Archive for the ‘Focus Groups’ Category
Monday, December 14th, 2009
With worldwide expenditure on online research predicted to almost treble over the next three years, market research specialist B2B International believes the future is rosy for most online techniques, especially focus groups.
The technological revolution of the past 15 years has led to the rapid development of online data collection methodologies. Of these, the online survey is the most established but, more recently, online focus groups have emerged, making it possible to obtain qualitative information online.
Following similar principles to Internet message boards, the online focus group differs from online surveys in that it allows every participant to see the responses of all of the other respondents and encourages them to respond to these views as well as to the initial question posed by the researcher. In addition, the researcher inserts questions as the discussion develops, in order to probe areas of particular interest, or to gain further information on new topics that participants introduce to the discussion. In this way, online focus groups enable a real-time, dynamic discussion to develop between the researcher and the respondents, just as would be the case with a face-to-face focus group.
Business-to-business market research specialist B2B International has been firmly established in the online research industry since the company’s inception in 1998 and remains one of the forerunners in e-enabled research. B2B International has recently published a comprehensive White Paper – Using Online Focus Groups As A Business-To-Business Research Technique – which gives a balanced assessment of the rationale behind using the online focus group as a research methodology.
The White Paper outlines 13 key reasons to conduct online focus groups:
- Volume of information
- Depth and quality of information
- Reflection time
- Accuracy and granularity
- Inclusiveness
- Honesty of respondents
- Better spread of respondents
- Incorporating different geographies and time zones
- Researching senior respondents
- Participation rates
- Introducing stimulae to the conversation
- Everyone has an equal say
- Client participation
In addition to highlighting the undisputed benefits, B2B International Director Matthew Harrison, author of the White Paper, shares some of the insights that B2B International has learned through the large number of online focus groups it has conducted over the last several years. According to Harrison: “Online focus groups can take place for a defined period of, say, 90 minutes, as with a face-to-face focus group but our experience shows us that online groups are more effective when spread over a period of 2 days, with respondents entering the discussion at different times to suit their convenience. This way, groups generate more considered opinion and a greater volume of information, adding real value to the research.”
However, internet focus groups are not suited to every research project and B2B International is quick to recognise the limitations. These include the fact that certain target audiences – particularly the less web-savvy – are less suited to online groups than others; respondent recruitment can be labour-intensive and expensive; and certain limitations exist with presenting physical stimulae for respondents to touch, feel or smell.
In spite of this, Harrison is optimistic about the future for online focus groups: “There are many reasons why we believe the prominence and effectiveness of online focus groups will increase, but key among them would be convenience and technology. Increasingly busy schedules coupled with the need to speak to respondents all across the world make online focus groups an ever more viable option. Secondly, there will continue to be huge advancements in the capabilities of and familiarity with technology, enabling greater numbers of respondents from all across the world to take part with increasing ease and improved effectiveness.”
To read the white paper in full, please click here.
Posted in
Focus Groups, Global Research, Matt Harrison, Online Focus Groups, Online Research, White Papers |
Comments:
None Yet »
Friday, June 27th, 2008
Although the annual intrigue and expectation regarding the BBC’s The Apprentice has now long since died down, in this week’s Thursday Night Insight, B2B Marketing Manager Caroline Harrison nonetheless reflects upon a recent re-run of the show and finds some more valuable business lessons can still be learned.
Recently I watched a re-run of an episode of The Apprentice on TV. It was an episode which I had not seen previously, but was (yet another) one in which you sit in disbelief as an ambitious individual with a huge ego has unshakable faith in their own judgement. As always, it makes for great TV when this person gets the comeuppance that everyone else has seen coming from the start.
The individual concerned was leader of the girls’ team tasked with creating and pitching a prototype product to retail at £10 or less. With two possible ideas for a children’s toy on the table – a toy robot and the team leader’s own idea of "Secret Signals" semaphore cards – both concepts were put to the vote.
The five fellow members of the girls’ team unanimously preferred the robot idea, considering the semaphore game old fashioned and effectively redundant in the age of texting.
Undeterred, focus groups with children – the key target market for the potential product – were arranged. Once again, the decision was unanimous, with the focus groups all showing a clear preference and potential market opportunity for the robot idea.
At this juncture, common sense would tell most people that they should back down or risk being left with egg on their face. Of course, everybody is entitled to have a different opinion, and there are products on the market which meet the various needs of many, many different people. However, market research – and in this particular case, a focus group – is used for a reason. It gives a great insight into what a potential market is really looking for in a product or service, and helps to establish whether there is a measurable need or desire for your concept in the first place. Anyway, the team leader flew in the face of what the whole world was telling her and decided to plough on with her ‘brilliant’ idea regardless. Needless to say, the whole project was a disaster and the team leader in question was the next Apprentice candidate to be given the boot.
That’s not to say that people can’t come up with ‘wacky’ ideas which prove to be hugely successful in spite of the initial reservations of some of their friends or colleagues. It’s just that when research shows time after time after time that your idea will not sell, chances are that your idea will not sell. The only silver lining from this whole fiasco would seem to be that very few people were surprised by the outcome of the task and that as a consequence few other people would disregard such compelling market research evidence at their peril.
Posted in
Caroline Harrison, Focus Groups, New Product Development, Thursday Night Insight |
Comments:
None Yet »
Wednesday, November 28th, 2007
Research from business-to-business market research specialists B2B International shows low awareness of noise levels at work as deadline looms for entertainment industry regulations
When the Control of Noise at Work Regulations 2005 came into force in 2006 the music and entertainment sectors were granted a two-year transitional period until April 2008. As this deadline looms close, and with exposure levels necessitating voluntary or compulsory protection for employees, Aearo [1], a leading manufacturer of hearing protection, commissioned B2B International to research:
- The needs and practices within the entertainment industry;
- Their knowledge of the forthcoming regulations; and
- How they are intending to respond to these.
The market research project included 30 depth interviews with managers/owners of music venues, clubs, pubs and bars with live or recorded music; two focus groups in London and Manchester with staff who work in noisy environments; and 200 telephone interviews with managers/owners/H&S officers in venues with music.
B2B director Carol-Ann Morgan was in charge of the research. She says:
We got the clear feeling that people would rather change working patterns than adhere to the regulations – In other words, to work a shorter day so as not to go over the time allowed to be in a noisy environment.
Two thirds of respondents had heard of the Noise at Work Regulations, yet one in five had no detailed knowledge and only half the respondents knew when the regulations come into effect. Nightclubs seem the furthest along the actual preparation line and pubs/bars the least prepared to meet the regulations. The regulations were considered to be good in that staff hearing needed to be protected at work and employers were keen to avoid lawsuits.
Impact and action
The perceived impact of the regulations is low and will be dealt with by noise limiters, provision of a range of hearing devices, and changing shift patterns and working locations. Music venue/club respondents gave more technically focused responses, such as applying limiters to sound systems and taking sound readings, whereas bars and pubs focused on staff issues such as getting staff to wear ear devices and giving staff breaks. In music venues and nightclubs, provision of hearing protection devices is the most popular approach to meeting the regulations whereas reducing the noise levels is favoured by pubs and bars.
Noise in the music industry is loudest in live music venues closely followed by nightclubs. The latter are most likely to measure levels and pubs least likely. Larger companies tend to have fewer staff exposed to noise. Where there is concern, it is for staff and not customers.
Likely actions (showing low reference to enforcement practices) to meet the regulations include:
- Provision of a range of acceptable hearing protection devises;
- Monitoring and reducing noise levels through limiters and education of the industry;
- A change in shift patterns;
- A change in work locations;
- Working with hearing protection suppliers (only clubs).
Advice
Gaining information about the regulations comes from trade press and H&S bulletins for music venues whereas internal communications are very important for clubs, pubs and bars. However when advice on the changes is pro-actively sought, employers approach local councils, local colleges and universities rather than expensive consultancies. Decisions about staff protection from noise are most definitely taken by management, with no employees driving the change.
Awareness, acceptability and availability
Staff awareness of noise levels is very low and noise complaints are negligible. Also, staff exposure to noise varies. The majority of staff in larger pubs and bars are casually employed rather than contracted – many of these are students, and so are more affected by noise in the evening. Nightclubs are more likely to have their own employees, with the exception of security, however here there are more strategies in place to protect staff, such as rotation. Music venues mainly employ a mix of staff, contract for security and crew staff for bands. Some employees in such venues are exposed to noise, but the bars are often located away from the main venue or speakers are faced away from where staff work.
Research indicates that acceptability of ear protection by the workforce and its subsequent adoption are real issues. Workers in the entertainment industry are often students and young people, conscious of current trends and fashions, who show little awareness of noise-levels and low concern for the damage noise may cause.
The preferences for the type and features of hearing protection vary according to user group. Buyers and management want performance, comfort, security, staff acceptability, and a good price, whilst wearers want discreet protection, comfort, design, versatility/ease of use (e.g. to take in and out). A price premium will be paid for performance features such as discreetness and especially the ability to hear conversations and protect simultaneously. Branding is not an issue for hearing protection among end users. However Aearo was found to be well-known and reputable, with products that are widely available and easy to use.
There are issues surrounding availability – pubs and bars especially are looking to buy ear protection devices through wholesalers and cash & carry outlets, whereas music venues and larger clubs are more likely to expect availability through specialist suppliers (music, bar and PPE suppliers).
Carol-Ann believes that “our survey indicates that companies really should be making plans to address the noise issue now. It has been refreshing that Aearo wanted to conduct market research to see what was happening (or otherwise!) in the marketplace. They have recognised the importance of trying to understand the needs and concerns of the entertainment industry and responding to these needs.?
[1] About Aearo – Aearo are world leaders in sound protection. They manufacture a complete line of hearing protection for anyone who spends time in noisy environments. Their goal is to provide the greatest possible comfort, security and safety whilst being at the forefront of innovation.
Posted in
Articles, Focus Groups, Qualitative Research |
Comments:
1 Comment »
Friday, June 8th, 2007
This week we have witnessed a furore erupt around the logo for the London 2012 Olympic games. The logo (above) which cost £400, 000 to design, has received a barrage of abuse from various arms of the media and all corners of the globe. Seth Godin gives his opinion on the matter below, and puts forward some very interesting points on choosing a logo.
About thirty years ago, three companies dreamed up logos that have become so powerful, I don’t even have to show you the images to get them to pop up in your head. A sneaker company paid a few hundred dollars for an abstract, upside down wave, a coffee company picked a half-naked mermaid (is there any other kind) that cost them nothing, and a computer company picked [hired a PR firm that picked] a piece of fruit with a bite out of it.
What the images had in common: nothing. They range from abstract to woodcut to groovy. The art of picking a logo, even one for the Olympics, has almost nothing to do with taste or back story. A great logo doesn’t mean anything until the brand makes it worth something.
That’s why spending $800,000 for a logo is ridiculous. And it’s why you can’t (I don’t think I’m going out on a limb here) draw the logo of any Olympic games since 1898. The Olympics have trouble creating new logos of value because each Olympics already has an image that sticks with people… and that’s the image of the city where the games take place. Putting an abstract picture on top of something that already has a picture doesn’t work.
[and of course, the original Olympics logo meant nothing much when they started, but now provides a great shorthand to remind us of a whole bunch of attributes (youth, sportsmanship, spirit of the games, yadda yadda) that would be very hard to visualize without it.]
The iPod didn’t need a logo, where a pair of sneakers or a cup of coffee do.
If you’re given the task of finding a logo for an organization, your first task should be to try to get someone else to do it. If you fail at that, find an abstract image that is clean and simple and carries very little meaning–until your brand adds that meaning. It’s not a popularity contest. Or a job for a committee. It’s not something where you should run it by a focus group. It’s just a placeholder, a label waiting to earn some meaning.
Anyone want to join me for a cup of mermaid? No sugar in mine.
Posted in
Branding, Focus Groups, Market Research |
Comments:
None Yet »
Monday, December 18th, 2006
Chapter 6 of “The Power Of Industrial Brands”, our latest free ebook, is published here today. Each Monday we will be publishing a new chapter on this blog which will be available for free download. As well as this, you can download each chapter as an audio podcast from our podcast site – The Market Research Podcast.
Brand differentiation should be developed with a complete understanding of the core values of a brand. The core values may be what makes the brand unique but in other cases something additional is required. However, whatever is selected as the core values of a brand must be a genuine part of the product or service package and not an aspiration. And furthermore, the simpler the core value is to understand, the easier it will be to communicate. It is a healthy discipline to find one word that describes the core value of a company.
To download Chapter 6 click the link below:
Chapter 6 – Stripping Back To The Core Values
To listen to the podcast, click here.
For more information on branding click here.
Posted in
Branding, Focus Groups, Industrial Research, Market Research, Qualitative Research |
Comments:
None Yet »
|
