The January issue of Quirk’s contained a Q&A piece in which we asked researchers to address a handful of questions about 2014 and their views of what’s ahead for 2015. Space didn’t permit us to run the responses to one of the questions, which asked interviewees to cite the topics they think the MR industry is not talking about enough and which are being talked about too much. Here, then, are their replies!


Diane Bowers, president, Council of American Survey Research Organizations: We are not talking enough about the real and measurable value that research brings to our customers and what it contributes to society and the public welfare. As far as what is being talked about too much, I would cite the grumbling about wanting “a seat at the table.” Let’s get on with setting our own table of “good work” – which is providing, through our research and analysis, effective-insightful-actionable information.

Peter Harris, managing director, Vision Critical APAC: What is not being talked about enough is how MR lost its mojo and how it can get it back. In my view the adoption of software solutions is a must but also MR professionals need to start thinking differently about their jobs and how important the data at their fingertips really is.

Jeri Smith, president and CEO of Communicus Inc., Tucson, Ariz.: There is not enough discussion of the fact that the industry uses too many convenience samples – asking the questions among respondents who are easy to reach, instead of taking the extra time and effort to query representative samples. For example, within gen-pop samples, we need to include adequate ethnic minorities, not just specifically examine these groups within our ethnic-targeted studies. By the same token, as for what’s being talked about too much, in many cases we are giving those consumers active in the online social space too large of a megaphone. While the spontaneous conversations that occur about brands online are useful, we need to remember that those who choose to talk about a brand or service experience online are not necessarily representative of the overall customer base – the “silent majority” who drive the bulk of sales and consumption for most brands.

Mark Sumpter, president, Qualitative Research Consultants Association (QRCA): With qualitative research consultants (QRCs) broadening the application of their skills, it is not clear how research buyers are adapting and who the marketing research decision makers are. In the past it was obvious, the department was usually titled MR! Today we find "market researchers" in all different areas of a company, including HR, IT, customer service, sales, operations and others. How will companies of the future position their MR? Another topic not often discussed is the future of brick-and-mortar focus facilities. Many are struggling but some are planning for a bright future by reinventing their offering. What are the focus facilities of the future?
 
Marcus Jiménez, founder and CEO, StickyDocs, Denver: Something I think is not getting enough talk is the role and importance of mobile engagement, both from a consumer (external) and workforce (internal) standpoint. Where social media has taken up so much of the conversation, I believe mobile will have an even more profound impact on our industry, especially as it relates to how we deliver and distribute our intelligence to teams. Today, and into the future, organizations will need to move at the speed of culture in order to remain competitive. That will require mobility, and the ability to place insights at your workers’ fingertips. As workforces get younger and younger over the coming years, it’ll be critically important to put your research where they go to most, which, by the way, is not their laptop. Simply put, what is the value of great insight if no one uses it? Now that’s a conversation worth having.

David McCallum, managing partner, Gordon & McCallum, and board director, Australian Market and Social Research Society: We’re not talking enough about training, upskilling, basic research skills – improving analysis standards to handle a wider range of data sources, questionnaire and data capture approaches for new or mixed technology. In other words, it’s about how we adapt our traditional skills for a new world of fast-moving clients who can use DIY MR, etc. The key missing skill is ability to integrate diverse data types. What are we talking too much about? A lot of column space has been spent on the potential of "new MR" stuff, from big data to mobile to neuro, but we are not talking about how to implement and integrate input from those methods. We’re not really focusing on, “How are we going to make this work?”

Scott Layne, president, the Marketing Workshop, Norcross, Ga.: What isn’t being talked about is the impact that DIY technology will have long term on corporate researchers. We hear plenty about how technology has enabled corporate researchers in the short term. The reality is that for years the research community has been perceived as tactical and not strategic. The concern long term is how corporate will avoid falling into the same trap. If corporate isn’t perceived as strategic, then where does that leave the industry?

Emma Rowland, ACT committee chair, Australian Market and Social Research Society: I completely agree that we are being distracted by the big data fad. As has always been the case, methodologies must be fit for purpose. I also think that the industry needs to keep talking about the next generation of researchers – how best to train, develop and retain the young people who are the future of the industry. What skills and experience will they need to sustain the industry into the future?

Andris Versteeg, senior data analyst, SA Health: There will always be a new methodology that seems to be the new big thing. I guess text analytics could be grouped with big data. Yes, it’s nice to have a new technology that you can use, or more data to analyze but let’s get back to the basics: What is the question we need to answer and how do we answer the question in the best way? While we talk a lot about methodologies and technologies, more time could be spent on how we transform from being experts on gathering data to being experts in interpreting data. It’s great that we now have a big data file with information and that we can slice and dice (and chart) this but what does it mean? How do we avoid clients cutting charts out of our reports and writing their own reports and instead have clients see agencies as experts who provide answers?