Tag Archive for Research Magazine

MRS Book Club: the first Chapter

August 26, 2011 MRS Book Club, Research magazine One comment

The story in a nutshell

We held a pilot MRS Book Club (post my session at the MRS Conference back in March) on Thursday 25th August.  Everyone was asked to bring along a book, an article, a blog or even just a thought to introduce to the group in a minute or so.  We then followed the themes – spending time chatting about each one in turn and some more than others.  As a first attempt I think it went pretty well and am gathering feedback so we can explore the best format if the Book Club goes ‘live’.  And in the meantime, keep reading!

The cast

Chloe Fowler, Rachel Simmons, Amelie Truffert, Tom Morgan, Claire Webster, Razor Research (helped by the fact it took place under the office!)

John Griffiths, Spring Research

Caroline Hayter Whitehill, Acacia Avenue

Kate McEnery-Evans, Discovery Research

Ed Nash, TNS

Rose van Orden, BBC

Rachel Boyd, Sainsbury’s

Payam Ghamsari, Four Eyes Research

Tom Woodnutt, Conversation strategist

Chapter 1

Tom M kicked off by talking topicality.  He wanted to tell us about an article in The Economist  (http://www.economist.com/blogs/bagehot/2011/08/civil-disorder-and-looting-hits-britain-0) that looked at how different media sources reported on and analysed the recent riots.  We talked about the Left and the Right presented their different reasons for the riots…and then he talked about Russell Brand’s article in the Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/aug/11/london-riots-davidcameron) – and we were only temporarily thrown off course by whether or not we thought he was sexy (or maybe that was just in my head).  We agreed on the fact that he was smarter, and more articulate, than you might think.  Finally, we talked about an article in www.media-awareness.ca charting the rise of the Tweens category and the jump between The Lion King and looting (http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/parents/marketing/issues_teens_marketing.cfm).  What implications might this have on how we recruit tweens in research?  What duty do we have as researchers to stand up for the ethics of the research we might do WITH teens and tweens?

Caroline sparked off a conversation about reading per se: how do we read and what are we reading?  And if we’re not sure what to read, she told us to check out an App called Kevin Duncan’s Greatest Hits, (http://www.expertadviceonline.com/greatesthits.htm.) Handy one liners that have done the hard work for you…and then she threw in a recommendation for www.tomfishburne.com, a marketoonist (see below).  A prize for the first one of us that puts a cartoon in a debrief?

So back to how we read.  Are we dippers and skimmers or analysts with highlighters?  Do we e-read or paperback? Annotate or re-read?  Do we read to form our opinions or do we read to ‘borrow’ from others?  And isn’t the analysis of the analysis just as interesting as where we started?  We talked about sites like www.reference-tree.com (Tom W) from which students can buy textbooks by the chapter or www.getabstract.com (Rose) a library of business book summaries. Nifty.  All this swiftly and neatly followed by the perfect example of a dip and skim as Kate introduced us to The Big Moo, by the Group of 33, edited by Seth Godin.  A compilation of fables, aphorisms and parables by the likes of Malcolm Gladwell.  It’s a book that can help you be more remarkable which frankly – I could do with.  So dip in or you’re a big moo.

Rose fessed up that she gets seduced by the big ideas…finding herself dropping in references for months at a time before moving on to the next one.  And then chucked a question back at us…her current phase is a fascination with Russia and China – China especially and wanted some recommendations for what books should be on her reading list.

And then it was John’s  (first) turn and I tried to write it down but I might not have captured it all, surprise surprise.  He talked about his quest to establish the Cloud of Knowing at the same time as write 2-3 reviews a month in his blog – but I reminded him that his memory is prodigious so his well-stocked mind is a genuine trove. Whereas mine is more like half a tube of tomato puree.  Caroline introduced the best word of the morning – dilettante – and we talked about knowing a bit about everything was the bomb or whether magpies were better.  Which are you?

Tom W brought us back to order with an introduction to Listen First! By Stephen Rappaport, who rather handily also has a blog (http://listenfirst.buildcapacity.com/about-2/). So I guess we should read first and listen second.  He described it as a nifty tour through the world of social media and marketing – offering case studies of best practice and how to ‘turn conversations to business advantage’.  Published by the Advertising Research Foundation – one of the books that’s NOT half-baked but the full loaf.

From the sublime to the not-as-ridiculous-as-you-think, Ed told us about www.pottermore.com – a unique site developed by J.K. Rowling that the cynics would suggest is a way of monetising her e-books without the need for a publisher or retailer (take that Kindle) but you could more generously suggest offers a fascinating case study into the brave new world of the e-reader.  John chipped in with a recommendation for Wizard!: Harry Potter’s Brand Magic by Stephen Brown – an exploration of just what it says on the tin.

Rachel brought us back from Hogwarts and into the class room with her reminder of the online (and offline) debates raging about the issues of privacy and e-ethnography.  It’s important and we should be engaging with it – and for those who need to bone up, check out our very own Research Live for a few recent blogs and articles: http://www.research-live.com/genning-up-on-the-big-data-privacy-debate/4005855.blog and http://www.research-live.com/features/time-to-rewrite-the-rules-of-research?/4005880.article.

Payam shared an article about the phenomenon of what creates value and the perception of value and recommended we read the following article about the recent rush to purchase of a discontinued Tablet.   http://thisismynext.com/2011/08/22/hp-touchpad-99-in-your-words/. 

Claire is reading Consumerology: The Market Research Myth, the truth about consumers and the psychology of shopping by Philip Graves.  It’s lucky we were running out of time because even as she started telling us about it I could tell the mood was getting heated – he appears to not like what we do very much.  To be continued…

We didn’t get around to my book but I was going to talk about No Angels: my undercover journey to the dark heart of the Hell’s Angels by Jay Dobyns because I like the title.  I was going to talk about ethnography and just how close is close?

And finally, the last word to John who is perhaps the best read, or at least the one with the best memory.  Do you know what psychogeography is?  No, Neither did I.  He’s reading Psychogeography by Melvin Coverley and for fear of ballsing it up, it’s defined in a nutshell by Guy Debord (thanks Wikipedia) as “the study of the precise laws and specific effects of the geographical environment, consciously organized or not, on the emotions and behavior of individuals.”

And that, dear readers, is the end.

Well nearly…so what next?

This was a pilot and it’s down to the people who came along (and the MRS) to help decide whether it should be a more permanent fixture or not.  I know we were pressed for time and that we could have talked for longer about loads of these themes. I loved the serendipity of subjects and the myriad of new reading choices, but we will need to strike a balance between eclecticism and ‘education’ as we move forward.  We’ll talk about and think about how to revise the format and keep you posted.  But most of all, it was a rare treat to spend 90 minutes with such a great bunch of varied colleagues (and clients) and with that I’m straight off down the Amazon.

Chloe

Chloe has her say in Research Magazine

February 24, 2011 Qualitative Research, research method No comments

Research Magazine offers researchers the chance to be heard and have their say…and in February’s edition Chloe was offered the chance…here’s the link to the site:

http://www.research-live.com/magazine/hear-me-out-lets-give-away-more-research-for-free/4004623.article

And in case you can’t be bothered to click through, here’s the text:

What’s the big idea?
Why not give away more research for free? Think of all those start up brands – they’ve done the hard work to get to launch and they’re embarking on the harder work of making them stick. Why not give them just a smidge of help right when they need it (but can’t afford it). Their ‘first shave’ with qualitative research, if you like.

Nice pun. But didn’t your mother tell you not to just ‘give it away’?
Yes, but my mother also told me not to talk to strangers…so I went out and became a qualitative researcher.
Most consumer research agencies work with brands and companies that can afford hundreds and thousands pounds of research a year, or at least thousands. But there increasing numbers of start-up brands who either can’t afford it or frankly, don’t even know that qualitative research exists.

What do you get out of it?
We don’t always get right up close to the top-level business realities that are driving the research objectives for our clients (though we ask as much as we can) – let alone briefings and debriefings with the chief executive. The smaller and newer brands are hungry for as much advice and help as possible and our ‘first shave’ clients are always the people who have germinated their brand idea and made it happen. They’re honest, assertive and have as much to teach us about business as we have to show them about their consumers.

Let’s be honest, the cost to an agency for recruiting and incentivising a few groups of respondents isn’t going to break the bank account and there are some nights a year when we’re not already doing 2 nights of fieldwork.

If you’ve got the time, can afford a little generosity and know you’re really helping a great start-up, where’s the loss? And what goes around comes around.

Sounds too good to be true.
In an ideal world start up brands and entrepreneurs should commission expensive U&A’s, work with leading brand consultants and conduct qual around and around the planning cycle but let’s face it, they just can’t afford to. And to be honest, should they even if they could? Should Innocent have commissioned 8 focus groups to tell them what a bin of empty bottles for ‘yes, quit your jobs’ and a bin for ‘no, stick with the day job’ did? Should Reggae-Reggae sauces have paid for a series of ethnographic interviews to figure out that the world really did need another spicy sauce? Not necessarily.

Research for start-ups isn’t (and shouldn’t) be used (solely) to provide answers to massive ‘yes’ and ‘no’ questions. No more than it does for our regular clients. It should be about giving them a sensitive but honest bit of feedback from brand new consumers (as opposed to their WAG’s or BFF’s).

Would they do it if they had to pay?
If I’m honest, probably not. When you’re a start-up the cliché is true, every penny counts. These brands don’t need qualitative research in the same way that they need their pack designers, their manufacturer’s and a distribution process. But it doesn’t mean they don’t value it when they have it. By giving them the chance to experience the power of market research early on in their ascendency to the Top 100 brands list we’re giving qual a good name too. And I’ll bet you that Innocent is happy to pay for research now that they’re able to afford it…

Don’t clients who DO pay feel cheated?
Let’s be clear – giving away research for free has to be selective and there has to be a reason for choosing one brand over another a few times a year. All clients benefit from working with researchers who have experience with many different types of respondent across many different categories. Researchers should always seek to broaden their horizons and if you can choose to dip a toe into an unfamiliar category and get to know a fab new brand then why not?

Like I said, if offering a few groups for free gives you the chance to get to know and even become friends with savvy, assertive and communicative brand owners, what’s the problem?

How to write better – Pimp up your Qual

April 22, 2010 AQR, Qualitative Research No comments

You know when you’ve been planning something for months and months and then it happens and you think, ‘what took me so long?’ That’s how I feel today, a day after the fabulous (though I say it myself) Creative Writing Meets Qual Research course that I had the pleasure of organising for the AQR.

The premise was simple. I wanted to devise a course that took qual researchers OUT OF research for a day and to spend some time being inspired by writers (not researchers). So much of what we do is written and yet I don’t think enough of us spend enough time thinking about HOW we write, as opposed to WHAT we write.

We had 4 speakers:
Joanna Pocock, a writer and creative writing tutor. She took us through the ‘rules’ of good and bad writing – watch out for those stretches, thickeners and all that jazz.
Jonathan Wakeham, a freelance planner, currently writing various screenplays. He used film as an example of how drama’s tell a great story. We were challenged to create and pitch a film in less than 25 words and in little more than 25 minutes.
Robert Bain, features editor of Research Magazine. We were reminded that good editing is as important as good writing and we practised writing better headlines.
Nick Southgate, freelance planner and tutor at the School of Life. Nick gave a whistlestop tour of Oulipo and got us committing ‘vowel-icide’, writing Haiku’s and writing like Martian’s sending a postcard home. Yup.

35 attendees: loads of different research agencies: champagne: blunt pencils: pigeons: popes and the complete opposite of writer’s block.

So, what next?!

Chloe

Illustrious company in Research Magazine

January 14, 2010 Qualitative Research No comments

I am in illustrious company…how exciting…

Check out this link to see what a few of us have to say about MR in 2010:

http://www.research-live.com/features/market-research-in-2010-in-a-word/4001831.article

Or just read it now (the challenge, one word to describe MR in 2010 and 100 words to say why):

My word: Fulcrum
Why:
Research will work harder to be at the centre of client, media, advertising, design and digital agency relationships. We can and should be pivotal to decision making and we should be ensuring that our results reflect the needs of all parties. There is so much crossover between what our clients demand of all their agencies, and with our unique knowledge of their end consumer and perceptive understanding of business, brands and marketing, we must strive to be the lever that drives change and results for our clients.

Other chosen words:
Phyllis Macfarlane
Chairman, GfK NOP – Transformational

Stan Sthanunathan
VP, marketing strategy and insights, Coca-Cola – Rewind

Ray Poynter
Owner, The Future Place – Qualitative

Jeffrey Henning
Founder, Vovic – Probability

Reineke Reitsma
Research director, Forrester Research – Listening

Niels Schillewaert
Founder, InSites Consulting – Ethnographical

Lorenz Gräf
CEO, GlobalPark – Essential

Chloe