Skip to: Main Content / Navigation

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Add This

How to bring on new research suppliers: Part II - Onboarding



Article ID:
20130625-1
Published:
June 2013
Author:
Scott Aaron

Article Abstract

In the second installment of a two-part series, the author follows up his advice for client-side researchers selecting new research partners and discusses how to bring the supplier into the fold and manage and monitor the relationship.

Editor's note: Scott Aaron is a principal at Insights for Innovation, a Cincinnati research company. He can be reached at scott.aaron@gmail.com. This article appeared in the June 10, 2013, edition of Quirk's e-newsletter.

 

In my first article, I shared the selection process I used to bring on new research partners during my time as a corporate researcher. But selecting the right partner is only half of the battle! The onboarding process is a one-time-only chance to motivate your new business partner. I've always believed that having motivated, challenged and happy partner teams makes a big difference.

I'm sure on the supplier side, clients have reputations and I always wanted my account to be one that the most talented people want to work on. So I would use the onboarding process to show the partner company that we were excited to work with them and were asking for - and expecting - a full contribution of their expertise.

 

Intelligent but naïve force

Careful consideration should be given to how the onboarding is done, what information is shared and who will be involved. We are enveloped in our categories and brands all the time and, as discussed earlier, the partner is coming in to the situation as an intelligent - but naïve - force. Often, observations the partner has early in the relationship can help you see your business situation in a fresh way.

Of course, prior to the onboarding you can ask the partner firm what questions they have and what they would like to see. If the new partner is going to work with existing partners, it's a good idea to have representatives of the other firms there as well, if it makes sense and can be done efficiently.

The ingredients of a quality onboarding include:

  • Meeting all the critical stakeholders. This can be done during the onboarding meetings and socially, if schedules permit. Bonus points for including senior-level stakeholders.
  • Providing industry, business and brand background. Don't forget to define industry jargon and acronyms!
  • Crystallizing business issues and challenges you'll face. Most companies have a lot of data and information that could be shared but focusing on the most relevant information is a good place to start.  
  • Defining success for the work and the relationship. Most of my partners were proactive in asking my team this, as it is critical to the health and success of the relationship but make sure you're clear on what success is. During the session you can define partner evaluation criteria and frequency of evaluation.
  • Sharing the company's cultural values (e.g., communication style, decision-making process, timing of requests, how a work day is defined, etc.).  
  • Holding an initial work-plan development session. Spell out a few choice wins to focus on in the first 90 days.
  • Having fun! This is the beginning of a new relationship. There is no baggage and the two entities should work on becoming a team.

On track for success

Once the work has begun and the partner has all of the necessary information to move forward with the project, there are ongoing performance- and relationship-monitoring practices, such as formal reviews, that can ensure the work and the partnership are on track for success.

Formal check-in at 90 days

At 90 days, you will have worked together long enough to do a progress evaluation. If there are things that need improvement, it is early enough to course-correct. If at all possible, this formal check-in should be done outside of the client environment and as a standalone meeting. In my experience, it is less effective to have a check-in as part of a larger series of meetings. It should be a discrete event - not an agenda item.

As always, the more specific the discussion, the better. Generalities don't add a lot of value and can confuse issues. The most senior people on both sides should be the main participants. Here are a few things to discuss:

  • Is the work going as planned? What are the surprises (good and bad)?
  • Is the client giving the partner what they need?
  • Is the partner staying within budget?
  • Is scope manageable or creeping?
  • Are the wins being achieved?

Six-month formal review

The focus of this meeting should be to follow up on the 90-day topics. After a full six months, both sides should have a clear idea of what is working and what is not, as well as what is changing in the environment that will impact the rest of the year. Based on the discussion at this stage, the annual review should not contain any surprises for either side.

Annual review

This review should be a formal, in-person review and the client should prepare a thoughtful, written evaluation. The evaluation should be crafted against the key criteria identified in the onboarding sessions. At this stage I recommend soliciting perspectives from the stakeholder groups. The focus of the evaluation should be on how to continually improve the work and the value the program brings to the organization. After all, this is the ultimate - and shared - goal of both parties.

A large undertaking

Certainly the selection and onboarding of a new partner is a large undertaking that requires time and effort, but your investment of both commodities into making the process go smoothly will deliver a high ROI.

Comment on this article

comments powered by Disqus

Related Glossary Terms

Search for more...

Related Events

RIVA COURSE 201: FUNDAMENTALS OF MODERATING
December 3-5, 2014
RIVA Training Institute will hold a course, themed 'Fundamentals of Moderating,' on December 3-5 in Rockville, Md.
THE RESEARCH CLUB NETWORKING EVENT - SYDNEY, AU
December 4, 2014
The Research Club will host a networking event on December 4 in Sydney, Australia, in conjunction with the IIEX.

View more Related Events...

Related Articles

There are 899 articles in our archive related to this topic. Below are 5 selected at random and available to all users of the site.

Field management: a better mousetrap
This article discusses the increasing role of field management companies in implementing research. Field management companies provide an alternative to hiring full-service companies that would require paying for design and analytical talent not needed on a particular project.
Hiring to win: Part I: Dig deep to ensure a good fit
In this two-part series, Paul Kirch discusses how to ensure that 1) you’re hiring the appropriate candidates and 2) your infrastructure is conducive to the sales team’s success. The first installment addresses the hiring process.
Bigger (data) isn't always better
With all the attention given to big data in the past few years, the author urges researchers to ignore the hype and allure of more information in favor of focusing their efforts and conducting research to answer the questions specific to their business.
A bird's-eye view of what mobile can do
A broad look at current mobile-device capabilities and how they can be incorporated to improve qualitative and quantitative research.
How market research vendors can increase sales to the corporate research buyer
The author, a former client-side researcher, offers tips on how research vendors can better tailor their sales efforts to meet clients' needs. For example, rather than cold-calling with canned sales pitches, vendors should get to know the client's business and offer customized solutions.

See more articles on this topic

Related Discussion Topics

Market research report
08/20/2013 by Aarkstore Store
Most commonly used research techniques
07/28/2010 by Curtis J. Fedder
yes, I have experience with those ethics issues
06/23/2010 by Michael R. Hollon
Ethics
06/11/2010 by Jim Santilli
Research and analysis to foresight your business perspective
02/19/2010 by Emmanuel M. Mendy

View More