How common is this predicament: senior leaders have asked for more creativity, but then shoot down the novel suggestions they receive.  Organizations seek creativity to grow and improve, but simultaneously shun the groundbreaking results of their creative focus.  A recent article on CNN.com outlines the bias against creativity:  the folly of seeking certainty.

Our ancestors learned to seek certainty and predictability to ensure our survival, and now our organizations’ needs to change and try new things is suffering.  The author of the CNN article postulates that we often believe that an idea can be either practical or creative, but usually not both at once, and that leaves people subconsciously categorizing creativity as a luxury.   

But, as the saying goes, necessity is the mother of invention.  To get through tough times, the tough need to get creative.   This means that researchers need to break through their own unconscious barriers to creativity to come up with true insight, and also the barriers put up by business partners to get the insight acted upon.  No sweat right?

Break through your own need for certainty

We need to foster comfort with uncertainty, which can be hard for those of us who find comfort in data.  But the best insights are created in departments that foster an open, creative culture:

• Assert judgments based on information and experience rather than simply relying on project outcomes.  As researchers we have a wealth of past experience and business exposure to draw from: Use It!
• Utilize your judgment to push research projects forward.  Hypothesize early and often throughout the research process to ensure research is finding true, new innovation. Read More »

When Google launched their Google Analytics product in 2005, the free tool was so wildly popular that the company had to temporarily shut down new signups a week after introduction due to overcapacity. Ecstatic at the new ability to study their visitors’ every move, website owners couldn’t wait to unlock the powerful capabilities of web analytics.

Many of those website owners, however, went on to discover just how tricky it is to analyze behavioral data. It might appear impressive that your company’s website traffic increased by 25% last month, but look a little closer and it may not be clear why. Did search rankings change, allowing people to find you more easily through search engines? Is it because a misleading paragraph on the home page is attracting customers who immediately click away when they realize they’re looking for an entirely different product? Or is it because an offline marketing campaign for your company’s website is has been surprisingly successful?

We recently completed a study on using web analytics in market research and uncovered some of the more challenging issues our members face:

• Challenge #1: Online segmentation is difficult without authentication information.
• Challenge #2: Web analytics efforts can collect an enormous amount of data, but determining what is useful and what is not is more ambiguous than one might think.
• Challenge #3: Web analytics is hard to explain to researchers and business partners alike.
• Challenge #4: Web analytics teams are not always well structured to integrate with market research.

Despite these challenges, web analytics can become a powerful tool for market research, whether to perform online segmentation or to increase sales conversions and lead generation. And, with the skyrocketing number of consumer transactions occurring online, it’s no longer an option to ignore how people are using your website.

MREB members, read our latest whitepaper An Introduction to Web Analytics to learn more about these challenges and how to overcome them.

Related Blogs:

• Segment Online, Even With Limited Data

Related Resources:

• Segment Online Consumers
• Integrating Analytics into Market Research
• Changing Role of Analytics for Market Research

The purchase funnel: that theory is so 1898.  Our friends at the Marketing Leadership Council recently blogged on HBR about changes in consumers’ purchase processes, and it looks like all of the information barraging consumers has caused them to adapt their shopping habits to cope with the noise.

For almost one-third of consumers the information is too much and rather than conducting a considered search they drop the work altogether and just zero in on a single brand.  And MLC research has found that decision simplicity in the purchase process is the #1 reason why consumers are likely to buy a product, do so repeatedly, and recommend it to others. 

In fact, brands that simplify customer decision making are:

• 86% more likely to be purchased
• 115% more likely to be recommended

The Council created a 15-question quiz to help you determine how simple—or complex—you’re making your customers’ purchase decisions.  And you can also access their HBR article on the new Decision Simplicity strategy.

Related resources:

• To Keep Your Customers, Keep it Simple
• Boosting the Impact of Shopper Insights

Related blogs:

• Stretching Shopper Insights Resources
• Setting Up a Shopper Insights Shop
• Santa Won’t do your Insight-Shopping for You

Last year we ran a quick poll and found that fewer than 30% of research teams work all in the same office.  And even for those who have the luxury of a single-location team, we still have to deal with far-flung vendors and business partners, which can only mean one thing: dependence on the teleconference.  Check out your calendar and tell me, how many planners include dial-in instructions?  For me, it’s almost all of them (“Welcome to Corporate Executive Board Conferencing; please enter your passcode…”)

On HBR.com, consultant Keith Ferrazzi recently outlined the benefits of virtual meetings, noting that they have the potential to be more effective than in-person meetings.  To improve these multi-location meetings, the he offers a few tips:

1. Video, don’t just tele-using video is the best way to ensure participants are engaged, and it helps participants read each other—always a benefit to making actual progress in a meeting.
2. Formalize catch-up-reserving the first few minutes to talk about what’s going on in the participants’ lives will break the ice and make folks feel more connected to each other.
3. Assign tasks-making sure you formalize a minutes-takers, Q&A manager, white board guru, etc., will ensure folks stay engaged.
4. Banish “mute”-unless they’re on a train or airport, a little background noise proves that participants are paying attention and not multi-tasking during the meeting.
5. Penalize multi-taskers-don’t just discourage folks from checking email or working on something else while in a meeting, institute a multi-tasking fine jar or chore wheel. 

Come to think of it, I’d like to institute this last rule for in-person meetings too.  Teri, if you check that phone while we’re in this meeting you’ll be on whiteboard wipe-down duty for a week!

MREB members, access more information on how to manage dispersed or virtual teams and offshore research teams.  And let us know, how do you make the most of virtual get-togethers?

Member resources:

• Manage Dispersed or Virtual Teams
• Managing Offshore Research Teams
• Communication and Consultation Resources

Related blogs:

• Optimize Your Work Environment and Impact
• Get Ahead in Business (some bizarre recommendations)
• Poll Results: Dispersed Research Teams
• Build Global Research Teams to Support Growing Business Needs

We have blogged in the past about engaging specialist users in research: engaging individuals whose lifestyle, usage requirement, or relationship to a category uniquely positions them to better inform research.  I’ve always thought of these lead users as most valuable for innovation.  But then I saw this article on how insurance provider Aviva has engaged its most influential customers to hone its product offerings AND its ads.

The company created an online community to better conduct quick-turnaround, lower-cost research, and used that opportunity to identify “expert consumers” who are knowledge and influential about the industry and scrub them in more specifically to the research process itself.  This process has turned Aviva’s community into a wonderful tool for relationship building and a source of quick and informed opinion on products and communications.

Aviva’s case profile seems to again confirm what many have found over the years: the more you know the source of information, the better that information can be.  For example, we’ve talked before about how social media’s anonymity undermines its ability to provide true customer insight.  But we have seen companies like Southwest Airlines and NASCAR unleash insights from social media by finding or building communities where they know the participants.

Identifying true lead users can be difficult; it’s hard to find lead users in nature, so defining a screener is imperative.  One appliance company we work with found success by leveraging external networks to generate a screener that would reveal truly leading consumers.  We have also seen companies like Visa and Charles Schwab engage consumers on a long-term basis through research by creating joint-benefit research projects or creating a shared agenda. 

Are you fostering long-term relationships with customers through research projects?  Do you see the benefit of identifying and engaging “expert consumers”?  We’d love to hear about it in the comments section below.

Related Blogs:

• Lego’s Building Blocks of Innovation
• Social Media-Listening to the Right Buzz
• 3 Steps to Customer-Focused Innovation
• Right People, Right Question is the Mantra of Open Innovation

Related MREB Materials:

• Creating a Specialist User Screening Process
• Passionate Communities: Using Engaged Customers to Get More from Social Media
• Using Engagement Strategies to Increase Research Participation

Time recently summarized a reading comprehension entry from New York’s eighth grade standardized test that is beyond all comprehension.  It sounds more like one of those “a pineapple walks into a bar” jokes than a multiple-choice test entry: a talking pineapple challenges a hare to a race, and the other animals bet that the pineapple will win because he wouldn’t have challenged if he didn’t have some trick up his sleeve to win.  When the pineapple loses because (shocker) he didn’t move, the animals eat him.

The test writers then go on to ask these poor 13-year-olds crazy questions like “which animal made the wisest comments?” and, my personal favorite, “why did the animals eat the pineapple?”  And remember, this wasn’t an essay test; this was a multiple-choice, yes-Virginia-there-is-a-right-answer test.  Good luck with that!

Does this situation remind anyone of some of the questions you receive from business partners?  The questions we receive can range from the uber-specific (and un-important) color preferences for billing envelopes to the unanswerable, let me break out my crystal ball to identify the next fashion trend before it happens.

The good news is, unlike these stumped eighth graders, we can re-scope our business partners’ questions to make sure that answers will actually inform strategy.  We have a few ways to go:

• Identify true unknowns: conduct analysis to understand what your business lines know and what they really need to know in order to succeed.  Johnson & Johnson actually puts together an information inventory to before setting its research agenda.
• Make existing information usable: with all of the existing data at most companies many questions asked can be answered without new work.   You just have to make sure that this foundational knowledge is accessible.
• Just say “NO”: sometimes ad hoc requests of low value are not even worthy of re-scoping.  Have a very specific process for vetting project requests, and if the question doesn’t merit investment let your business partner know.

We would love to know: what is the craziest research request you’ve ever received?  Please share in the comments section below.

Over the past decade Timothy Judge at the University of Notre Dame’s Mendoza School of Business has studied high performers, and he has discovered a set of four characteristics that seems to set these folks apart from the rank and file, regardless of industry, level, or situation.  “Core self-evaluation,” an individual’s fundamental evaluation of their own abilities, has a huge impact on job performance.

A recent article on ERE.net dubbed those with a high core self-evaluation “Deciders,” because their belief in their own abilities means that they aren’t afraid to make decisions.  And since the best way to improve judgment is experience, this willingness to decide means those with high core self-evaluation develop good judgment faster.  So what attributes do deciders share?

1. Self-Efficacy-believing that they can overcome challenges
2. Internal locus of control-taking control of their own work and responsibilities
3. Confidence, not narcissism-caring about others and pitching in to help rather than thinking they are above others
4. Emotional stability-keeping a positive attitude, not becoming discouraged, making them less likely to burnout

Test your own core self-evaluation score here.

MREB research has also found that those willing to trust their instincts, and not rely solely on what the data shows, will provide better insights to their organization.  We have the accumulated knowledge of years of projects, so why base recommendations on a single project result?  There are a few ways that you can unleash your inner Decider:

• Take yourself from risk-averse to judgment-focused-change your perspective from one of fact-gatherer to decision advisor.  Diageo actually created new goals and characteristics to help researchers redefine their vision of themselves.
• Internalize business strategy-those focused on tactical projects lack the broad business perspective needed to improve judgment.  Kimberly-Clark requires that all projects link to overarching business goals, and has researchers document business unit strategy to ensure that they can make the connection.
• Engineer learning moments-once you’ve got experience-based insights to share, you have to know how to correct business partners’ overconfidence and misperceptions.  Companies like H.J. Heinz, P&G, and Telecom NZ know that it’s all about creating learning experiences.

Related blogs:

• 7 Questions to Tame the Information Fire Hose
• 10 Tips: Helping Leaders Relinquish Control
• How to Teach a Know-it-All
• The Key to Success: Humor?

If market researchers are really doing their jobs right, they should be spending a lot of time saying “no.”

• Project Scoping–getting to the right question is tough, and we have to make sure that we are spending time on the most valuable work.  Not only is it important to screen out low value work, but we have to help our business partners ask smarter questions.
• Insight Generation–a fact about your customers or competitors does not an insight make, and sometimes we need to tell our team members or business partners that the information they have isn’t enough
• Taking Action–communicating research often turns into a war against conventional wisdom.  We’ve got to break down business partners’ existing understanding to help them internalize insights

A couple of summers ago I asked whether research departments were too nice, and judging from the popularity of the post we might benefit from some training on disagreement.  A recent article on CBS MoneyWatch outlines five smart ways to disagree with your boss, and I think that these lessons translate nicely to help you take a stand with anyone in your organization:

1. Ask clarifying questions-sometimes a well-placed question or two can help guide someone to the realization that their plan isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. 
2. Pick your time and place-know your audience and pick the time that will work best for them.  And of course, avoid public places to make sure your feedback isn’t taken out of context.
3. Accentuate the value to the team-phrase your feedback as an improvement that will help the group—lead with the value that your suggestions will create.
4. Speak up early and often-if you have provided feedback consistently you will not be viewed as defensive or negative when you have a counter-opinion to share.
5. Ask permission to provide feedback-for those with a more formal relationship, asking if it’s ok for you to share some feedback sets the tone for the conversation to come.

What do you think?  What are your favorite tactics for sharing tough feedback with your business partners?

My colleague Liz Barrett has blogged a lot recently about the decision making process and the real sources our decision makers turn to when it’s crunch time.  And the answer, oftentimes, is that they turn to themselves.  I think that’s why this recent HBR blog about democratized expertise resonated so much with me: as researchers we spend a lot of timing trying to determine if our knowledge sources are trustworthy and accurate, and it seems that we can apply similar screens to the partners that we work with.

Entrepreneur Daniel Gulati outlines five “everyday experts” who like to provide advice that they may not really be qualified to dole out.  How many of these profiles to you encounter in a given week:

1. All-Star Adviser: They are successful, so think their recommendations should work for everyone, in any situation.  Screen statements for situational applicability to avoid taking bad advice here.
2. Blog Bandit: After reading all the latest business resources, they present conventional wisdom as their own.  Always make sure the claims take all information into account, and that folks aren’t just following the herd with their theories.
3. Failed Forecaster: Always assumes that what happens tomorrow will follow linearly what happened today.  When assessing forecasts, remember that most perform no better than dart-throwing (i.e., distribute your grains of salt liberally).
4. Partial Pro: Slants all recommendations with some built-in bias.  This screen is an oldie but goody: always consider your source and what motivates them.
5. Deluded Directionalist: The correlation versus causation conundrum.  Just because one thing preceded another, doesn’t mean it caused the it.

I think Daniel’s descriptions provide a valuable checklist for interactions with our suppliers, our business partners, and perhaps even ourselves.  Do you have a system for assessing the validity of recommendations you hear?  What about the advice that you provide your partners; you don’t want them thinking of you as an “everyday expert”!  We’d love to read your thoughts in the comments section below.

Related resources:

• Don’t Try to Overpower Other Info Sources, Co-Opt Them
• How to Teach a Know-It-All
• EMC’s Peer-to-Peer Presentation Review
• Engineering Learning Moments
• Optimizing Content for Resonance and Shareability

Since the rapid growth of its economy in the early 1990s, India has charted a path of robust economic growth. Even during the 2007–2009 recession, India maintained impressive growth rates of more than 8%.  With a median age of 26.2 years, the country has one of the youngest populations in the world; Sixty-five percent of India’s population falls in the working age category. 

With the many changes India has seen since the 1990s, companies have a number of emerging segments to focus on:

• Rural India: With 151 million households increasingly diversifying in their occupation, rural India contributes to 54% of India’s GDP and 55% of the country’s monthly expenditure.
• Youth: The economic boom has resulted in more income opportunities and higher wages for the youth entering the economy. Unlike their parents who led a frugal life, the younger consumers have a limited savings mind-set. They live for the present and are willing to live on credit.
• Women: 16% Indian women, especially in cities, are economically independent and work outside of their homes. A recent study by supplier IMRB also showed that in the past decade the average income of the urban Indian woman has doubled.

For more information on these segments and researching this region, see our newest whitepaper: An Introduction to Conducting Market Research in India.

Related blogs:

• Conducting Market Research in China
• Conducting Research in Russia
• Brazil: What to Know before Researching Latin America’s Biggest Market