“In finding different market segments it is important to keep in mind that you will have to use the segments. Important questions are therefore how are you going to place customers into each group and how are you going to target and track each group,” says dobney.com. While each technique has its own pros and cons, to understand how attitudes affect purchase cluster analysis is the way to go, especially when the numbers of groups or the observations per each group are unknown. The information gleaned from cluster analysis “can then be used to target groups by what they think and how they feel, rather than just who they are. This is particularly valuable in determining branding strategies and keeping a brand in tune with consumers.”

Cluster analysis is a statistical mapping that is used to exhibit natural groupings. For marketing, these groups are market segments, each made of a different group of consumers with different attitudes about a product. James Kolsky says, “Cluster analysis is a popular classification technique frequently used to analyze market research data which divides the data into groups. Data appears in rows, purchase intent scores for example, and columns, sales concepts for instance. Rows can then be clustered with respect to columns or columns with respect to rows.”

James Kolsky also provides ways to better interpret the data provided by clustering, since, as he says, “The validity of the conclusions drawn from cluster analysis techniques is sometimes questioned since very different clusters can be formed from the same data depending on how the analysis is performed.” First, Kolsky says that the variables, the distance measurements, and the algorithms for the clustering should be well defined beforehand. “Careful attention to these pre-analysis decisions will increase your ability to obtain meaningful results.”

Before analysis, “researchers should fully understand both the data and the research objectives.” If those preparing to analyze the data do not comprehend just what the study is trying to show, the analysis may not show everything needed. To prevent major flaws in data from slipping into the analysis, it’s a good idea to have a picture of what the outcome should look like before analysis begins.

As for the analysis itself, Kolsky cautions that “different methods of cluster analysis work better with certain shaped clusters.” Also, try different distance measures and algorithms when analyzing the data because the clusters will vary with each different measure if there are no natural clusters. The data may not reflect what the analysts hypothesized, but Kolsky says that even if the algorithms detect different patterns in the data, it may only be “a different method of ‘slicing’ the data” and not entirely wrong.

Of course, cluster analysis cannot do everything. Attitudinal grouping and cluster analysis is very difficult and expensive to repeat. Clusters, since they are based on attitudes and not measureable evidence, have a hard time bridging the gap to demographics. “The translation from attitudes to demographics means that some of the usefulness of an attitudinal segmentation is lost. Companies can reach different attitudinal groups by offering a range of products and a range of communication, but clearly the lack of a clear definition means cross-over between the targeting of segments,” states dobney.com. However, when looking to chart the attitudes and beliefs of the public and form market segments, there is no doubt that cluster analysis proves its worth when done correctly.

Source: Market Research Bulletin

That’s right. Over the past few years, hybrid research (also commonly known as mixed-mode or fused
research) has been working its way into the mainstream. In fact, one recent study found that use of hybrid
tools nearly doubled from 2008 to 2009.1
But what does “hybrid” really mean? Numerous studies have revealed a wide range of definitions,
applications and benefits, but still the industry lacks a consistent or mutually agreed upon definition for the
term.

Given the growth and apparent staying power of hybrid, iModerate, a leading provider of online hybrid
research, wanted to give the larger research community some clarity around this term. To that end, we
asked hybrid practitioners to weigh in both qualitatively and quantitatively on some key questions, such as:

• What exactly is hybrid research?
• How do they use it?
• What is the benefit?
• What does the future hold for hybrid?

FAMILIARITY WITH HYBRID RESEARCH

For the most part, the researchers we queried have a solid overall familiarity with hybrid research. 83%
said that they were somewhat or very familiar with hybrid research, and 90% recognized the names of
leading hybrid research providers. These figures demonstrate that an approach that was considered
cutting-edge just a few years ago has quickly become familiar and relied on.

Further illustrating just how integrated hybrid has become into the day-to-day work of today’s researchers
is the fact that 75% of the researchers we polled have personally used hybrid approaches, and 30% rely
on it for some or most of their projects.

Based on these figures, it seems clear that hybrid research has grown beyond its position as a promising
but unproven approach and now occupies a solid position in the majority of research toolboxes.

HOW PRACTITIONERS DEFINE HYBRID RESEARCH

While there is little doubt that hybrid research has gained widespread acceptance, practitioners define and
apply the term in two similar but fundamentally divergent ways.

Read more of this whitepaper from iModerate by clicking here.

http://www.imoderate.com/cms_images/file_212.pdf

According to Founder, Jim Bryson, “We’ve been presenting webinars since 2005, but have really focused on them in the last two years.  Since early 2008, we have educated more than two-thousand agency researchers, independent moderators and client-side personnel with our free webinar program.  As our industry evolves and online qualitative research becomes more widely used, our webinars have become even more popular.  We offer several topics that address different online platforms and applications and will add more this year.”

20/20’s March sessions include:

• An Overview of Online Qualitative Research: Tools, Case Studies and Best Practices
• An Examination of Bulletin Board Focus Groups
• Taking Advantage of Webcams and Video Streaming
• Utilizing Text-Messaging for Mobile Qualitative Research
• Diving into Online Journaling and Immersive Research
• How to Conduct Product Testing Studies Online
• Using Hybrid Studies/Mixed Methodologies to Achieve Deeper Insights Utilizing Online Platforms for Concept Testing

OAKLAND, Calif., February 25, 2010 – American consumers showed increased optimism on environmental issues for the fourth straight month, according to the monthly Green Confidence Index (www.greenconfidenceindex.com).

The Index, which is derived from a monthly online survey of approximately 2,500 Americans aged 18 and over, jumped nearly four percent during January, based in large part on consumers’ expressed interest in buying green products in the coming months. The Index measures Americans’ attitudes towards and confidence in  how leaders and institutions are perceived to be addressing environmental issues, the adequacy of information available to them to make informed decisions, and their past and future purchases of green products.

The Index’s three components include:

• Responsibility: Who’s “doing enough” – and who’s not?
• Information: Is enough information available and for what types of decisions?
• Purchasing: Is green purchasing continuing, accelerating or declining?

Of the Index’s three components, it was Purchasing that drove the change. Past purchasing is now above 110 (+5.7 points from December), roughly 10 percent higher than the July 2009 benchmark. Anticipated future purchasing was not far behind at 108.

Is a green recovery at hand? According to Chief Research Officer Amy Hebard of Earthsense, whose company creates the Index: “Don’t bet the farm quite yet. Of the three components, Purchasing has shown to have the most month-to-month variability, no doubt because it is the one most directly affected by changes in the economic winds. And our picture of increased confidence is painted primarily with consumable products — food, personal care, household care products, etc. — which are lower priced than durables, whose price tags are typically much higher; the latter showed little change, no doubt reflecting the challenges of making a large initial investment..”

The monthly measure published today also tracks what Americans think about the individuals leading the charge on environmental action. It introduced a “Perceived Environmental Impact” score for a score of individuals from government, business, media and activism. The PEI score assesses whose reach is broadest and deepest. Leading the pack were Al Gore, Barack Obama, Bill Gates, and Jane Goodall.

Also this month, The Index offered insight into Americans’ attitudes toward buying renewable energy. It found that more than 75% of Americas don’t currently have renewables on their radar screens. Many don’t understand them, while others aren’t aware of the available alternatives. A small group of pioneers — less than 5% of adults — say they have purchased renewable energy in some form.

 
 “The challenge ahead for utilities is developing easy-to-understand, consumer-friendly incentives to help accelerate the development of this sector. Beyond that, marketers will need to help consumers understand the bigger picture beyond their energy bills: the job creation, economic development, and energy and national security that can come from a clean-energy economy,” says John Davies, vice president of GreenBiz Intelligence, a partner in the Green Confidence Index.

The Green Confidence Index is a partnership of three leading business information services companies: GreenBiz.com, part of Greener World Media, which also produces research reports and events on the greening of mainstream business; Earthsense, an applied marketing company that produces Eco-Insights, the largest syndicated survey of U.S. consumers’ attitudes and behaviors toward the environment and sustainability; and Survey Sampling International, the world’s largest provider of multi-mode survey research sampling solutions.
 
The Index is a subscription-based service. Annual subscriptions are $499, with charter subscriptions available at $299.

More information and a sample copy of the monthly briefing can be downloaded at www.greenconfidenceindex.com.

ABOUT GREENBIZ.COM
GreenBiz.com (www.greenbiz.com) is the leading online resource on the greening of mainstream business, and the flagship website of Greener World Media (www.greenerworldmedia.com), a media and business information services company. GWM also produces ClimateBiz.com, GreenerBuildings.com, GreenerDesign.com, and GreenerComputing.com, as well as the annual State of Green Business report, the Green Building Market and Impact report, the State of GreenBiz Forum, and the GreenBiz Executive Network, a peer-to-peer learning forum for senior sustainability officers at multinational companies.

ABOUT EARTHSENSE
Earthsense (www.earthsense.com) is an applied marketing and research company whose mission is to “make sense of our world to give confidence in the value of going green.” It blends market research and database marketing principles to make consumer insights actionable. In addition to creating the Green Confidence Index, Earthsense conducts Eco-Insights semi-annually; it is the largest study to focus on consumers and the environment (30,000 each wave), to help marketers understand and close the gap between green attitudes and behaviors.

ABOUT SURVEY SAMPLING INTERNATIONAL
Survey Sampling International (www.surveysampling.com) is the premier global provider of sampling solutions for survey research. SSI offers access to more than 6 million consumer and business-to-business research respondents in 54 countries via Internet, telephone, and mobile. Additional client services include custom profiling, survey programming and hosting, data processing, sampling consulting, and survey optimization. Founded in 1977, SSI has an international staff of 400 people representing 50 countries and 36 languages.

Perhaps less personally profound for the candidate but operationally no less important to the campaign manager is the question: “How does the political effort translate into key messages, stump speeches, a killer brochure, effective media, web-based mobilizations and all other elements of a winning campaign.

What follows is a straightforward, researched-based approach to identifying and refining political brand, managing the research, shaping campaign strategies and tactics; creating compelling messages that touch the hearts and minds of voters and motivate them to vote.

But again, campaigns begin with research.

VALUE OF POLLING
The goal of a political campaign is winning; the election of an individual to public office, or the approval (or defeat) of a referendum.

The purpose of polling and research is to provide candidates and campaign managers the accurate information they need to make informed, intelligent, data-driven strategic and tactical decisions.

HISTORY OF POLLING
Modern polling began in the 1940’s associated with the emerging notion that the principles of math and science could be used in helping businesses make decisions—especially in finance and in the marketing of products and services.

Then and now, political research experts employ many of the same techniques and formulas that help business discover what their customers want in products and services to gain valuable insights about what voters are thinking and how candidates may address critical issues.

The “Founding Fathers” of scientific polls are George Gallup Louis Harries and Elmo Roper. Although this new science had one famous “miss” (the Dewey-Truman election of 1948), Gallup, Harris and Roper developed the modern science polling based on scientifically selected samples of people who accurately reflect the economic, social and cultural demographics of a any given population—be it a city, assembly district, congressional district, state or entire nation.

The methods and approaches of political polling and marketing research remain closely aligned.

Like business and finance research, political polling is now more accurate than ever before as new and even more highly techniques and formulas are discovered.

Today, nearly every successful campaign, from the state house to the White House, like all successful businesses, operate by data driven strategies and plans that rely on professional research.

FORMS OF CAMPAIGN RESEARCH
Broadly speaking, campaigns conduct two kinds of research.

Secondary Research focuses on scouring publicly available sources to inform the campaign about the history and current status of relevant issues, people and events of concern to voters. A part of that effort is a thorough vetting of the public activities, comments and sources of funding of opposing candidates. Many smart campaigns conduct an “in-house” opposition research to identify what opponents are likely to discover and to prepare in advance a “rapid response”.

Using the Internet to review government document, news coverage and state and federal campaign finance records have made secondary research a relatively easy and inexpensive, yet highly valuable exercise.

Public Opinion Research is the primary source of unique intelligence about voters and the district and includes polling and associated tools such as focus groups.

Polls render a “snap shot” of who lives in the district and what they think about issues and candidates. Using carefully planned and worded questions, pollsters “interview” a scientifically selected sample of people via telephone, online or, on rare occasion, face to face. The key to the scientific selection of a representative sample is randomness. Randomness of selection allows a few hundred people in a congressional district to accurately convey the views of many within a statistical margin of error.

Focus groups are professionally moderated, recorded and analyzed group discussions among 6 to 10 individuals who by virtue of their scientific selection can speak on behalf of many people living in the district. Such conversations give depth and “flesh” to data gathered in polling.

News organizations frequently conduct polls and focus groups mostly centered on the “horserace” aspects of which candidate is ahead and which is behind. Sometimes the focus of news sponsored polls is broad assessments of how many support a particular proposal or issue.

Although the simple who’s up and who’s down may be interesting, such information doesn’t provide candidates and managers the actionable data candidates and managers need to shape successful campaigns.

Campaign research frequently begins with a baseline survey designed to assess the issue environment, demographics, partisan affiliations, and relative positive and negative profiles of the candidates.

The political graveyard is overflowing with politicians and elected officials who did not conduct proper research. President Bush lost his bid for re-election after he betrayed his “Read My Lips, no new taxes” pledge. Despite a strong brand, a southern socially conservative Republican governor cannot tryst with Argentine mistresses and a crime busting Democratic Governor of a very large northeastern state cannot frequent prostitutes.

The truly successful political campaign is an effort that communicates authentically. Woe to the candidate who cannot or will not conduct the proper research and craft the most efficient strategic message.

Michael Lieberman is founder and president of Multivariate Solutions, a statistical and marketing research consulting firm that works with major advertising, public relations, and political strategy firms. He can be reached at +1 646.257.3794 or at michael@mvsolution.com.

Michael Barnhart is a Washington DC based communications and public affairs consultant. He can be reached at 202.288.6049 or at mbarnhart@publicaffairsconsulting.us.

Likewise, a well crafted research project begins with the end user in mind. For although the utility of data begins with the corporate researcher, utility ends with key decision makers up and down the corporate ladder.   Quality research informs the corporate researcher, to be sure.   But research is most valuable when used to shape business decisions throughout the corporation.

The beginning and the end of well crafted research is a deeper understanding of customers who live and work in an increasingly complex, information rich, and integrated global society.   The complexity of daily life for consumers demands research generated data that is also more sophisticated and integrated.

The following   discussion explains why data integration is important, what types of data my be included, some models of integrated research projects and finally, several case studies of hypothetical businesses and how they might use integrated data in decision making.

Integrating Data Captures Change
Data integration is important because, simply put, things change.   The marketplace is in constant motion; consumer views evolve costs of production and service may increase, the global economy reacts to the introduction of new technology.   Emerging social, demographic and cultural trends may alter, reduce or increase the benefits of a product or service.    Consumer decisions are not made in a vacuum.   Surrounding the consumer and his decisions are a swarm of factors that traditional research may not identify and measure with sufficient sensitivity.

Integrated research seeks to capture complexity and change, providing superior category data and deeper consumer insights to help businesses refine its approach to the market place, retail positions and to provide direction to product research and development, inform market segmentation and even information on new technologies.

Breaking Barriers Between Qualitative and Quantitative Data
Traditionally, researchers viewed qualitative and quantitative as distinct and separate. Qualitative tools such as focus groups, in depth interviews, observation (ethnography) social networks and guided online chats   were conducted to explore consumer relationships to products and   companies, to develop the themes most valuable (traditional) to the creative team in developing advertising and design.

Quantitative research, on the other hand, was employed to confirm the consumers’ relationships and views of a product using surveys, tabulations, and multivariate analysis to develop numerical descriptions most valuable to identifying the key drivers motivating consumer behavior.

Qualitative data collection focused on the collection of textual/visual/oral material to support the inductive development of strategies and products by producing data for analysis in the form of memos and narratives.   Quantitative data collection employs the prior development of brand measurements, quantitative and multivariate testing presented as numerically descriptive estimations of population variables and the conversion of textual findings into attribute arrays.

However, quantitative and qualitative techniques in combination may produce a set of integrated data to help researcher and corporate executives to improve business and marketing decisions.

The Terminology of Data Integration
Multimethod research is collected by two or more procedures (e.g. ethnography and case study) and quantitative study interspersed with on-line chat to give data depth. Mixed method designs use qualitative AND quantitative data collection/analysis techniques in parallel, but generally sequential phases of focus groups and standardized surveys.   Mixing occurs in the methods section.
The Utility of Data Integration
Integrated data demonstrates that an array of variables will predict an outcome and answer exploratory questions about how that predicted relationship actually happens. During the qualitative phase a hypothesis is created of key drivers of consumer behavior. The quantitative phase tests the hypothesis and identifies drivers of consumer behavior and established brand equity.   A communications strategy can be developed for branding generally or by key segments with a test of fundamental principles.

Because methods are mixed in a way that complements the strengths of the other, there is no overlapping weakness.   Clear and actionable ‘answers’ emerge.   Mixed methods may include focus groups and follow-up phone surveys, on line chats, and customer group discussion.

The strength of the integrated approach is that it provides data upon which to make stronger inferences by capturing and presenting a greater diversity of viewpoints.   The integrated approach to research techniques can be modeled to achieve the desired research goal.

The best business insight comes from a holistic understanding of the market.   Breaking down traditional barriers between research methods is a critical first step to providing the business decision-maker with the holistic understanding they need to make intelligent decisions. This is an approach to data gathering that most business decision-makers intuitively understand and employ regularly in most areas of the business.

As illustrated by the above case studies, integrated data can provide a deeper, richer and more comprehensive set of data to develop effective strategies to communicate brand equity, to identify and test the maximizing mix of purchase components to drive product maximization, and identify what customers value most in service and product in a competitive market segment.

Most importantly, using integrated research data recognizes:

•    Markets are complex and must be studied from multiple perspectives to gain useful insight.
•    All research is done in the service of the decision-maker, who requires a robust analysis of the situation to properly fulfill their responsibilities, which means exploring the issue from multiple angles.
•    No single method can adequately capture an understanding of any market

The past 10 years has seen a mind-boggling explosion in the quantity of data available to business decision-makers and the tools available to examine that data.   The simple explanation for this explosion is technological advancement.   Technology has facilitated this trend, to be sure, but it never would have become a trend if there wasn’t a desire for the benefits it could deliver.

As difficult as this may be for some researchers to admit, marketers have embraced many of the “DIY” data collection and analysis tools because researchers weren’t meeting their needs.   Just like the consumers we spend so much time analyzing, marketers have been seeking out – and increasingly finding – tools that solve their problems better than the existing options.

Stronger, more regular integration of research methods is a first step to regaining relevance to business decision-makers.   The examples we discussed in this article are simple steps, but steps that are taken by far too few researchers in practice. It’s time for researchers to break out of their self-imposed silos and look at research challenges from many angles, not simply through the lens of their particular specialty.   This is the surest path to relevance within the organization and a seat at the table when decisions are made.

Source & Contributors:

Ed Erickson is the Principal at Erickson Research. He can be reached at 1.312.276.5140 or ed@ericksonresearch.com.

Michael Lieberman is President of Multivariate Solutions. He can be reached at 1.646.257.3794 or michael@mvsolution.com.

But do the corporations that benefit from environmentally-conscious purchasing and investment choices deserve their green halo?

To provide some answers, New Scientist magazine teamed up with two companies that possess the most relevant data. Earthsense, based in Syracuse, New York, has polled US consumers to paint a detailed picture of public perceptions of corporate sustainability. Trucost, headquartered in London, UK, has compiled a comprehensive quantitative assessment of companies’ global environmental impact.

Bringing these two datasets together for more than 100 major corporations shows just how confused ordinary people are about companies’ green credentials. Overall, there was no correlation between the Earthsense and Trucost scores, suggesting that US consumers have little idea about companies’ relative environmental performance, across a wide sweep of businesses.

There were also some dramatic mismatches between performance and perceptions: Fresh Del Monte Produce, for instance, is one of the greenest companies around in the eyes of the US public. But according to Trucost’s analysis, it has the biggest environmental impact ratio of all the companies in our sample.

Other key findings:

• In general, consumers fail to recognize the large environmental impacts of food and beverage production
  • Some companies are benefiting from underserved “green” reputations – and could be vulnerable to a consumer and investor backlash
  • Others, such as The Coca Cola Company, are getting little public credit for some fairly impressive efforts to protect the environment
  • Greater disclosure of companies’ environmental impacts will help investors and consumers to make choices that promote a green economy
  • Green marketing can work – as our results for General Electric reveal
  • In our sample, Whole Foods Market has the highest consumer “green” perception; Google and eBay the lowest actual environmental impact

Please cross reference to www.newscientist.com if you run this story.

The New Scientist URL for the article, plus interactive graphic, will be available from 1pm GMT on Wednesday.

To view a PDF copy of the article, please visit http://www.newscientist.com/data/doc/article/mg20527473.300/100220_n_sr_greenwash_small.pdf

Earthsense data

In May 2008, Earthsense conducted the second wave of its Eco-Insights survey with a nationally representative sample of 30,000 US adults. As part of this online survey, individual respondents were asked about a randomly-assigned sample of up to 20 companies.

Participants were first asked if they were familiar with each firm, if necessary being prompted with some examples of its brands.

Only if they were familiar with a company were survey participants asked to rate the firm’s environmental credentials. This gave an average of 1648 respondents per company included in New Scientist’s analysis, which drew on the answers to two questions:

1)       Sustainable business practices allow companies to “make green by going green,” by taking the environment into account in how they run their business.  For example:  using renewable energy in manufacturing, recycling raw materials, reducing packaging, etc.

When thinking about these companies, how much do you think sustainability is an important part of how they do business?   Please rate them on a scale of “1” to “10” where a “1” means you think they don’t consider the environment in any meaningful way in their business, and a “10” means you think the environment is a core part of their business approach.

2)       Products have different impacts on the environment – how they are made, what they’re made from, and how they are packaged and distributed.  Thinking about these companies’ products, what DIRECT IMPACT on the environment do you think the main products they make or distribute have?  Please rate them on a scale of “1” to “10”:  a “1” means you think the company’s products are having a very negative impact on the environment, and a “10” means they don’t damage or even have a positive impact on the environment.

For New Scientist’s analysis, the scores from both questions were combined into a single average for each company.

Trucost data

Trucost’s assessment of corporate environmental performance accounts for more than 700 different environmental impacts, including greenhouse gas emissions, water use, and a wide range of chemical releases. Its analysts use models based on all of a company’s activities, and the materials and processes involved, incorporating official sources of data such as the US Environmental Protection Agency’s Toxic Release Inventory, and companies’ own environmental data when these are disclosed. Trucost also works with firms to refine the results, to ensure as accurate a profile of their impacts as possible.

Trucost then converts each impact into an annual dollar cost. In the case of a firm running a fleet of diesel vehicles in its distribution chain, for example, these costs could include the burden of treating people with lung disease caused by emitted soot particles, plus the price of greenhouse gas emissions on a carbon-trading market. To assign these costs, Trucost relies on a library of prices derived from the latest academic research, updated with the help of an international advisory panel of leading environmental economists.

Finally, Trucost divides the cost of all the impacts by the company’s annual revenue to produce an overall environmental impact ratio, expressed as a percentage. For extremely polluting companies, such as those running coal-fired power plants, these ratios can exceed 100 per cent. The ratios for companies in New Scientist’s analysis ranged between 0.47 per cent and 52.60 per cent.

Each company’s supply chain is included in Trucost’s analysis – so that a restaurant chain’s score, for instance, incorporates the environmental cost of producing and distributing the food and beverages sold.

Business sectors

Companies were assigned to business sectors using their “Super Sector” listings in the Industry Classification Benchmark system run by Dow Jones Indexes and FTSE, established as a global standard for grouping companies with similar activities.

Since 2003, Rockhopper Research has collaborated with select industry partners to produce the annual Research Industry Trends (RIT) report – covering trends in data collection, technological advances, and the state of the industry. RIT 2009 partners were Cambiar, The Greenbook Marketing Research Directory, iModerate, Market Research Global Alliance, Peanut Labs, Pioneer Marketing Research, Qualitative Insights, RFL Communications, Rockhopper Research, & StrategyOne. Quantitative data collection was completed in early fall 2009, and the survey report was issued in late November.

To illuminate and elaborate on themes that emerged in the survey, six focus groups were conducted in early December, three with research buyers and three with research providers. Groups were conducted on the Rockhopper Research TruVirtual® online interview platform, using both voice and webcams.

To download the 2009 Qualitative report, click here:

http://rockhopperresearch.com/reports/ResearchIndustryTrends2009QualitativeReport.pdf

To download the 2009 Quantitative report, click here:

http://rockhopperresearch.com/reports/ResearchIndustryTrends2009FinalReport.pdf

Group discussions covered a wide range of topics, but the focus was on the top issues that survey respondents identified as key areas of concern during 2009 and looking forward:

• PRICE OR BUDGET PRESSURE FROM CURRENT ECONOMIC CONDITIONS
• INSOURCING VS. OUTSOURCING
• NON-RESEARCH MANAGERS DOING THEIR OWN SURVEYS ON THE INTERNET
• RESEARCH TREATED AS A COMMODITY, WITH LESS WILLINGNESS TO PAY FOR HIGH QUALITY
• GETTING NO RESPECT
• MARKETING RESEARCH MARKETING
• MERGING WITH OTHER DISCIPLINES AND CONSULTANTS
• DEMANDS FROM CLIENTS FOR SHORTER TIMELINES AND FASTER DELIVERY OF FINDINGS
• SURVEYS THAT ARE TOO LONG
• CONCERNS ABOUT PROLIFERATION OF PROFESSIONAL RESPONDENTS
• RFPS GENERATED BY PURCHASING MANAGERS WITH CRITERIA MORE APPROPRIATE FOR HARD GOODS THAN FOR RESEARCH
• DIFFICULTY IN OBTAINING SUFFICIENT SAMPLE FROM ACCESS PANELS
• A MOVE TOWARD PROPRIETARY COMMUNITIES OF CUSTOMERS
• BULLETIN BOARD QUALITATIVE
• MOBILE AND SOCIAL MEDIA SAMPLING
• PRICE PRESSURE BECAUSE OF COMPETITION WITH OFF-SHORE RESEARCH PROVIDERS

The qualitative research for 2009 did more than simply corroborate the findings of the survey. It suggested avenues for further exploration in more depth.

Hearing this clearly, the RIT partners plan a series of special reports throughout 2010, presenting trend data as well as a focus on an issue central to the health and advancement of the industry and profession.

In addition, the RIT partners of Cambiar, The Greenbook Marketing Research Directory, iModerate, Market Research Global Alliance, Peanut Labs, Pioneer Marketing Research, Qualitative Insights, RFL Communications, Rockhopper Research, & StrategyOne have formalized the RIT initiative by forming the Research Industry Trends Monitoring Group, a new industry organization dedicated to observing the changing landscape of the global MR industry and understanding the implications for all involved. The RITMG will be spearheading this ongoing effort in 2010 and beyond.

We have been extremely gratified by the overwhelmingly positive reaction to the survey report this year and are encouraged to think that our efforts are not only intriguing but valuable to our clients and colleagues.

For more information on the Research Industry Trends study, please contact:

Best regards,

Leonard F. Murphy
President
Rockhopper Research, INC.

Office: 866-545-3216
Direct: 770-985-4904
Skype: lennymurphyrhr
Cell: 678-232-7691
lmurphy@rockhopperresearch.com
www.rockhopperresearch.com

AUBURN HILLS, MI – February 10, 2010 – Greg Heist was named Vice President, Research Innovation & Technology, as announced today by John Gongos, founder & CEO.  This move is expected to accelerate the rate at which Gongos Research develops research-driven innovations for the marketing research industry.  Formerly the director of this team, which he founded, Heist has been a practitioner and strategist with Gongos Research since 2003.

Heist leads the company’s Research Innovation & Technology (RIT) team formed in early 2009. The team encompasses three areas of expertise: product management, software development and IT infrastructure.  Members are responsible for the development of the company’s more recent product launches, namely i°Communities, metaCommunities™ and ConsumerView.

“We are experiencing a seismic shift in the way society uses technology to interact and connect,” says Heist. “Our team’s focus is on creating a steady stream of innovations that take advantage of how consumers and companies will be using these emerging technologies to engage with one another over the next two to five years.”

The RIT team will continue to be a vital aspect in how Gongos Research helps clients chart a course that embraces innovation to gather information, make sense of the data, and find better ways to help synthesize it.

“With the rapid pace of technology, I have seen our industry change more in the past five years than in the 20 years preceding,” says John Gongos, founder and CEO. “Greg’s history as a research practitioner allows him to better envision new possibilities with our clients’ goals in mind.”

That combination of research insight and long-term vision will help Gongos Research stay ahead of the innovation curve, supporting its commitment to leadership as a forward-thinking, full-service marketing research firm.

Since 1991, Gongos Research has worked with leading companies including Best Buy, Hallmark Cards, Mars Snackfood, Domino’s Pizza, U.S. Bank, GM and Polaris. In 2007, the company was first named to the Inc. 5000 list of “The Fastest Growing Companies in America,” and in 2008/09 was among the Honomichl Top 50.

Gongos Research is a custom marketing research company that forms trusted research partnerships with Fortune 500 and other leading companies. Blending strategic thinking, top talent, ongoing innovation and proprietary technologies, Gongos’ offerings help refine, enhance and advance products and services across many industries. For further insight into the Gongos culture, visit gongos.com.

Susan Scarlet

Director, Marketing & Public Relations

GONGOS RESEARCH

2365 Pontiac Road

Auburn Hills, Michigan 48326

P – 248.239.2300 x2381

F – 248.239.2301

http://www.gongos.com

Where will the greatest risks—known and unknown—flare up on the global business landscape this year? In this roundup, three prominent forecasters scan the horizon.

Among the risks the Economist Intelligence Unit’s latest global business risk assessment highlights are growing political instability from rising global unemployment, macroeconomic risks as stimulus measures fade, and financial-system risk spreading to sovereign debt in Greece and other countries.

European fiscal divergence makes the list as well at the Eurasia Group, which also sees diminished appeal of economic partnership between China and the United States raising concern, while Iran faces growing pressure at home, regionally, and globally.

And the World Economic Forum’s 2010 Global Risks report focused on, among other risks, the barriers to growth posed by structurally deficient or obsolete infrastructure, the spread of chronic disease, and illicit trade.