Next Gen Market Research Group (NGMR) and Foundation for Transparency in offshoring (FTO) Releases First Annual Research on Research Report

This NGMR study differs from other industry-level surveys of market research practitioners in that it was inspired largely by fellow NGMR members who submitted study topics via our online discussion board in an initial exploratory qualitative phase. Other questions related to the relatively new trend of offshoring various market research functions were added on behalf of the Foundation for Transparency in Offshoring (FTO). A subsequent quantitative survey conducted online consisted of approximately 30 questions. Respondents were recruited by email invitation or through a link posted on NGMR’s forum. 855 members completed the survey and identified themselves as either Supplier (54%), Mainly Buyer (19%), Both Buyer & Supplier (22%) or Other/None of the Above (5%).

For anyone in market research who is no yet familiar with the Next Gen Market Research group (NGMR), it is an invitation-only, non-profit professional networking group for market research practitioners who are interested in exploring innovative, emerging market research techniques and technologies. I originally founded the group as a discussion forum on the LinkedIn network in September 2007 for market researchers with 7+ years experience. NGMR’s membership now exceeds 6,900 market researchers (clients and suppliers) and is the most active online community in the field of market research. Other than the LinkedIn group and this blog, the group also has a new website at www.nextgenmr.com.

The Foundation for Transparency in Offshoring (FTO) is an independent, non-profit organization dedicated to educating buyers and suppliers of consumer research and analytics services on considerations related to offshoring, and aims to establishing sensible, clear disclosure standards for offshoring practices. A few of the survey findings related to offshoring have already been shared on www.offshoringtransparency.org.

If you are reading this post it’s probably safe to assume you too are a savvy Next gen market Researcher. Therefore I’m sure you will be able to draw your own conclusions from the summary tables in the PowerPoint report above.

In the report I think you may find that client-side market research organizations seem somewhat more likely to use “Next Generation” analytic techniques than supplier-side organizations. Client-side market researchers were significantly more likely than supplier-side market researchers to cite data mining, Web analytics, CRM analytics, social network analysis and blog mining as tools they currently use.

This suggest that many market research suppliers may still be stuck in the ‘Research 1.0′ mode while clients attempt to push ahead.

Interestingly, the data also shows that research clients also put great value on traditional market research, specifically focus groups. It is nice to see that clients have not abandoned traditional research methods; but that they are expanding their toolkits and merging these traditional techniques with newer technology. I think there is a tremendous opportunity for us suppliers to rise to the occasion and help our clients leverage these new techniques.

Other interesting findings:

• Clients generally do not seem to care about which online panel/s are used in a study (majorities of both suppliers and clients confirmed this).

• Suppliers are generally more skeptical of “Do-It-Yourself” (DIY) online survey research tools than clients, but the difference in attitudes may not be as pronounced as the industry has been led to believe.

• Market researchers employed by large suppliers (1000 employees or more) are less “happy” in their jobs compared to their client and smaller supplier counterparts.

• Supplier selection criteria differ by client size: Larger client companies (10,000 or more employees) are apt to seek suppliers who offer “new and different techniques,” while smaller clients are more likely to consider supplier size and tend to value “reputation” and “price” foremost.

• Clients (59%) and suppliers (69%) agree, “Offshoring is not as profitable as others think and is fraught with risk.”

• Gaps exist between the research activities clients consider suitable for offshoring compared to suppliers. In particular, suppliers who offshore were considerably more comfortable offshoring concept and ad/copy testing.

• Surprisingly, clients were more likely to approve of offshoring multivariate research work. “This suggests clients and suppliers may have different understandings of ‘multivariate’ projects and/or offshoring in general,” said Anderson.

Various additional topics were also covered in the study. I may post/comment on some of these within the coming days. Curious to hear your feedback on the survey results.

@TomHCAnderson