The future of research: stop asking, start listening
At the start of the year, Research Magazine asked a number of top UK researchers to sum up in one word what they believed 2010 held for the research industry. “Listen,” said respected research director Reineke Reitsma from Forrester Research.
It’s an interesting thought, but you could argue qualitative researchers have always been doing that. As a facilitator, the art of listening is up there in terms of importance with the art of questioning. The two normally go hand in hand: listen, question, listen some more, ask some more questions. But when Reitsma talks about what’s at the forefront of 2010, the art of the question doesn’t follow.
For years the research industry has focused on different ways of framing questions to ascertain consumers’ wants and needs. Regardless of the methodology, researchers use countless techniques to draw out the answers required to uncover insight.
But slowly, a few are starting to rethink the fundamental question and answer approach. That’s because if you look in the right places, you’ll find the answers are already out there. Consumers are publishing them online, without even being probed. People are generating more content than ever before. Rich content that talks about their lives, their highs and lows, their experiences with brands, both positive and negative. Content that is openly available to anyone with an internet connection.
What this means for researchers, is that the art of questioning takes a backseat to the art of listening. By trawling through the incredible amount of data online you can paint a rich picture of consumers’ lives. What’s more, you often get deeper insights into how people are feeling about things, more than you’d ever get by asking people ‘how are you feeling about things?’. It’s the most modern form of ethnography you could wish for.
But how do the research subjects feel about this? You’d think people might feel a bit vulnerable at the thought of companies trawling their comments on open source sites. There’s more and more support for the view that suggests consumers expect companies to understand they’re interacting with them through a number of touch points and to recognise their feedback in all shapes and forms. The fact is they don’t want to be asked about the same content they’ve already shared before. Seemingly, no one wants to repeat themselves, regardless of the context.
So, what does this mean for the future of the research industry? Listening to what’s already out there could certainly speed up the research process; it can help focus what you need to do; it could send you in an entirely different direction; it may potentially even reduce the cost of your research. But at this stage, you’re not going to get all the answers you could ever wish for online. It’s not going to replace a brand tracker or specific NPD evaluation. But, it should reshape the way we look at things, and become another tool in the researcher’s toolkit.And you’d hope that market research will adopt more of a multi-media approach and embrace this new spin on ethnography.
2010 may not be the death of questions, but it should at least highlight the greater importance of listening before you speak.
Chris Pescott
May 6, 2010
I would like to add that listening can be dangerous too. I am a passionate qual researcher, and therefore know the pitfalls of "listening".
Often marketers are hoping to hear certain things so much so, that they hear it even if its not there.
There is always merit in validating what is "heard" from the noise, to ensure the real insights are tangible and well grounded in context.
Quick dips to validate what is heard is like packing a suitcase for an overseas trip. You don't want to arrive at your destination in sub-artic temperature with nothing but bikini bottoms (We've all been their right?…. right?) Especially if your a somewhat overweight guy like myself. Huge embarrassment could have been avoided by asking a couple of relevant questions. Ahhh memories.
Joking aside… listening is one direction for research but it is not the only direction it's heading. Balance is always going to be an important factor which you did touch on, and I only wanted to emphasis.
p.s. don't go to Vomo Island in January. People get hurt that way.
Spencer
May 6, 2010
As a GenY specialist I gotta say that reading an article about how listening is the next big thing is somewhat stunningly obvious. Although I have to suck up to Chris and say that you listen with finely tuned ears otherwise you can hear what you want to hear.
Try sitting in a field at a music festival for a couple of days/nights using only your ears, just like data or a group video, you have to sift through the verbiage to find the vein of value you need to tune in.
Sorry to dissapoint the cheap bastards who thought they could run out and get all ethnographic and save on some research budget….you still the need us.
So back to the point of the article….? Anyone? Listening is good….my wife tells me that all the time!
Spencer
May 6, 2010
Sorry for typos……rushing
Debra
May 6, 2010
The problem with listening is that most people only hear the things that support their prior opinion.
But that said, it's important to remember that listening is not just about trawling what people are saying online… eavesdropping delivers a wealth of information, and finely tuned ears are an essential asset to every good researcher, and I would have thought, every good marketer too.
Martijn
May 7, 2010
Listening is also reading between the lines. And reading between the lines is not looking for info that supports a prior opinion. It's actually hard to be a good listener.
In order to understand people you have to use all senses. You have to use all kinds of info that is available. So when you're sitting at a music festival it might be hard to hear the data but the customer's behaviour and body language speak for itself.
Spencer
May 7, 2010
Sorry, when I think of listening in my professional context I'm referring to the ability to listen to someone / something in all of its forms. The body language, how loud is the impact, what’s the verbal and non verbal response, how relevant is the environment to the statement – these things (and more) determine whether someone can really listen.
Sifting through the static.
Pop culture quote "Look man, you can listen to Jimi but you can't hear him. There's a difference man. Just because you're listening to him doesn't mean you're hearing him”
Duncan Stuart
May 7, 2010
Spew. This is like being lectured to by a nanny.
Duncan Stuart
May 8, 2010
"..you’d hope that market research will adopt more of a multi-media approach …"
You think we haven't? Methinks you are out of touch with what's been happening in research over the past few years.
Michael
May 12, 2010
My mother always said, "you have two ears and one mouth and you should use them in that order of importance". I didn't really listen.
As a creative, I generally find that I know just about everything, intuitively. So any kind of research (or strategy, or brief or whatever) is fundamentally flawed and most likely a waste of good money that I could be spending on special make billboards and "online content".
But in the spirit of the conversation, while I agree that there's a lot being said online – surely that's mostly the extreme stuff?
If I'm going to make an effort to give an unsolicited opinion online, isn't it likely that I really, really like something, or I really, really don't? (Or, like this opinion, I just like the sound of my keyboard).
And if that's true, when we average out those passionate opinions and filter out the drivel – do we really get anything useful? Or are we missing out on the big bunch of people in the middle who have better things to do than blog? (It might be they're too busy buying stuff.)
I'm sure those are the people that researchers research. And I guess, like anything, "it's not what you do it's the way that you do it."
Finally, as a point of interest, I do know with absolute cast-iron 'creative certainty' that everyone buys everything they see advertised on a special make billboard. So no need to research that one.
Spencer
May 12, 2010
@Michael….I'm contradicting some of my previous work here but I personally think testing creative / ads is pointless and that any money set aside for 'research' in the testing phase of ads should be spent either on a better research brief for me or put across the bar for the creatives to drink post production.
Michael
May 12, 2010
@Spencer… good call. I think you'll also find that most ads have already been "researched" within the creative department. And since creatives are invariably right about… well, everything, any further research is money wasted – much better to put in on the bar.
PS – Don't worry about contradicting yourself. Isn't that what researchers do best? ;)
Spencer
May 12, 2010
Oooh that hurt. Bastard :-)