One of our clients who doesn’t mind not staying anonymous is the Cartable.  Invented by Paul Myrant and now in preparations to launch to the market, Cartable is a unique tool for beachgoers.  Watch this video to see how valuable it will be.  We helped Paul with a concept test, using Redirect, which helped to ensure the test was not just a logical reaction to the concept but that test-takers–consumers–allowed their emotions to sway their choices just as they do in real life.  Because of that, we feel the projections we developed were very accurate.

Follow this link to watch the video.

4 hours and 33 minutes. The average time on a survey these days? No, the length of what might very well be one of the greatest games played. Well, not sure it was the greatest, but definitely full of excitement. Why not the greatest? There were more errors committed in the first 6 innings than both teams committed all year. (An exaggeration, sure, but…) Then, with the score tied 4-4, the game went ballistic with the lead changing, going extra innings and ending with an almost story book walk off home run by the hometown kid. Disney couldn’t have written the script for this game. And that unpredictability, the changes and even the errors are what made it such an enjoyable game to watch. If only market research were so fun. Well, maybe, sometimes it is.

I’ve noticed a lot of buzz about what are being called MROCs (Market Research Online Communities).  I didn’t realize that all the way back in 1997 I dabbled in MROCs.  I was a corporate-side researcher and gathered a small group of 10 customers and communicated regularly with these customers via email.  This was, of course, way before social marketing was cool.  Or even in existence.  Despite the shortcomings technology-wise, I found it was a great way to get quick feedback from customers on issues that wouldn’t normally warrant market research.  I also found that it gave me a more dynamic view of the customer.  I saw it as the difference between an oil painting (think major survey that takes months to execute and then the data is static) and amateur video–the quality of the picture might be a little grainy, but its cheap and moving.  While we have moved beyond simple communities based on email alone, and technologies have arisen to facilitate MROCs, the interesting thing to me is that the benefits are still the same.  MROCs provide a video-like perspective of the market.  And because the cost of feedback is not as high as commissioning a full-on survey or focus groups, you can get market insights on the smallest of issues and thus be more customer driven than ever before.  MROCs offer a much more dynamic view of the market.  Standard surveys or focus groups remain static–once you collect the data, it stays in its form.  That’s not to say that static isn’t valuable.  I love my artwork on the walls of my office and home.  We do surveys all the time that are insightful and actionable.  The value in static is real.  But at the same time, where before there was little or no opportunity to have dynamic research, today there are many ways to get it.  It’s like having the option to go video or still.  You can do what best fits your needs.

We recently conducted some focus groups for a telecommunication company among former customers of the company. In the first group we asked why they left, most initially said “price – it was too expensive”. However, when we re-framed the question to “what could XYZ company had done to keep you as a customer?” we got to the heart of the matter. Rarely, when we framed the question in this way did the respondents say “price”. Mostly we received comments such as “well, if they would have had better channel selection…”, “given me better technical support…”, “faster Internet speed…”, etc.

You see rarely is it about price. It’s about value. These former customers were giving up more than they were receiving from their provider. We also gained understanding of the pain points associated with switching telecommunication providers. We concluded that while some did leave for “better AND cheaper” service, if they were satisfied – getting what they wanted – switching to a new provider probably would not have been an option because they were 1) happy with their service and 2) not willing to go through the pain of switching.

Bottom line: Have reasonable prices and don’t give your customers a compelling reason to leave.

Normally, the idea of new technology and focus groups do not go together. If there is a method that is stuck in the 70′s (not necessarily a bad place to be stuck in, in my opinion) it is focus groups. This is not meant to disparage the use of focus groups, or their value. I am just saying that they are what they are and haven’t changed a lot over the years. It is nice that now some facilities are providing video in digital format. And most facilities now facilitate more technology in the backroom with more plugs for electronics, WiFi connections, etc. And frankly, what can you do to enhance groups more with technology? I don’t think there is much that can be done. The value of focus groups, as I see them, is that they are so real world. There is a real credibility factor as well as a strong ability to evoke insightful learnings by interacting as real people. It’s real.

In the last set of focus groups we did, we tried something new and it turned out pretty helpful. While moderating, I held an iPad and was connected via Facebook chat to the backroom. No more passing of post-its into the room.

No, it wasn’t revolutionary. But yes, it was rather fun and enhanced the groups ever so slightly. And that is why we constantly look for new ways to incorporate technology into research.