Content Type:

Glossary

Share Print

Say-Do Gap Definition

The say-do gap refers to the difference between what people say they’ll do – and what they actually do. It’s a well-known friction point in consumer research, especially when marketers rely on self-reported data from surveys, interviews or focus groups. In short: people often mean well, but real-world behavior doesn’t always match their stated intentions.

Why the say-do gap matters

For marketers, researchers and CX teams, this gap isn’t just a quirk of human nature – it’s a serious threat to decision-making.

When the say-do gap goes unchecked, it can throw off:

• Brand tracking (consumers say they’d recommend a brand, but don’t)
• Product development (users ask for features they don’t use)
• Ad testing (viewers like the ad but don’t act)
• CX strategies (claimed satisfaction doesn’t drive loyalty)

Relying too heavily on what consumers say – without validating it with what they do – can lead to missed opportunities and costly missteps.

Real-world examples of the say-do gap

You’ve probably seen these before:

• A consumer insists sustainability matters, but opts for the cheaper, non-eco brand at checkout.
• A respondent swears they’re going to switch providers … then sticks with the same one out of habit.
• A focus group loves the ad, but sales data tells a different story.

These aren’t lies – they’re lapses in memory, emotion or context. But they still distort the data.

How researchers are closing the gap

Smart teams are moving beyond “what people say” by integrating approaches that reveal actual behavior, such as:

• Behavioral data: Think purchase history, clickstream, app engagement.
• Implicit testing: To uncover subconscious preferences and decision drivers.
• Real-world experiments: A/B tests, fake-door tests, test-and-learn pilots.
• Mixed-method research: Blending survey insights with behavioral tracking for a fuller picture.

The goal isn’t to throw surveys out – but to supplement what people say with what they actually do.

Key takeaways

• Intent does not equal behavior. Self-reports are useful, but incomplete.

• Question design is critical. How you ask matters just as much as what you ask.
• Behavioral data fills the gap. It adds context and credibility to claimed intent.
• The gap has a wide impact. It touches everything from ad effectiveness to NPS tracking.
• Methodology should match the moment. There’s no one-size-fits-all fix – your tools should align with your goals.

Understanding and addressing the say-do gap isn’t just good research hygiene – it’s essential for getting closer to the truth of how people think, feel and act.