Coordinate and conquer

Editor’s note: By Andrew P. Garvin is founder and director of Guideline Inc., a New York research firm.

True or not, the charges will be continually debated and discussed, but I fear that the core issues may be lost in the noise.

A fundamental fact is that quality research (of all types) is - and will continue to be - a key to successful marketing.

What has changed? Well, the world has become much more complex, competitive and fast-paced. New research tools and techniques have proliferated. Info  rmation heretofore unavailable can now be located with a few clicks of a mouse. Strategic plans must be revised constantly. Marketing methodologies are themselves evolving rapidly.

Yet most companies have been unable to leverage all the new tools to exploit their full potential to gain a competitive advantage. Why? Because they are mired in traditional views of information and research, restricted by functional boundaries and constrained by budget limitations. And when they look outside, they see service providers mired in the very same problems.

Clearly, there is an opportunity for a new research and decision-making model.

The age of information-based traditional research is over. The functionally-driven, internally-focused, one- or two-dimensional and commoditized research approach must evolve into a new form of business intelligence that can serve a more highly segmented marketplace, and is customer focused and multidimensional (which means using multiple methodologies and resources to solve a single problem).

The new approach must use much more integrated research programs that can produce relevant data, synthesis, analysis and innovative insight. This suggests that conducting research properly is even more essential than ever before. It is also, I submit, relatively simple to do!

In today’s world, a company’s ability to perform successful research depends on four factors:

1. Coordinating the research functions.

2. Asking the right questions.

3. Using research methodologies in a new, integrated way.

4. Establishing the right relationships with the right research partners.

Coordinating the research functions

In many companies different people in different departments are responsible for different types of research. Competitive intelligence, secondary research, the library, and quantitative survey research functions can be at different ends of the building. This no longer makes any sense.

For example, how can one conduct a survey of global consumer attitudes towards soft drinks without knowing that results of a major syndicated survey were just published in Britain? Or that two soft drink competitors in Europe are engaged in a very public fight?

Centralizing all the research functions - reporting to a key top management executive - can be a better solution, as long as it is highly responsive to the needs of its users.

At a minimum, I advise creating a research council that meets regularly and includes members from all research functions as well as representatives from marketing and top management. This will facilitate the communication necessary to conduct cost-effective research.

One of the critical roles of this council would be to bridge the gap that often exists between marketing people, research people and top management. It would also help coordinate the most typical areas of research needed.

Ask the right questions

Being able to ask the right questions depends on having an understanding of the business background, the immediate issue, problem or decision to be made, and the availability, cost and likely value of all research methodologies that can be used.

Most importantly, those who will use the research results must be active participants in formulating the questions and providing context. There should be checkpoints along the way to ensure the research process is on track to respond to the end user’s question.

Every business issue ultimately boils down to an information problem. We think we have decision problems, but in reality, if we had a sufficient amount of accurate information, all correct decisions would be indicated within that information.

In my experience, to ensure the right questions are being asked, you need:

  • A very clear, specific and written description of the problem, opportunity, issue or required decision.
  • An informed internal decision on what information is needed, from what sources, using what research methods. This can only be done with a group of people who know what they’re talking about.
  • Input from outside the company to validate and provide external perspective.

Integrated research: the nine stages to quality results

Too often, a typical approach still is, “Hey let’s do a survey” or “We need a focus group” or “We need some competitive intelligence.” Followed by, “Get the cheapest quote.”

This approach produces the commoditized market research and lack of insight everyone is now complaining about. And it leads directly to the failure of marketing, for which market research is being blamed.

There is, however, a new way to go. It involves adopting a simple process that uses nine common research tasks, approaches and methodologies in an integrated and holistic fashion. It can be applied to virtually any research requirement, with more or less dollars spent on each segment.

While I call them stages, it is important to state that the following are not necessarily sequential steps that must all be performed for every problem. Nor do they require a separation of secondary, qualitative and quantitative research. On the contrary, the idea is to have a coordinated, holistic mix of research solutions that fluidly interrelate with each other and can be combined or separated as appropriate.

Here are the nine stages in a typical, but not required, order:

1. Find out what’s out there

Begin by searching for all publicly and readily available information on the topic, using search engines, business databases, trade associations, etc.

This stage is often called secondary research, but in my view the term should be eliminated from the research dictionary. It was generally used to refer to publicly available information like what you could find in a library. But these days, what is publicly available is pretty vague and fluid. When you call the head of the relevant trade association to get his input and advice on where to find the best information, is that secondary research?

The result should be a treasure trove of background information, current data and even current thinking and analysis that, if properly organized, will:

a. Often give you enough information to avoid spending too much on subsequent stages.

b. Help shape the questions for the subsequent stages as well as the requests for proposals from outside suppliers.

c. Possibly provide enough information to stop the whole project right there, or move it in a different direction.

2. Identify and buy published research reports

There are thousands of reports published every year on all kinds of industries and markets. They are usually done by knowledgeable analysts and produced by reputable companies like Frost & Sullivan, Mintel, Packaged Facts, etc.

They can be found in minutes in databases like marketresearch.com. Such databases will often provide reference to key reports on industries and companies produced by Wall Street analysts, multi-client studies and syndicated research, all of which should be included in a quality search.

At a minimum you’ll get a good overview and tremendous background, enough information to save considerable dollars on any custom research and enough insight to help formulate the questions for such further custom research. At a maximum, you’ll get enough to know you should stop right there and potentially save millions.

3. Identify and contact experts

The next step is to identify and contact experts in the field. This is now very easy to do using expert network databases like intota.com, or even by searching Google using your topic of interest.

4. Synthesize results in a preliminary industry/market profile

The next stage should be to put together all the research done so far into a brief report (maybe 10-30 pages) with appropriate appendices.

This report can serve several purposes:

a. Be a briefing for top management.

b. Offer plans for the next research steps, based on findings thus far.

c. Be the background document supplied to those, internally or externally, who will actually perform the more in-depth research methodologies that follow.

Now you will be ready for the type of in-depth and primary research that is required.

The next four stages can be done sequentially, independently or all together, but should definitely be integrated, with intelligence from each step feeding the others.

5. Industry, competitor and market assessment

My advice is to focus on the industry and its players first, then the marketplace.

A good in-depth industry and competitor assessment will require combining secondary research with interviews of manufacturers, distributors, wholesalers and retailers, plus solid competitive intelligence obtained ethically and legally.

For trend information, it’s wise - okay, essential - to set up an ongoing monitoring or tracking of both the industry and key competitors. This can be done inexpensively via alert services like NetContent’s Intellisearch or Dialog’s NewsEdge (to name just two). Customized tracking are also available from many research suppliers.

Once the supplier industry structure is understood, then turn to the marketplace - the consumers or end-users of the products or services produced. Again, it’s necessary to use a combination of secondary research, syndicated services and panels, information from trade associations and interviews with industry players. You want to get a firm handle on the demographics and characteristics of the buyers, as well as the size of the market.

6. Product development and technology research

This is an often neglected part of a research effort. If you are looking at an industry or market you must know what product and technology innovations have recently occurred, and what’s likely to emerge in the near future. This is especially important if you are going to survey consumers (see No. 9 below). Interviews with outside experts can be very helpful for this.

7. Benchmarking and best practices

Recently, it has become evident that an understanding of an industry or market is not enough. Successful decision-making also requires knowledge of how you’re doing compares to others in the field (benchmarking) and what are the best practices out there and who is performing them.

Good benchmarking studies involve an in-depth comparison of one or more of your own practices or processes with those of competitors. Benchmarking studies can be expensive, as they will normally involve interviews with dozens of sources, including distributors, wholesalers, retailers, industry analysts and employees.

8. Qualitative market research

The term qualitative market research is most often applied to describe the use of focus groups, so we’ll adopt it here, although the term could apply to many of the stages described above.

Focus groups are an essential step in the research process because they provide an opportunity to gain special insight directly from the customers (whether consumers or business executives).

I’ve so often heard, “Hey let’s do some focus groups.” Then someone finds out the cost, and suddenly it’s “Well, let’s do just one.” Don’t. Better none than only one. My experience suggests at least three.

The reason is that the big danger of focus groups is that they can easily be dominated by one vocal participant who ends up swaying the entire group, thus producing very misleading results.

Nonetheless, the big advantage in doing focus groups is that careful listening can often yield unique insights that no one has thought of, thereby enabling a much higher ROI on subsequent surveys.

9. Quantitative market research

Now we’re ready for the last - and usually most expensive - step in the process, which involves full-scale surveys with sampling that make the results sufficiently valid and projectable.

Prior to a big survey, I generally would recommend testing the field by using an omnibus survey and submitting a few key questions.

What type of survey should be done? While the current debate on the merits of attitudinal vs. behavioral research is certainly healthy, as a business and marketing person, I simply choose to do both. Effective and creative marketing programs require knowledge of what customers are actually doing as well as why they may be doing it and what that indicates for the future. In any case, as has been pointed out by others, it’s not the data itself that is so important, it’s the insights that should come from people who can understand that data.

Many researchers are gravitating toward the use of Internet surveys because they are generally cheaper and faster and more convenient. True, but caution should be applied because results are potentially not projectable under most circumstances.

The right relationships with the right research suppliers

If you don’t have a centralized research capability, then I submit you should no longer think in terms of individual research suppliers and begin thinking in terms of a research agency.

If the old way was to bid it out and select the lowest-cost supplier (or the one whose name is recognized by top management so results have “authority”), my reaction would be it’s time to recognize there’s a paradigm shift.

I suggest the new way is to develop a relationship with one or just a handful of outside suppliers, partner with them, and insist they take the time to understand your business and the current issue requiring research. Then, they should assist in guiding you through each stage in the research process, indicating how the best ROI can be achieved. A key point here is that a centralized research function working with fewer suppliers can dramatically reduce the time cost of knowledge transfer from one research step to the next.

This means interactions with research suppliers should resemble those with advertising and public relations agencies - thus the term “research agency.” Relationships should be ongoing. The research-by-the-project approach would diminish in importance.

It is my prediction that while single-focus, niche research suppliers will continue to exist, larger research firms will begin to provide an integrated approach and position themselves more as agencies than suppliers.

I even think we’ll soon be seeing research firms getting ongoing retainers just for maintaining a partner relationship, with individual engagements priced lower to compensate.