THE MOST IMPORTANT 5 YEARS IN THE HISTORY OF MARKET RESEARCH IS UPON US. I BELIEVE IF THE RESEARCH INDUSTRY DOESN’T GET ENTRENCHED AND EMBRACE NEW TECHNOLOGY, IT WILL CHANGE THE INDUSTRY IN A NEGATIVE WAY AND DRAMATICALLY IMPACT THE OVERALL REVENUE OF THE RESEARCH INDUSTRY FOREVER!
- Do you agree with my statement?
- How important do you think the next 5 years are for the research industry?
- Do you believe the research industry is a slow moving industry to embrace NEW technology?
- If you believe that? What can we do about it?
I really look forward to hearing from you and seeing what thoughts you have!
Jim Bryson says:
Frankly, its difficult for me to say that the next 5 years are the most important in history. However, I do know it is the most exciting time of the 25 years that I have been in research. My company is deep into online qualitative. The new technologies and services that we are developing and that are appearing in this space are incredible and a gold mine for those who embrace them.
The industry is at an inflection point. The industry is transitioning away from person-driven methods to technology-driven methods. Those who transition will develop new, better research; those who don’t will find that they are not competitive.
Kevin says:
I agree wholeheartedly with that statement. Either we embrace the new opportunities afforded to us by technology and social media or we cede our position as the gateway to the general public.
The “drive by research” mentality of the previous 1/2 century where we interrupt folks on the phone or send them an unwanted e-mail invitation has worn out its welcome.
We need to do a better job of engaging the public in a more interactive fashion and we also need to speak to folks who actually give a damn about the product/service in question.
Paul Kirch says:
I think our industry is already trying to embrace change. And those that aren’t embracing it are clambering to learn how they diversify or increase their offering through new services or relationships. Yes, things are going to change and already are. And yes, companies that ignore that may face challenges, but I don’t see traditional research methods going anywhere over the next 5 years. I do see them complemented by other tools, but that can be through service partners. Also, you have companies like 20/20 Research, Revelation Global, the MRGA (Market Research Global Alliance) and many others really driving things forward with innovation, new platforms and opportunities. The list of companies embracing change is growing exponentially.
Traditional lines of business will continue to drive most business within our industry. It’s not unlike when online research became a reality back in the 90’s. Gordon Black believed telephone was dead and that online would replace that method. Today, there are still a lot of telephone and offline surveys taking place. Many of those traditional offline service providers now offer online. I see the next 5 years looking much like that in regards to new offerings. Some will adopt new tools and offerings to complement their business. There’s no doubt our industry has traditionally been slow to innovate or change, but I’m seeing some of the most conservative firms looking for new answers. It may be partially driven by statements like the one you posted, since it makes anyone in a traditional research business question tomorrow. No matter the reason, I think it’s going to lead to some exciting opportunities for all of us.
Jeremy Bromberg says:
Not to be flip, but the next five years are always the most important, so in that regard your statement is true.
In this case, Merrill, you really are correct (IMHO) because we do have to adapt to the world around us. There are sea changes in how people communicate – they are a bit bizarre and challenging to an old f— like me – but they are real and likely here to stay. And while I do think technology is a big piece of the puzzle, I don’t think technology is by definition the thing to focus on. The business of market research lies in understanding how people behave and think, and we must constantly review and modify what questions we ask and how we ask them to ensure we really understand both drivers and desired outcomes.
Is the research industry slow moving? Probably no more than any other industry. I think what we see is often more what the “big box” companies are doing – which is less about innovation and more about efficiency, while the real innovation comes from the “mom and pop” entities – those who are less constrained by immediate rates of return, having to report to “the street,” and who by dint of fewer organizational levels are closer to the end users. Half of the challenge for evolution requires someone to accept the new ways, and most of the time the pool of early adopters is quite small.
But an important point behind this topic – and thanks for asking these questions – is the real danger in complacency. Because the majority of clients don’t look at our work and ask, “is there some new way we could get at this,” it’s far too easy for us to stay with what we know. In this business, and in all businesses, we have to have to have to constantly ask “how can we make / do this better,” whatever “this” is. Can we do the work faster or cheaper? Can we do a better job at uncovering the underlying thoughts and beliefs? Can we do a better job of speaking the language of the consumer? Can we adapt our approaches to the target audience? Can we strengthen the skills of our employees?
Fifteen or so years ago one of the agencies in this space had an advertisement showing a barracuda or some sort of aggressive fish, with the tagline, “Adapt or die.” I think that message is still a right one.
Thanks, Merrill, for asking great questions!
Christing Cook says:
Oh…I love topic! I agree with the guys. I think the last five have brought about some amazing technology and change. I think the next five will be equally and even more exciting.
I don’t believe you can ever take away the face time in qualitative. This said; I strongly believe that a multitude of methodologies is better…online and face. I also believe that the “face” is going to evolve. I believe that the old database recruiting method is also going is a thing of the past.
Most important I believe that the companies need to embrace and evolve with new technologies and methodologies. If they don’t they may not be around in ten years. It is an ever changing industy filled with excitment.
W D Neal says:
Being one of the old guys around here, let me raise a little caution. Yes, these new technologies and methods for social interaction are important. They provide many new opportunities for connecting with people and finding out what’s on their mind and for testing new ideas and concepts. The MR Industry must understand them and embrace them rapidly.
However, we must not ignore or misuse the “science” that underpins our profession and our industry. Gobs of data and information does not relieve us from the necessity of having good samples from sample frames we can identify in great detail. Gobs of data does not relieve us from crafting unbiased inquiries and measurements. Gobs of data does not relieve us from conducting statistically reliable and trustworthy analyses. Gobs of data does not relieve us from making reliable projections that can be defended in the court of reality. Good science is the rock of this profession and that must not be ignored or forgotten.
Marshall Toplansky says:
The reasons why this next 5 years are so important goes beyond technology and methodology. We are in the midst of a generational shift. Baby Boomers out. Digital Natives in.
As the next generation of managers, they will feel the “need for speed” more than any previous generation has. And, because they are surrounded by real-time stimuli and metrics in the rest of their lives, they will expect the same from the insights they use to run their business.
Specifically, they will demand that the research function provide them with instant, accurate assessments of the present, and instant, insightful estimates of the future.
The research industry simply does NOT deliver on that “need for speed” today using traditional quant and qual methods. We take too long to deliver answers which are frequently not accurate because they have too much built-in bias.
The fact is that the technology world is already moving to fill the gap with new approaches that involve mass observation and pattern recognition. Most market researchers are either ignorant or defensive when it comes to these innovations.
However, the train has left the station. Every major corporation I know already is experimenting with these new approaches. If the research industry does NOT get involved, it will relegate itself to the dustbin of history.
steve says:
it might be the next five years but honestly it could be the next 2-3 years. when it comes to technology and potential advancements, it is more algebraic in nature v. linear. technology will advance in an exponential way. probably not the best analogy but think about what microprocessors and computing speed allowed us to do ten years ago and think about what it allows us to do today. this shift has altered the landscape of many professions and ours is no different
in the research industry it historically has been a slower change due to our lack of acceptance of technology. whether we accept change or not, it is coming. once the advancements in technology are embraced by our profession (by choice or forced), the impact will be exponential.
the researcher of tomorrow (3-5 years from now) will potentially look very different than the researcher of today. different skills, different training, different integration in the decision making tree. be prepared or be left behind – personally i don’t like the dustbin of history – thanks for that one Marshall 🙂
one final thought – we need to all look at this as an exciting time, not a time to be scared. if research can deliver quality insights to decision makers, our importance grows and ultimately our businesses grow. technology can really assist in these deliverables. maybe in time we actually wind up having a bigger say or a more established seat at the big table
[…] Merrill Dubrow blog: Hey Research Industry What Do You Think of This Statement really struck me, as Dubrow poses the below statement followed by four questions about the future […]
Peanut Labs says:
Some good questions here, and certainly ones that we should be thinking about as an industry. We blogged our thoughts here: http://www1.peanutlabs.com/Blog/?p=627
Great blog and thanks for inspiring our post.
Merrill Dubrow says:
Thanks Rick, glad to know I could inspire your thoughts on the subject. For everyone else, here is the text of Rick’s responses to my questions from his blog post:
1. Do you agree with my statement?
While I agree with Merrill’s statement, it has always been the most successful research firms that not only embrace new technology, but also take it to the next level. In looking at the big picture, market research has gone from door-to-door interviewing to advanced online and mobile surveys in a relatively short period of time. That said, the next 5 years are important; as are the 5 that follow, and the 5 that follow that. Market research must continually find ways to answer companies marketing objectives in an actionable, affordable and timely manner.
2. How important do you think the next 5 years are for the research industry?
As mentioned above, the next 5 years are incredibly important for the research industry. If researchers do not stay abreast and adapt to the changing environment, the industry will lose its edge. I am not advocating the adoption of every new technology or method that emerges, but rather placing the importance on not remaining stagnant. Research companies must focus on providing a holistic service and increasing the quality of their insights.
3. Do you believe the research industry is a slow moving industry to embrace NEW technology?
The problem is not necessarily that the research industry is slow moving in adapting to and embracing new technologies, but more-so that today’s new methodologies MUST be tested to provide clear information on both the validity as well as how it affects the results. New methodologies must be used in conjunction with parallel studies in order to demonstrate whether the new methodology is affecting the results; and if so, if the new methodology provides better results.
4. If you believe that? What can we do about it?
Embrace new technologies with care and testing. Include clients in the mix so, if the new methodology is the proper technique for studies moving forward, the clients not only understand the technology and potential impact, but EMBRACE it as well.
Colleen Mezler says:
I agree with all of the comments above.
I think it is the most exciting time in market research history. It is important to read, learn and grow your skills each day, especially since the technology options/new techniques are emerging constantly. There are many cost effective options out there to help companies move into the technology arena. If you haven’t already taken the leap, do it today.
Jami Guthrie says:
Yes, our conversation a month or so ago on this topic really got me thinking in terms of where it is going. In the end, despite a lot of inertia from suppliers and manufacturers to really embrace technology and perhaps a new role of MR, I don’t think the industry as a whole will suffer. There will be a few “winners” initially, but then the rest will follow as some point soon after.
My guess is that the potential is great for those who do adapt very quickly…whether that be share for suppliers or a competitive advantage/share for manufacturers. That really is the carrot…to be the first to get there and leverage it for advantage before it becomes the new norm.
I love this topic because the implications of the technological change affects everything…to how we do the research, how we communicate it, the skills sets that we need in the industry. I’ve been working a lot lately on the latter.
Anne Brown says:
Hi Merrill,
Yes, I agree with you that the next 5 years will bring about an extraordinary change to our profession. However our profession has already absorbed tremendous change. It is easy for me to remember when most of our studies were on paper, or when CATI was new and more recently although already a while ago, studies completed on the web. I think we do adapt to change and will continue to do so in order to provide cutting edge products for our clients.
Globally speaking, choice of methodology is still a key factor in insuring accurate results.
Michael Braunberg says:
Interesting post with some thoughtful eloquent responses.
In my experience, those who are generally most resistant to new technologies are those who are expert at and support entrenched technologies. People naturally get invested in the status quo and are resistant to change.
The question of adaptation of new technologies is pretty broad. Perhaps in a future post you could expand on which areas in particular you feel like the industry is lagging so seriously that it is imperiled.
Melanie Courtright says:
I believe it’s spot on. I think we are on the brink of another major shift in sampling practices, and all of the changes will be driven by technology. Current methods will be refined, new methods will be born, and I honestly believe that one or two methods may reach the end of their product long tail.
I also think we are on the verge of some amazing and new analytic practices and products. The shifts in methodology have forced our hands. We’ve had to rethink sampling theory and standard metrics of measuring validity. New types of data have challenged us to figure out how to use them. The convergence of data sources and methodologies has introduced creativity. The respondent issues around both over-engagement and under-engagement have forced survey revisions long overdue, and MUCH more will come. Everything is changing.
Regarding being slow moving, I completely agree. But there are some rebels out there that are good at forcing change down people’s throats. The changes will take place, they will disrupt, and we will be forced to change with them, or be left behind. Some really great companies didn’t do that five years ago, and they are suffering now. Or they are gone already.
Melanie Courtright says:
One more thing – if you know me, you knew I would say it – INNOVATE OR EVAPORATE!
Dan Womack says:
Tough one, Merrill. I generally agree this is a critical time and the industry is slow to adopt technology. A few random thoughts/musings on this subject:
–I try to remember my job is to help companies make better decisions through better understanding of customers and potential customers. Surveys, focus groups, IDIs, etc. are only tools to help me perform that job….show me better tools for the job and I’ll use them.
–Tech folks need to partner with solid research and marketing folks that have experience in client-side (real-world) settings. Many tech people just can’t speak the language in ways that best makes their case.
–Much of the “developments” I see are about behaviors…new ways to track what people have done (and hopefully) predict what they will do. This is important, but we need to continuously get better at the motivation side as well. Better understanding Behaviors AND the Attitudes that drive those behaviors is the real game.
–Hyperbole is a problem for adoption. Too many companies making claims they can’t back up only further slows adoption. Buyers are weary of the snake oil.
–MR isn’t perceived as large enough by most tech companies…so we don’t see the best stuff adapted very quickly.
I warned you, random thoughts, but I think these all have a place in this discussion!
John Castellano says:
I agree with your statements, research is very stagnant and very slow to adapt. Where is the value? Clients pay a few hundred grand and end up with a boiler plate report and a stack of charts pulled directly from the tables-how sexy. Respondents need to be better engaged, research needs to embrace all the changes that are happening around us. I was speaking with a very senior person at a Pharma company and they are looking for new vendors, they are not turning to the “household” long standing names, rather they are going to smaller more nimble firms who are taking risks. Now is the time to start experimentation.