Computer people might be better suited for online research methods because when they're in public, humans are constantly trying to use them to check their email.

Have we really reached a point in which our technology deserves more attention than living, breathing humans? Microsoft’s “Really?” commercials for the Windows Phone back in 2010 suggests that we may have – and heck, that was nearly 2 years ago. While this is hardly the time or the blog to have a deep discussion about civilization and its relationship with technology, I’m sure this point is somehow related to what I’m trying to say here: there is great value and authenticity in interacting with customers and constituents face to face.

That said, I’ll also point out that this MythTrouncers episode is not intended to undermine online research methods, either. I sincerely believe that both online and in-person research methods have their uses, and there are cases in which one is better – or perhaps more user friendly to participants and clients – than the other.

I’m not the only one who feels that while online research has its uses, it isn’t always the best choice. There are researchers who actually specialize in using particular online methods who are still careful to make certain that their clients are getting what they need.

It comes down to a few key questions:

1. What are the questions that you need answered? Can these be answered with existing data? Do you need to collect new information? Does this involve the need for quantifiable data? Do you need more in-depth information from a conversation? Do you need to watch how someone uses a product in a particular environment? And if you do need to reach out to collect data:
2. Who do you need to reach? Where are they located? Are they in the same area, or spread across the country? How much time will they have to participate in the research? Does it make sense to segment them into different audiences? Are they a high-touch audience?
3. Are the people you’re trying to reach actively online? Do you need to the research to be representative of the larger population? Will the people you can reach online actually be representative of said larger population? (One of the biggest drawbacks to online research is that online sampling isn’t robust enough to do general public survey research as the results generally can’t be projected to a larger audience due to the nonrandom nature of the sample.)

These are some of the initial questions and issues we’d discuss with our clients in deciding an approach to methodology. The point is that there are a lot of factors involved in deciding the best approach to answering your questions, and the best approach won’t necessarily involve an online component.

I’m declaring this myth TROUNCED! Online options have expanded our toolbox in research. Many research professionals can vouch for the importance of flexibility in methodologies, based on the types of questions their clients would like to have answered.

Findings of marketing audits commonly show that organizations typically lack a truly strategic approach in their marketing.  The 1989 reprint and review of the original article (The Marketing Audit Comes of Age, Philip Kotler, William T. Gregor, and William H. Rodgers III) shows the top 10 findings of marketing audits, but below are a selected few, backing up the commonly known hunch that we tend to fall back to natural tendencies of jumping to tactics without having the foundation of a real compass.  While the world has changed drastically since this article, it’s amazing how these findings still ring true, even today.  Just a few include:

• Lack of a marketing planning process
• Failing to invest in the future, particularly in human resources
• An organizational structure that is incompatible with the marketing strategy
• Tendency to view marketing as only advertising or sales
• Narrow, short-term view of advertising and promotion

While the word “audit” may have some negative connotations thanks to the IRS, don’t be afraid. In this case, the goals are to step back, look at your marketing organization as a whole, and make better decisions thanks to the process.

So where do you begin?

An internal assessment is one of the very first high-level steps in the marketing planning process, a step that shouldn’t be taken for granted and should be periodically readdressed given the underlying assumption that organizations constantly change just as markets do.

For a marketing executive, an audit of the macro-organization (e.g. financial status, strategic plan, key initiatives, other functional department goals, etc.) as it affects the internal marketing organization’s planning and decision making is certainly an important part of the assessment.

But what do we do with the marketing organization itself as part of our internal assessment?

Why not perform a marketing organization audit – a relatively little-known, little-espoused tool?  This is a tool for conducting a broad evaluation that helps understand not only performance, but also yields key insights for future planning.  Of course, resulting insights are information- and data-driven, and it is largely a qualitative assessment.  Particular areas of interest examined include:  marketing objectives and strategy; marketing organization (structure and people); marketing systems (processes, procedures, etc.); and marketing performance … Doesn’t this sound at least a little like the classic management functions of planning, organizing and controlling?  In addition, individual marketing mix functions are examined to ensure objectives are aligned with both internal strategy and external market needs, and that all variables work effectively, interrelated to each other.

 ~

So, let’s begin to think strategically and consider a marketing organization audit – one of the first steps to actually being strategic.  Some literature shows there are some types of organizations that are especially in need of such an audit.  Is yours one?

Well…I’d love to raise my nose in the air and snootily say, “That is ridiculous. That sort of thing does not happen!” But I’m pretty sure many of us have witnessed times in which it indeed has been the case. It’s interesting really, because the fact is that nobody wants it to end up that way. Not the people who paid for it, not the people who conducted it…and you know, even participants like to feel that they’ve made a valuable contribution via their role.

This man has made a living by riding his bike around and dusting unused research reports.

If that’s the case, then why does this happen? I suggest several scenarios:

1. The information isn’t all that great. This could be because the firm doing the research didn’t do a good job conducting it, or maybe they stopped too soon – that is, maybe they did do good work conducting it, but didn’t take it to the next level – they didn’t look for insights and actions tucked away in all of that data and conversation.
2. The organization isn’t prepared to use it. Sometimes this can be fed by the fact that the research firm they’re working with didn’t take it to the next level, which makes it less actionable, I’ll admit. But other times, the organization paying for it wasn’t quite ready to listen or make changes in the first place…so it just sits there on a shelf. And let’s face it, even the best data typically has an expiration date on its usefulness.
3. The organization doesn’t like what they hear, so they disregard it. We’ve seen it happen. It can be very hard to hear negative things about your organization, so there’s a tendency to want to defend current products or processes if you’re receiving information that isn’t entirely complimentary.

I’m sure there are other reasons, and if you’d like to add to the list, feel free.

Much of this list seems to suggest that lazy, shelf-occupying research is the fault of the organization buying it, and not the firm conducting it. But that isn’t really the takeaway, here. What I want to emphasize most is that research isn’t meant to sit on a shelf collecting dust, and an engaged and insightful firm will help you make sure that it doesn’t. They’ll have a more intimate understanding of your organization and the landscape in which you function. This is the kind of research – and relationship – that helps you effectively use that research to your advantage.

I’m calling this one PLAUSIBLE, realizing that the fate of any research, no matter how good it is, still depends on the ability of the firm doing the research to provide actionable insights, and the willingness of the organization to heed what the research is telling them.

Has your research fallen victim to a weekly visit with a feather duster, or did you find ways to fold what you learned from it into your organization?

If you were to make this comment in front of our company’s principals, they’d likely collide with one another in a mad dash to reach their soapbox – and rightfully so. While we do carry out research to guide clients’ very important tactical decisions, one of the most powerful uses of research is in its ability to help guide strategy. You know, the big-picture stuff that makes some of us shudder as others among us delight in its breadth.

Make the leap!

It isn’t unusual for a market researcher to have examples aplenty of clients who called hoping to have research results by tomorrow – or yesterday – to make a decision about a product or a campaign.

That’s fair enough. The business world doesn’t have life without tactical decisions, and people who are expert at thinking tactically. They’re the people our research team might work with to use focus groups to test ad concepts, for example, or gather opinions via an issue-specific survey. These thinkers help make decisions on the important details that can make or break a product, campaign, or idea.

But there’s also thinking that takes place on a different, strategic scale, and this thinking needs to be informed, too. It’s this thinking that provides a base-camp for those tactical decisions. This is the kind of work for which we might be more likely to conduct research in order to learn in which direction to steer an entire organization. Maybe it’s reaching out internally to staff and board members, in addition to a particular customer or membership group, in order to make vital decisions related to the future purpose or focus of an organization. Perhaps it’s stepping out to the macro level and gathering industry-level information – research that provides a pictures of the overall environment in which you’re operating. All of these can help you learn who you are – organizationally speaking – and who you need to be.

So don’t forget about the use of research in making these larger-scale decisions about how to proceed – to help you steer your proverbial ship. It helps staff and customers alike feel included and on-board with any changes that might be coming…and it helps you tap in to all of the brain power and important opinions that the stakeholders of your organization have tucked away, just waiting for you to ask.*

<Blogger steps down from her own soapbox>

I’m declaring this myth TROUNCED! Research has its place in all dimensions of decision-making.

*Want to learn more about moving beyond tactics and into the realm of strategy? We welcome you to visit our website and enlighten yourself to Corona’s Synergistic Business Model as a framework for unlocking potential you may never recognized. Learn more about our crusade to shed light on strategic marketing efforts too, to make informed, proactive decisions related to your products, services, and campaigns.

Here’s a graph from ESPN.com that I found interesting for today:

Nationwide, we see that ESPN.com users overwhelmingly feel that the University of Kentucky is the #1 seed most likely to win the national title.  With over 93,000 completed surveys across the country, we can probably assume that more people in your office pool are picking Kentucky than any other team.  That is, unless you live in North Carolina, Michigan, or New York.

Survey respondents in those three states—which are home to the other three #1 seeds—selected their home team as the one they thought would win it all.  Do they have a bias?  Sure, they’re cheering for their team to win!

This is perhaps an oversimplified way of showing how survey responses can vary by audience and how their responses can become swayed.  What’s important to note here, though, is that it’s not always this easy to spot these types of differences in survey responses.  Sometimes, little nuggets of information and even key points are overlooked.  That’s where having a team like Corona (no pun intended) on your side can come in handy.

As Meredith mentioned in a previous post, stay tuned for some stats from Corona’s March Madness office pool, and good luck to all!  Predictions are more than welcome in our “Comments” section.

If you’re thinking something along this line, you’re doubtlessly not alone. We very frequently work with organizations of all kinds that don’t know what to do with all of the information they’ve collected over the years, and still keep collecting.

Now that's a lotta data.

This is true especially these days, when we’re overloaded with ways to reach out to and hear from our customers, members, donors, or whoever our audience is. We’ve been trained to think that information is power, and of course it is – but you have to know what to do with it. You still must use it wisely. Don’t think that just because you have a ton of numbers, it’ll be easy to draw conclusions. You must be aware of the ironies of having too much information. Respect the data!

Maybe this indicates the up-and-coming importance of firms that have experts in analytics. Well okay, they’ve always been important, but now perhaps we’re approaching their time in the spotlight. You know the analytic experts I’m talking about. They’re the ones who analyze down every chunk of information they can find, considering it from so many angles it makes your head spin, but they love it. And they come up with some amazing findings.

Maybe you do indeed already have plenty of information but you need to better understand what it’s telling you. Some firms are learning how to do this and it’s giving them a competitive advantage. As you come to realize this for your organization, don’t disregard the benefits of working with a research firm that has a strong analytics staff. They will be fully capable of providing you with insights culled from your existing data.

I’m thinking this myth is actually PLAUSIBLE. Once you dig out from beneath all of your data, let us know what you think.

Read the first episode here.

As a gal who holds qual research so near and dear to my heart, my initial reaction to the first half of this myth is to lean back in my desk chair and yell dramatically, “Noooooooo!”

But in an effort to remain professional, I shall take a deep breath and propose that, as any good researcher would tell you, there is a time, a place, and a purpose for each of these approaches to understanding your various constituents. Google “qualitative research” and the first search result will send you to the Wikipedia page on the topic. It’s tough to talk qual without contrasting it with quantitative research, as the Wiki page does, but it boils down to the type of information you’re trying to get. The widely accepted rule is that quant research helps you learn what, where, when, how many, and qual research helps hone in on the how, and why – mostly related to decision-making behaviors.

So you can see why one might be preferable in one situation but not another.

I think I’ve noted the ‘quant is better’ school of thought (perhaps because I’m sensitive to the assumption) in situations when we are working with a client who must take the results of the research and present them to decision-makers – and really, most of our clients must do just that. And I understand.  It’s different going to your manager with numbers and statistics with margins of error than it is going with quotes from a focus group. You don’t have a way to prove the accuracy of your qualitative results. Even when you’re working with a smart, reputable firm, qual research is tricky…but it’s the only way to dig deeper than those survey responses allow.

The fact is that there are certain situations in which there’s very little substitute for qual research, nor is there for quant. They’re a good team to help you answer all sorts of questions. So next time, before you scoff at the suggestion of a focus group, or poo-poo the recommendation for in-depth interviews, just consider what you’re trying to learn. And for goodness sake, find someone bright to guide you to the right research methods, and conduct it well.

I’m thinking we can declare this Myth TROUNCED. What do you think?

As a firm, we’ve talked about launching a short series of blogs that address market research myths as a form of educating the masses. It wasn’t my idea…but now that I have found some pockets of time for writing, I’m stealing the idea and running with it. So there.

We’ll approach this in a MythBusters-type fashion, picking apart one myth each episode (a.k.a. blog) at a time. Unfortunately, we probably won’t have any explosions and in an effort to avoid any copyright funny-business, we shall refer to this series as MythTrouncers.

While I was still considering whether or not to write about market research myths (prior to stealing the idea), I happened to be on the UPS website where I noticed a link to an article on their site, “5 myths of going global”. It’s a quick and interesting piece on assumptions that business owners might make which hold them back from entering international markets. I became even more intrigued after reading “5 business myths to ditch now” on CNN Money. I especially like #3 on that list since it suggests that research can shine light on potential customer segments you might have assumed weren’t in your ballpark.

The list of business-related myths goes on and on, the old wives’ tales (old CEOs’ tales?) of the business world.

It seems that, even just in the two articles referenced above, one of the greatest threats of accepting myths into your reality without questioning them is a loss of potential. The only step we can take to trounce myths is to seek information…good information. So our goal with this series will be to provide you with the information you need in order to make good choices about research which will in turn help you make the best choices for your business.

What myths do you believe? What information are you missing?

Tune in again soon for our first trounce.

Honing in more specifically on our business sector customers and fans, our new Insights for Strategic Marketing page is a clear and concise representation of how we use data-driven insights via market research and consulting to inform all stages of strategic and tactical marketing. Our collective experience and background has fueled our thinking in this area and tells us that “an ounce of strategy is worth a pound of execution.” It’s sort like the old adage, “Measure twice, cut once.” Make sure you’re doing things right in the beginning, and you won’t end up wasting your resources.

We know from our experiences working with hundreds of clients that it’s critical for them to fully understand current and/or potential target markets along with consumer or business needs for a particular product offering(s)…before spending the big bucks on marketing campaigns.

So, check out our framework, and start thinking about how to take first things first. We’re talking about big decisions you’ll be able to make, enlightened with information, like determining marketing goals based on a thorough assessment of internal and external environments; identifying market segmentations and selecting target markets based on criteria that is directly related to those marketing goals; and establishing a positioning platform and value proposition that will resonate with the selected target markets and differentiate from competitor offerings.

It doesn’t have to be a guessing game. Armed with information, you’ll have the “ready-aim” part down. All that remains after that is to fire away with your marketing execution…and shoot down your less-informed competitors.

Corona has worked with CML for several years and this is the third year in which Corona has conducted the research to inform the State of Our Cities and Towns annual report.

Visit the Denver Post to see a recent article by CML referencing the State of Our Cities and Towns report.  To learn more about the Colorado Municipal League, visit their website.