Normal 0 false false false MicrosoftInternetExplorer4
This post was originally going to be focused on research deliverables and why a lot of the traditional ones (including many this author has provided) are just lousy. But it took a different, broader turn.
Let’s start with the caveat up front; what follows is based on anecdotal evidence with all the limitations it implies. It is also an overall commentary with full acknowledgment that the following indictment is overly harsh and does not apply in every instance.
Indictment: Survey research is grossly underutilized and the supplier community is to blame.
Some supporting evidence. Over the last 8 months I’ve had over 50 extended (i.e. 30 to 45 minute) phone conversations with internal market research departments across a wide variety of verticals (e.g. retail, financial services, CPG, hospitality, health care) and there is near unanimity that many of the answers to enterprise wide, big hairy strategic questions are knowable just using the information they have already collected or maintain. Part of the interpretation of this dynamic has to be that the information was not fully used or applied the first time around. Additionally, there is a general sense that a market research supplier’s first answer to everything is a large, new study using their better mousetrap. The implicit indictment goes on to include a feeling that everything under the sun is promised but never fully delivered on.
Pick your business book sentiment – Hedgehog from Collins, Blue Ocean from Kim and Mauborgne or Execution from Bossidy and Charan – since so many apply but research suppliers have a real opportunity (or need) to figure out what business they are in and more importantly, what services the vast majority of clients actually need. Here are some thoughts on where the opportunity exists and indirectly, how to address the INDICTMENT.
1) Clients do not need a ton of additional data. They are swimming in it.
2) Clients have a lot of existing programs, systems, KPIs and processes. The best route “in” is to figure out how to augment what they already have instead of replacing it.
3) Data linkage b/n survey data and transactional/behavior data is where great firms and suppliers will go. Including unstructured data in the models is the next, next thing.
4) Strategy is overrated. If you can’t break it down into manageable parts that can be tasked with people, tasks, process and timeline then it won’t happen.
5) Suppliers who decide great insight is enough will be on the outside looking in.
6) Aggregate or segment level anything is all good and well but if you don't also help clients remediate and/or relationship build at the individual customer level you are missing a big opportunity.
To keep true to the original intent of this post here is a link to a slideshare presentation, http://www.slideshare.net/garr/brain-rules-for-presenters, highlighting some recommendations from Dr. John Medina’s Brain Rules. One of his first recommendations: Throw away whatever deck you are using. The reason: it almost certainly violates most of the rules around how the brain (i.e. your client) processes information.