Cambiar assists market research agencies and corporate research departments who seek to thrive in a changing, challenging world.

by Ian Lewis, Cambiar Partner

The Market Research Council (MRC) was chartered in 1927 to promote the field of market research. MRC members are senior research executives, and MRC meets monthly to host presentations and discussions with research leaders. Monica Wood (J&J Diabetes Care) recently moderated a terrific panel discussion with three corporate research leaders –Jack Lee of Estee Lauder; Jim Nyce of Sun Products (formerly head of insights for Kraft); and Trish Rainone of Chase. What were the key takeaways?

  • It’s about anticipating and inspiring action that fuels growth and profitability. Jim opened with “We’re here to make the business grow and be more profitable. Without that we’re just a cost.” He went on to say “Getting ahead and anticipating what the company needs to know is critical”, and Trish added “It’s about how to have answers before they have the questions. 4-6 weeks doesn’t fly. We’re trying to be thought leaders.” And it’s about inspiring action. “Taking learning out in a way that’s so inspirational they can’t help act on it. The time for people to pay attention to us is smaller and smaller [Jim].” “We cull down to 3-4 pages that are sent in advance to our CEO, and then the CEO may have one question and then talk about recommendations. We don’t do research presentations any more to the C Suite [Trish].”
  • Synthesis is huge.  “There are vast amounts of data coming at us. Proprietary, secondary, social media. Data is a commodity. A searchable repository is not good enough [Trish].”  Jim noted “Accountability for organizational learning is at least as important as the learning (from studies)”.  Jack added “We’re looking everywhere for insights. E.g. social media, customer complaints, more. The role of MR is to synthesize it all. It’s less specifically about the research, it’s more about what we know, what it means.” None of them would trust a supplier to do it completely because suppliers lack deep knowledge of their business. They want suppliers to synthesize the learning from all the studies the supplier has done for them, but that’s as far as they want the supplier to go.  “Project management orientation doesn’t cut it. Suppliers ought to be doing cumulative learning [Jim]”. When addressing “What makes for a good synthesizer?” Trish answered “Curiosity.  I look for someone with a Master’s degree who sounds curious and asks good questions. A drive to know and learn.”  Jack concurred, adding “I look for curiosity and drive to learn and look across different areas, to be able to think across categories.” Note to suppliers – synthesis is a huge client need, and a huge opportunity for suppliers who can understand their client’s business in depth
  • Suppliers need to step up. Jack led with “Suppliers need to understand what my business partner needs to know. It’s never reliant on a single piece of information. I want suppliers to come with a POV, be willing to disagree, challenge the way I think, stand up in the Boardroom and present difficult facts.” Trish has some preferred suppliers, who she expects to learn and grow with them. She wants preferred suppliers to reach out and touch base – a lot of suppliers don’t do that even yearly. Jim noted “I can’t manage the quality of the research product. I pay for that.” Making a different point, Jim stated “You (supplier) can’t communicate with the CEO. There’s been a huge desire to do the things you can’t do (i.e. present to CEO).”
  • They need help with social media. Everyone recognizes the need to do more and for more help from the supplier community. Trish spends a lot of time tracking social media – providing texture around quant data, especially on brand health; and volunteered that “the engagement piece is where I get lost.”
  • Marketing ROI is currently unmeasurable in the new era.  Jim provided an excellent historical perspective – “We became very, very good at measuring the ROI of traditional marketing programs, so much so that it was irresponsible for companies to be making significant marketing investments without serious assessment of the productivity of that spending.  As a discipline we delivered tremendous value to companies through this work.  Now, however we are leaving that world and entering a new era in which the vast majority of brand exposures which consumers will have are not through intentional, targeted, context controlled media delivery by the brand owners, but rather through incidental on-line encounters, and through discussions and pass alongs via social media. That world, including the branded creations which will populate it (like the commercial I showed – an Old Spice commercial developed with the intent that people will forward it along), is currently unmeasurable and not currently amenable to marketing productivity assessment.”
  • A closing thought, on mobile.  “Mobile’s coming. We know we have to start. We have to figure out how to do it.” [Trish]

 

What is Google up to with Consumer Surveys?

by Simon Chadwick, Managing Partner

Let’s face it – we all knew this was coming. If you were a company that possessed massive content, an awesome analytics machine and access to billions of people, wouldn’t you be looking at ways of monetizing all of that? If, in the process, you became a classic example of disruptive technology to entire industries, wouldn’t that be cool? So, why are we acting so surprised?

Google Consumer Surveys is just one little brick in the wall of Google’s march towards becoming the world’s go-to company for all things analytic and intelligence. At present, GCS looks pretty basic: two questions per “survey” (but you can string “surveys” together), $0.10 to $0.50 a response and a limited range of question types that you can utilize. Certainly not professional grade, so they must be targeting SurveyMonkey, right? Wrong. Just go through that pricing structure again. If you want to do a 4-question, general population survey with 1,000 people, it’s going to cost you $400. On SurveyMonkey, all you need is a $25 a month account to do the same thing. No, it’s the data collection companies they are after. Get a quote for the same thing from Toluna, uSamp or SSI (and we did) and the price will be four times as high.

So who is the target market? Quite clearly, it is the professional DIY research user – the brand manager, the marketer, the guy in IT or, quite possibly, the researcher who is attempting to achieve more with less. And the pitch to them is fairly compelling – sample that delivers more accurate results than that from any panel (so they say) at a price that cannot be matched and ‘now’.

The professional research community may well look upon this and conclude that it isn’t ‘real’ research; after all, it can’t handle complex innovation projects or brand trackers, can it? Yeah, well that was what DEC said about personal computers and what Polaroid said about digital photography. A disruptive technology will always enter a market with a supposedly inferior product at a ridiculously low price. The establishment writes it off and then it’s ‘boil the frog’ time. Established companies do not realize that the interloper is slowly boiling them until it overtakes them and they are out of business.

Don’t be a frog.

Announcing InFoRm Strategy Assessment™

In 2011, the Cambiar Future of Research™ study reported 60% of Corporate Research Vice Presidents expect major transformation in the market research industry and profession by 2020.   70% of these believe the change will happen by 2015.

InFoRm Strategy Assessment™ helps executives in the research industry make sense of the global trends that are driving this transformation, and helps them decide where to focus.  Based on the 2011 benchmark wave of the annual Cambiar Future of Research™ study among industry leaders across the research community, InFoRm Strategy Assessment™ brings the study’s results down to the company level, providing critical information to aid the strategic planning process. With InFoRm™, a company’s leadership team can reap the benefit of industry benchmarks to help them know precisely where they stand on the trends causing change in the market; where to place their bets in terms of investment and product portfolio; gauge alignment among team members; and use solid, quantitative information for strategic planning.

“The challenge in strategic planning is to accurately assess where you need to head in the next five years and what key trends you should capitalize on”, says Beth Rounds, Cambiar Partner.  “Equally hard is to make sense of all the predictions that are out there and to know which ones you should pay attention to.  InFoRm™ brings an objective ‘voice’ to the strategic planning process, one that research executives have been asking for.”

InFoRm Strategy Assessment™ is offered as a standalone service or in conjunction with Cambiar’s suite of strategic planning solutions.  Utilizing the 2011 Future of Research™ survey, leadership team members are asked to provide their opinions on broad industry trends, new modalities and methods, as well as rate their company on key barriers and enablers to success. Deliverables include a presentation-ready report that includes industry vs. company benchmarks, as well as providing individual company data on key internal issues that affect strategic planning.

Cambiar is equally excited to announce our project partners for InFoRm™ and the 2012 Cambiar Future of Research™ Study: The Gilfeather Group; Gazelle Global Research Services; and MarketSight.  Each company brings a high level of professionalism and quality to project management, data collection, and online survey analysis.

For more information, contact Beth Rounds at beth@consultcambiar.com or Simon Chadwick at simon@consultcambiar.com.