We’ve been hearing a lot about the “new” mixed-method or hybrid market research techniques called “Quant/Qual” of late. Truth is, if you’ve been around marketing research for any length of time, you know that we’ve been doing “quant/qual” or “qual/quant” for decades.
What’s different – and noteworthy – is the way technology is being leveraged. Two companies come to mind, yet I’m sure there are others:
iModerate – Fields a larger quant study and then pulls off certain participants to have a one-on-one follow up with a professional moderator. As their site says: Research>iMpact provides a hybrid approach in which online qualitative sessions are incorporated into virtually any online survey, giving you qualitative insight that enhances and clarifies the quantitative data.
Invoke Solutions – Seemingly more quantitative in orientation, Invoke is leveraging their technology to obtain richer and deeper open-ended responses. They say that it’s like a focus group experience, but I’m going to need to learn more before I’m convinced. Having said that, I’ve seen enough that I’m intrigued and I want to learn more. The client-interface portion looks very powerful.
But are either of these “new”? I started this topic thinking, “No, they’re not really new at all. Just a new twist on an old approach.”
But the more I think about this, the more I believe these might be new approaches. The dividing line for me lies in the definition of “qualitative research.”
- Qualitative research explores.
- Great open-ended responses in quantitative research explains.
For now, I’m going to continue to think of these newer approaches in these ways – and make client recommendations accordingly. And, as always, I’ll continue to seek out more info. If you’ve got something to share on this subject, please do!
Maybe I’ve missed something, but with mobile marketing being so “hot” these days, why hasn’t an ad delivery network teamed with a mobile carrier to offer a newer, less costly phone-service option?
We have monthly phone plans, unlimited data plans, and pre-paid phones, but what about a service that says if you agree to view two ads a day on your mobile, you’ll get X off your monthly carrier changes, and five ads a day you’ll get Y off your charges? Or extra minutes? Or free text credits?
Certainly, marketers love the platform because people are literally attached to their phones at the hip. And, if like TV programming viewed on the Web, a person couldn’t get their messages unless they saw the 10-15-second ad first, theoretically, they would be more attentive to the ad. At least this form of mobile advertising is more opt-in than any other. The consumer makes an agreement with their cell phone provider and by extension the ad network: I’ll agree to watch you ads if you lower my bill.
Are we so entrenched in the cable TV model that we’re not thinking outside the box? I think there could be an opportunity here. What do you think?
Over the last year, “apps” and “social media” have gotten a lot of attention. “Apps” are making smartphones more indispensible – “stickier” to use a word from Web 1.0.
And social media (Web 2.0’s driver)? While there’s a lot of hype, we’re beginning to hear that interest among some segments is waning. Dunbar’s Number has been trotted back out as rationalization for the slowed growth. (How many “friends” can you really follow?)
So, can social media be made more engaging and relevant with “stickiness”?
There are lots of folks out there trying, but the one concept that’s caught my eye for its potential “marketing legs” is location-based mobile services – such as Foursquare, Yelp, and Gowalla. Foursquare seems to be the one to watch and it’s doing some interesting things. Its site says:
foursquare is a cross between a friend-finder, a social city-guide and a game that rewards you for doing interesting things. We aim to build things to not only help you keep up with the places your friends go, but that encourage you to discover new places and challenge you to explore your neighborhood in new ways.
Consider customer loyalty programs. You login and say you’re at a restaurant. That restaurant knows you’ve been there 10 times before and could reward you with a free dessert. No cards to keep track of and you are engaged with the brand as you know your actions get you bonuses sooner.
A brand can promote its involvement via Twitter, at checkout, or wherever it makes sense.
Part of the social aspect comes from Foursquare’s “mayor” concept. If you’re the most frequent visitor to a location, you’re crowned mayor. A bit of a game or contest that could bring people in again and again.
What about brands without a retail presence? Pepsi sponsored a NY charity event for CampInteractive: every time New Yorkers checked in from any location with Foursquare, points were tallied and Pepsi gave money. In this case, social engagement with a purpose.
Even without charitable involvement or the “mayor” concept, this is a newer form of social media that provides something tangible to the user. Consequently, in my view, a highly “sticky” idea.
