A recent article by Itamar Simonson and Emanuel Rosen, reprinted in Quartz, makes the claim that market research can no longer predict what consumers will like. The authors point to a 2007 study in which 10,000 people worldwide were asked about portable digital devices—specifically, the yet-to-be-released iPhone. The study concluded that there was no true need in more developed nations like the United States, Germany, and Japan for one product that would replace existing digital cameras, cellphones, and mp3 players.
When asked to rate their agreement with the statement, “I like the idea of having one portable device to fulfill all my needs,” only 31 percent of those in the United States completely agreed, compared to 79 percent of those in Mexico. In theory, the study’s authors suggested, people in the United States would be much less excited about a phone that is also a camera and a music player.
Thankfully for Apple, this proved to be incorrect.
While the study and subsequent article focus on consumer research, it is possible to draw a parallel with predicting trends in business research. Simonson and Rosen introduce the idea of “O source” information, such as user reviews, expert opinions, and price comparison tools – “other” places one would look for information rather than what consumers have traditionally used – prior perceptions, beliefs, and experiences. It is difficult to conceptualize ideas if we have no concept of what they could be. It sounds like we’re talking in circles with that statement, but think of this: the bewilderment and cries of a young child while playing “peek-a-boo.” The child cannot see you and, therefore, truly believes you are gone. The child, at that stage of development, is incapable of perceiving the existence of something he or she cannot physically behold. This idea of perception versus reality, about which we have previously written, was the stumbling block in that 2007 market research study.
We’ve noted numerous times that market research cannot guarantee results, but that it can guarantee clarity. Asking the right questions—both initially and as follow-ups—is the key to eliciting meaningful information. But it doesn’t stop there. The way an interviewer frames a question is just as important as the question itself.
Imagine answering the following question: “How likely would you be to use one portable device to fulfill all your needs?”
Now imagine answering this question: “If there were a device that could store and play your music, take quality pictures, serve as a web browser, and still provide telephone capabilities, how likely would you be to use it?”
Chances are, you’d be more willing to provide an answer in the affirmative to the second question, likely because of the level of detail, albeit concise, and the theoretical picture it paints. Experienced survey designers and interviewers know how to balance the level of detail needed to accurately paint the conceptual/theoretical picture in the interviewee’s mind with time constraints of a telephone interview.
So while we are inclined to agree in principle with the notion that “market research can no longer predict what consumers will like,” we do so with a proverbial grain of salt: market research that asks incorrect or incomplete questions will certainly prove deficient in predicting trends, while the accurate framing of forward-looking questions will, at the very least, provide a degree of clarity in the otherwise murky waters of assessing a market opportunity.
If you would like to bring clarity to your market research, feel free to call us at 1-800-999-6615, email us at mail@tweedweber.com, and/or visit us online at www.tweedweber.com. Also, be sure to follow us on LinkedIn (Tweed-Weber, Inc.) and Twitter (@TweedWeber).
No comments:
Post a Comment