting step forward!

Y8KRUPGZQE2K

Buying Ads Effectively

A new study from the ANA Alliance for Family Entertainment reports that the type of show in which an ad is placed can impact the effectiveness of that advertising.

A couple of key points from “Are Family-Friendly Shows a Better Environment for Ads?” (Ad Age 11/4/09):

“Running an ad in a show that matches its tone and provides appropriate context can boost ad effectiveness by an average of more than 30%.”

“The collective ad-spending might of the Alliance for Family Entertainment is enough to raise the eyebrows of any media outlet.  Should [this] research help guide marketers’ spending decisions, then certainly, TV networks and other media might take notice.”

I am not in media research.  But I spent more than 10 years working in ad agencies.  What surprises me is that this is “new news” or that media outlets would be just waking up to these facts.

In part, my job as an account planner was to work closely with the media planner – and there were times when the two of us sat with the buyer to refine a buy.  We were always looking for great synergy between our ad spends and the people we were trying to reach.  From the sound of it, this collaborative approach may be on the verge of a resurgence.

A cautionary note for Marketing ROI and Math Marketing advocates:   All TRPs are not the same.  Those that enhance loyalty or positive brand associations – things hard to calculate – count for more than just immediate sales returns.