Curious as ever about how the market research industry is faring around the world, we do of course have a particular interest in developments in Russia, thanks to our Moscow office.

It’s pleasing to hear, therefore, that according to the latest estimates from OIROM, the Russian Association for Market and Opinion Research, the country’s market research turnover grew by 16% in 2011 to reach approximately $US 370m. Turnover grew by 20% in 2010, demonstrating the increasing importance attached to Russian market research.

If you are interested in carrying out market research in Russia, please email moscow@b2binternational.com or read our white paper on the subject to find out more.

An article by Enrico Codogno – Competitive Intelligence and market research– caught my eye recently. Not for the snappy title but more for the contentious sentence at the beginning of the piece:

Market research has often cold-shouldered competitive intelligence – but could the two be complementary?

I could not help but disagree with this statement. To my mind, competitive intelligence and market research are more than complementary; competitive intelligence is, in fact, one of the many guises market research can take. I was intrigued and needed to read more.

From shaky beginnings, now we’re on the same page. Far from disagreeing with the article, I felt it went on to put forward an intelligent argument for the need for companies to gather competitive intelligence.

We all know that many factors – internal and external – impact on a company and its ability to function in any given marketplace. We also know that what our competitors do can impact dramatically on what we may need to do now, or in the future.

Competitive intelligence can look at many things, among them: legislation; the emergence of new technologies and new competitors; upgrades or new uses for established technologies; new markets; public opinion; the backgrounds of key decision-makers; shifts in demographics; the abundance or scarcity of raw materials or their substitutes; and changing client demands.

All the information gathered from any intelligence study – and at this point I should perhaps reiterate that competitive intelligence is not akin to some sneaky form of industrial espionage; indeed, ‘standard’ market research techniques (i.e. interviews with customers about why they choose one company’s products over those of their competitors) can provide a wealth of CI data – then needs to be analysed and cross-referenced in order to assess the validity of the data and to truly understand what it all means. The findings will then serve as the basis for strategic and tactical planning…or, at least, they should as long as the findings are taken on board.

As with any research, there’s no point in having all this fantastic information at your fingertips if you are going to let the report sit on the shelf and gather dust – or if you are going to disregard the findings.

Because, let’s face it: although many of us do have an impressive understanding of our ‘chosen specialist subject’, there are – sadly but inevitably – certain to be huge gaps in our knowledge. One vital job of competitive intelligence, therefore, is to challenge and dispel myths which would otherwise form the basis of a bad judgment. Competitive intelligence, as with other forms of market research, gives you cold, hard facts, which should be ignored at your peril.

To find out more about competitive intelligence, please click here.

Cristin Malone this week ponders the return on investment of market research

As prospective clients inquire about our capabilities to conduct market research on their behalf, one of the most frequent questions they ask is how successful our research contributions and action recommendations have been to our previous clients’ growth and business success. Essentially, they are trying to gauge the return or value that they will receive by investing in market research. As this happens quite frequently and as my intrigue on this matter continued to grow, I read an interesting article by Dawn Lesh and Diane Schmalensee entitled, “Measuring Returns On Research.” While the authors focused more on internal market research departments or groups, I found that their conclusions and suggestions are also applicable to a research supplier.

In my own experience with prospective clients, I found the authors’ following statement to be dead on:

We came to several conclusions. First, the organizations that are most likely to ask for measures of the payoff of MR [Market Research] are those that are unconvinced of its value.

I found this to be particularly true, as many of the clients that request examples of return are often those that are the most skeptical of market research and its value. In many cases, this skepticism is not undeserved as some prospective clients are conducting a research project for the first time or have conducted market research projects that have failed in the past, among other reasons. Despite what may cause this disbelief in market research, it is important to help clients understand its value. The two authors detail three approaches that can be utilized by market research providers to demonstrate and increase the return on investment to their clients, as summarized in the figure below. (Please click to enlarge)

To get further details on the approaches provided above, check out the article in full:

http://www.schmalensee.com/files/articles_measuring_returns_on_research.pdf

While the ROI (Return on Investment) of market research is important to measure, the return that clients receive from the market research rests on the quality of that research and the provider and how well the actions and recommendations derived from the research are implemented. What good is measuring ROI, if it is not maximized by quality? The value that the supplier can provide is of the most importance as that is what has the most impact on ROI. Therefore, if you are considering market research, think: how can the expertise, quality, and specialization of this supplier help me get the most return for my investment?

We pride ourselves on being able to provide quality data and service to our clients, consult our clients with actionable recommendations and findings, and help our clients implement these recommendations to reach their objectives and maximize ROI. One tool that we use to help our clients achieve the maximum return on investment is an implementation workshop, which rests on our proprietary, action-oriented MOSIAC model shown below:

For more information on B2B International and how it can help you maximize the return on your potential research investment, visit http://www.b2binternationalusa.com/

You can also check out our white paper, Measuring & Maximizing The Return On Investment Of Market Research

A few days ago, fresh from choosing his latest Apprentice (in the UK BBC show), Lord Sugar conducted some rather cutting-edge social media market research. The task that Lord Sugar was looking to complete was not the most business critical decision by any stretch of the imagination – however, it was still an important decision, and one that most publishers and designers will surely agree, can take much deliberation and an abundance of time. The task – to decide upon the cover for Lord Sugar’s latest book.

In The Apprentice, Lord Sugar is often talking of the importance of market research, and a few days ago he highlighted to all his twitter followers the apparent ease with which it can be undertaken. Lord Sugar posted a short message via his twitter account (http://twitter.com/Lord_Sugar) asking his followers to cast their eyes over three variations of a new cover for his up-coming book, and to then respond with their preference (cover 1, 2 or 3 – (view the images here)).

Sure enough, Lord Sugar’s followers duly obliged, and 24 hours later a twitter post appeared proclaiming cover number two to be the chosen winner.

So what had Lord Sugar achieved? Well, in the space of a day he had come up with a research problem, put the question to his market, and received the feedback he was looking for. And ofcourse, this was an act of measurement – the covers were already designed, so there was no need for qualitativefeedback as to what people liked about the covers, or how they could be improved. Lord Sugar got to the core of his problem rapidly, and got the measurement he needed.

Although this medium of social media research is fairly new (though certainly gathering pace rapidly), the principal of ‘dipstick’ research has been around for many years in various forms, through tools such as omnibus surveys and panels. With an omnibus survey, a specific question (or number of questions) can be submitted to a target market or a particular sample pool, on a syndicated survey that may run weekly/bi-weekly/monthly. Results are usually turned around in a number of days. Surveys of this nature are indeed very useful in terms of gauging a quick response from the market and gathering attitudes towards a particular topic; however, they are unable to answer more in-depth research objectives, where a wide range of questioning is required.

Research using social media channels is certainly more prevalent in consumer research than in business research – though its usage in a b2b capacity is certainly growing. Indeed, b2b research inherently leans more towards multi-modal methodologies, as many projects seek to address a number of sub-objectives. Projects may combine exploratory focus groups with a programme of desk research, followed by a quantitative telephone survey, in order to meet a project objective. And of course, all research tools have their strengths and weaknesses, their applications where they yield the best results, and Lord Sugar highlights the strengths of social media research here.

There is, of course, much more to social media research – attitudes to brands can be tracked through syndication tools, key trends and problems can also be identified and addressed – and much more. Indeed, it too is a methodological approach that could complement an array of other methodologies being used in a multi-method piece of research. The uses and possibilities are quite vast – those mentioned in these few paragraphs are very much the tip of the iceberg.

Lord Sugar’s dipstick twitter research certainly delivered quick results, and certainly met his research objective of gathering market opinion on which book cover is preferred. So, perhaps this could be a methodology that would be best used for answering questions whereby a response is either time critical, or where a rough quantitative gauge is required.

The pool of followers that each twitter user has (whether a person or company) could be considered to be its own miniature panel – or twitterpanel, if you will. Though this pool of followers may not be representative of a company’s customer base, or a person’s typical readership (as in Lord Sugar’s case), they certainly have a vested interest in the said account, otherwise they wouldn’t be following it. This is a panel that is instantly accessible, and as Lord Sugar shows, can answer a simple research problem in an extremely short space of time.

Though it is unlikely that this type of dipstick research through twitter can ever replace typical surveys (not least because twitter followers will no doubt be averse to being over-researched, let alone its limitations) it can certainly provide an excellent gauge on a market’s attitudes.

Ever the entrepreneur, Lord Sugar has taken a problem and found a simple, effective, and free solution.