research
at workes
BRAND2 180111

Archive for the ‘Blog’ Category

Here at FACE, we live for the moment – and we especially like to do it in the name of research. Researching live experiences used to be a matter of showing up, doing interviews at various points, and taking down notes throughout, maybe a survey here or there. But that’s not our style and things have changed (we love change!). Now, people can experience everything the world has to offer in real time while simultaneously contributing and sharing experiences with others through mobile and social media. It’s been great news for us, because we get even more opportunities to delve into understanding what is happening and why.

We’ve been doing more and more research in this area and are fascinated by it. So in the spirit of experiencing and sharing, here are some tips that have helped make our live research live up to the definition on Urban Dictionary: “jumping, full of people, exciting!”

World Cup Stadium
Image by Flickr user Shine 2010 – 2010 World Cup good news

1. Focus

When going into any kind of live event (whether physical or digital, or both) having a clear objective and a plan are incredibly important. Whether we are looking at engagement with a message, understanding behavior in context, or identifying opportunities for improvement, having a focal question helps to narrow in on exactly what kind of information the research should prioritize over all of the other (distracting!) aspects that make live events so fascinating.

2. Technology

Even a few years ago, asking people to do things while they were doing something else was fraught with difficulty (think paper diaries, and intercept interviews). But now, online behaviors have really shifted in our favor in regards to collecting data during live events. Liveblogging, livestreaming, updating, checking in, – all of these methods act as shortcuts that help participants get their thoughts directly to us without getting in the way of the experience itself.

And the best part is that people are already engaging in these behaviors in their personal lives. We’re just extending an already existing behavior into a research situation. Just be sure to choose your technology medium carefully. Make sure that it fits within the situation you’re looking at. For instance, check-ins are useful if you’re studying gym-workout behavior. But they’re not really that useful if you’re looking at the experience of a live concert.

3. Real-time integration

This should go without saying, but I am going to say it anyway. In order to capture what happens ‘live’, the research simply has to be happening at the same time. The information you get from people experiencing something in the moment (even if it doesn’t seem relevant at the time) is extremely powerful and should not be left out of the picture. When people look back on experiences in retrospect, it is often lacking a lot of the rich contextual information that is key to understanding what is really going on in the moment.

4. Thinking about dimensions

Live experiences are akin to animated objects – constantly changing in look, feeling, and experience. There isn’t always a clear beginning, middle, or end, and things can take dramatic turns. There is a lot of reading between the lines.

Where traditional research might normally have limited perspectives across a few points in time, a live research approach gives us the opportunity to explore multiple vantage points over the entire duration of an experience. The added dimension of change over time means that we can better understand the subtleties of live experiences in ways that people might not be aware of in the moment or even after the fact.

Ultimately studying live experiences can be a whale of a proposition but it is always worth it. We are looking forward to the next opportunity to lose ourselves in the moment.

Flashing lights

Social media made online social behaviour measurable.

Now smartphones are doing the same with face-to-face interaction – thanks to ‘machine sensing’. Machine sensing is basically data collection through sensor-equipped machines, where a sensor is a converter that measures a physical quantity and converts it into a signal which can be read by an observer or by an instrument.

Traditionally mobile market research has mimicked what can be done on the web, with poorer interfaces and engagement. But with smartphones enabling mobile sensing, the opportunity got much bigger and much more interesting.

Mobile sensing is the passive recording of a person’s online and offline daily life in a quantitative way. Sensors in the mobile handset can be used to capture communication, proximity, location, and activity data alongside the more established prompted inputs: a 360-degree approach becoming known as Reality Mining.

Longitudinal collection of this data produces a depth of information on behaviours, interactions and states that can reveal patterns and insights that would be impossible to spot on an exclusively qualitative basis.

Back in July 2012 I ran a pilot project on a sample of one (me) to assess the potential of mobile sensing within the industry. How could market research use ‘reality mining’ to develop a better understanding of consumer behaviors and attitudes? And how useful would it be?

The presentation below gives an overview of the Reality Mining project. A more in-depth paper will be published over the next few weeks discussing the details of the set up, the research methodology and the outputs of the project.

Lately it seems that whenever I turn on the TV (or YouTube or Hulu) I am forced to endure advertisements that feature market research as the central creative concept.

As a researcher, I find it difficult to watch these ads because they often misrepresent how and why research is conducted, which impacts the reputation of the research industry as a whole and makes me feel sad and misunderstood. While I can’t deny that having a spotlight on the industry is somewhat flattering, in the end I always come away with the same feeling: that the use of market research in ads often results in unengaging and ineffective advertising.

To illustrate my point, I have compiled some of my least favorite ads along with some of the comments and responses that these ads have garnered online.

Warning: the following ads contain cheap shots below the belt and may result in extreme brand disloyalty!

1. Research as reality TV:

The consumer wisdom on this commercial is that it tries too hard, uses too much product placement, has awkward humor, and does little to promote the product. Also, it is scary. In fact, if the comments to this video are an indication, it almost does the complete opposite of what it should:

“This told me nothing about the soda. Another waste of time commercial trying to be funny and creative but falling flat on its face.”

“I’m never trying this flavor because of this crappy commercial.”

“If a strange man walked into a room that was mostly empty except for me, and if I was a female, and if he started blocking off the exit, I would be running like mad.”

A lot of the comments to this video are about how awful the soda is, how bad it is for your health, and how scripted the actors are, including the actors themselves weighing in – not necessarily the best response.

This commercial reminds people that they are watching an advertisement from a company that is trying to make them like a product. People are savvy and they know that this is a forum to speak directly to brands… And equipped with that knowledge, they hold Mountain Dew and PepsiCo responsible:

‘How is this about soda? And if this is an ad about trying to portray a feeling you get when drinking Mt. Dew it is not a feeling that I want. Ummm Hello PepsiCo time to move on.’

Finally, it is quite scary to consider being ‘accosted’ in a focus group facility (they are strange places!) As a researcher, I rely on participants taking interest in in research – it worries me that people might not consider participating if this is what they can expect when they show up.

2. Sending the wrong message:

This next category is actually the one that inspired me to write this article. It is so cringeworthy that every time it pops up on Hulu, I click ‘not relevant to me’ in a personal effort to protect my future sanity.

Many people find the above ad confusing. There is an effort to unpick the logic but it never quite works out in Geico’s favor as viewers call out for the ‘old Geico’ ads, the ones that made them a household name:

“Why get car insurance based on the taste of a drink??”

“I don’t think this was supposed to make sense.. right?”

“All I know from this is that Geico is car insurance…or a juice product…”

“I wish their “Does GEICO really save you 15% or more on car insurance?” ad campaign is back!”

Here is a similar style from Verizon:

and in case you thought the 18-24 demographic was exempt… Well, no:

The sentiment towards these types of commercials is very clear and unsurprising considering the premise of blatant data manipulation. It was difficult to find comments from these videos that didn’t include a string of curse words. Unlike the Geico ad, the Verizon examples are called out for being patronizing and for ‘treating customers like idiots.’

“It doesn’t matter how you present it. Verizon is very pleased with themselves for no good reason.”

“That focus group sure is biased”

“I came here just say this commercial is annoying, that’s how obnoxious the people and the acting is.”

“I can only imagine how many people Verizon has driven away with this garbage.”

In my opinion, the above examples are the most damaging to a brand’s reputation because they are conceptually based on being ‘untruthful’ or intent on hiding something – in short, trickery.

By presenting this to consumers, it sends the message that companies are not interested in validity or authenticity – they are out to pat their own backs and get the answers they want no matter what. No only does this take a punch at our clients, but to researchers and advertisers alike – it is harmful all around.

3. When it works

It is not fair to say that every commercial that uses market research as a creative concept is unsuccessful – there are few examples where it works well.

Before you check out the video below (and I recommend the series that goes with it) keep in mind that these ads work because they are not posing as reality and they focus on funny or interesting people participating in the research – not the research itself.

and of course, some excerpts from the comments section:

“Ahhhh!! they are soo cute!!”

“Smarter then the models, seniors, glam rockers, guidos, surfers hahah”

“So is this everybody’s first focus group? Ha ha”

“At the very beginning of the video in the bottom right corner it says “Dramatization with actors” thumbs up so people are not deceived!”

These ads don’t try to be real, they don’t set out to boast about themselves, and they are incredibly subtle. But more than that, they are entertaining, engaging, and people want to keep watching because they are fun and the participants are the spotlights – not the research or the researcher. It even looks like fun to me – researcher approved.

Pulling the plug on this creative device:

With exception of the example above, people generally interpret the use of research in commercials as derogatory and patronizing. It can be done with success, but it happens rarely. The only way I could consider any of these ads as working is if the strategy behind them is to lower consumer expectations as much as possible. If that is the case, then job well done.

My experience in testing ad concepts is that the best ones are simple. They tap into strong emotions, or are thought provoking and as a result are genuinely entertaining. They tell stories that people can and want to connect with.

To put it plainly, market research does not work well in ads because it IS market research. While it might be fun for researchers, the majority of people actually find what we do really dull. So presenting it as something they should be interested in is a step in the wrong direction – consumers are interested in brands, products and experiences, not the research that goes into understanding all of those things.

Market research lives happily behind the scenes by helping businesses and organization understand audiences and by contributing to the development of creative ideas that speak directly to consumer benefits.

This article was originally written by Face CEO Andrew Needham for the GreenBook Blog, but we wanted to share it here too. Making technology and innovation central to your company’s culture can seem like a big task, but it doesn’t have to be.

Old World Map

I gave a talk at the Cello Partner Day on “Old World to New World: making tech and innovation central to your thinking”. For me there are three important drivers to making tech and innovation central to your company’s culture:

  1. Be curious to explore new things
  2. Have the desire and motivation to change NOW!
  3. Be constantly frightened of what could sink your business next week.

There’s no excuse really as innovation doesn’t always have to be about the big and scary things: it can be about the small things too. Ultimately we innovate to be better, faster, cheaper, more creative or more valuable than our competitors. Fortunately things don’t move quickly in the research industry so we have more time to innovate than we think. Also we should remember that most good ideas have been thought of; we just need to ask whether they have been applied to what we do and if so, how well have they been applied and could we do them better.

Here is the deck I presented which is based on the framework from Scott Keller and Colin Price’s Encouraging organisations to change: the influence model, which I thought was a useful way of sharing some Face examples of creating an innovation culture. It breaks it down into the following four simple steps:

1. A compelling story: I understand what is being asked of me and it makes sense

Having a vision and a plan to achieve it is key; asking the question of the role you want technology and innovation to play in that plan essential. Things don’t happen by accident, so start by mapping out client needs (those that are here now and also the ones that you can see coming over the hill) and build an innovation pipeline against them. Think not just about innovating in terms of research technology or research frameworks to answer these needs, but also think about bringing research to areas that don’t have them. It’s about future-proofing your business.

2. Reinforcement mechanisms: I see that our structure, processes and systems support the change I am being asked to make

Doing pilots as part of an “always in beta” mentality is a great way of demonstrating to the whole company that you’re serious about experimenting. The mantra of “test, learn, do” is at the heart of what we call Face Labs, our internal innovation network – as is working with forward-thinking clients to help develop new approaches.

Fundamental to this philosophy is being prepared to fail/get things wrong and learn from them. Hack days; opening up to individuals and companies both inside and outside your organisation; and writing and talking about innovation (at events, in the press, on your blog or on Slideshare) are good examples of proving to your employees that you’re serious about making tech and innovation central to your thinking.

Finally, do you have a line in your P&L to fund your innovation? If not then why not?

3. Skills required for change: I have the skills and opportunities to behave in the new way

One of the most important decisions we have made at Face has been creating the role of Chief Innovation Officer. Francesco D’Orazio, Face’s CIO, has overall responsibility for driving our innovation pipeline; he is in charge of Face Labs and is rewarded for our successes.

People, rewards and training are one of the hardest areas to get right. First start with recruitment by thinking about what type of people do you want to attract into the organisation as well as what skills do these people need to have (something that is driven by your vision and your plan). Secondly with existing team members it’s critical to ascertain the necessary training skills needed for them to succeed in your company. From a rewards point of view it’s often not just about the money. We send team members to SXSW for a week, for example, something that is seen as one of the best innovation rewards.

Finally it is about embracing technology to run your business and that means at the very least embracing tools such as Basecamp (or something similar in terms of project management), Skype and Evernote (becoming paperless) to drive efficiency and collaboration. Recently we have added PivotViewer to our technology tool set as it makes it easier to interact with massive amounts of data by visualising thousands of related items at once, enabling us to see trends and patterns that would be hidden when looking at one item at a time.

4. Role Modelling: I see my leaders, colleagues and staff behaving differently.

The old adage that “actions speak louder than words” is key here. I can speak from personal experience along with Face’s MD Job Muscroft – we not only introduced the above tools into Face’s processes (whether that was from a management, marketing, sales, promotion or research point of view) but we also made sure that we were the first to use them on a regular basis. Our Twitter and Slideshare accounts are evidence of that!

Blog, Face

Facebook Twitter

Happy Holidays from Face

0

This has been a big year for us. A lot has happened, both for Face as a company and for us as individuals. We’ve had engagements, promotions, mustaches, new offices in Hong Kong and Singapore, people moving house, and people running marathons, just to name a few. All of this went to inspire our 2012 company holiday cards, designed by Beci Ward. We hope your 2012 was as full of great experiences as ours was, and that 2013 will have even more!

Happy Holidays!

- Happy Holidays!