Tag Archives: Next Gen Market Research

Award Finalists Strut the Stuff of Innovation

NGMR 2015 Award
Finalists Revealed
For a roster of who’s pushing the envelope in insights
today, the just-released list of 2015 award finalists posted on the Next Gen Market Research (NGMR) blog is a wise place to start!
Now in its sixth year, the NGMR Award recognizes companies
and individuals that have demonstrated outstanding leadership as change agents
and/or made significant contributions’technological, methodological or
otherwise’toward driving research industry progress in one of three categories: Thought Leadership, Innovative Research
Deployment, and Individual Achievement.
Candidates for the award were nominated by
peers in the industry and vetted by a panel of respected industry veterans
(listed below).
The list of finalists constitutes something of an
industry-level barometer for innovation. Take a look…
Thought Leadership
CMI Research
Hall & Partners
MFour Mobile Research
KnowledgeHound
iModerate
Gracenote, Inc. ‘ Tribune Media
Insites Consulting
QRS Research Solutions
Orbitz Worldwide
DVJ Insights
Innovative Research Deployment
yPrescribe
Research Through Gaming
BET Networks
Antedote
InsightFarm
HYVE Innovation Research
Consumer Activation Studio
iMerge Analytics
Qpod
Individual Achievement
Betty Adamou
Oliver Hayward
Christopher Monahan
Carol Cunningham
Kristi Zuhlke
Lucas Hulsebos
Jen Drolet
Anne Lacey
Kelley Styring
Stacey Symonds
Richard K Sussman
Tom DeRuyck
NGMR Award Judges:
Kristin
Luck, President Kristin Luck Consulting
Stan
Knoops Global Head of Insights IFF
Mike Gadd President of
Gadd Research Inc
Duncan
Stuart Director ‘ Kudos Organisational Dynamics Ltd
Jan Fager FMR
Counsel
 Swedish Marketing Federation
Gordon
Morris Vice President at Ipsos
Tom H. C.
Anderson CEO OdinText Inc.
Winners will be announced at The Market Research Event taking place November 2-4 in Orlando.
For information or to register, please visit TheMarketResearchEvent.com.
(Ps. SAVE $100 when you register with code TMRE15BL!) 
Congratulations to the finalists!
About Next Gen
Market Research (NGMR)

Next Gen Market Research (NGMR) is an independent, non-profit professional
networking group for market research practitioners who are interested in
exploring innovative, emerging market research techniques and technologies.
Originally founded as a discussion forum on the LinkedIn network in September
2007, NGMR’s membership now exceeds 23,000 market researchers worldwide
(clients and suppliers) and is the most active online community in the field.
For further information, please visit the NGMR group on Linkedin http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/31804
or
the NGMR blog at www.tomhcanderson.com or find out about this year’s awards at http://nextgenmr.com .

The WHY Behind NGMR’s Disruptive Innovation Finalist Selection


Where’s Mobile, Neuroscience and Social Media Monitoring?

By Marc Dresner, IIR

Yesterday, Tom H. C. Anderson, founder of the online research networking community Next Gen Market Research (NGMR), announced 10 individuals and 15 companies made the finals for the 2nd annual NGMR Disruptive Innovator Awards to be presented at The Market Research Event in Orlando November 8th.

In a mysterious turn, Anderson also reported this year’s awards have been reorganized and will feature three new categories in addition to the ‘Individual’ category, but withheld any further details except to note that NGMR has dropped last year’s ‘Client’ category, effectively putting research agencies in the running against the likes of IBM and Heinz. (I’ll admit I’m intrigued to see how that plays out!)

Finalists were selected by NGMR’s Board of Directors: Jan Fager and Dan Foreman (Europe), Michael Gadd (Canada), Jasper Lim (Asia), Duncan Stuart (Australia and New Zealand) and Tom Anderson and Gordon Morris (North America).

Upon scanning an advance courtesy copy of the list Sunday night, I was delighted to see several old friends and familiar companies, any of which would make a prime candidate for an award whose premise is the productive disruption of research as usual.

But I was also surprised to find that some of the trendier research areas today, such as mobile, neuroscience and Anderson’s own personal favorite, text analytics, were conspicuously underrepresented.

So, I went straight to the source to ferret out what, if anything, the finalists’ selection says about the industry.

It’s worth noting up front that as far as the judges are concerned crowdsourcing remains a definite disruptor.

Three companies on the list offer a crowdsourced type of service: KL Communications, Infosurv and BrainJuicer. Anderson confirmed that the committee was sufficiently impressed by the first two’s take on crowdsourcing to bump them to the finals. As for BrainJuicer, Anderson noted their submission’s emphasis on ‘twitterbots’ also earned them a nod from some of the judges.

As far as mobile goes, Anderson pointed out that Ipsos’ ‘Real Time Event Research’ program has a mobile component. Nonetheless, there weren’t any other mobile standouts.

Anderson explained the mobile short shrift was largely due to the fact that ‘this year’s mobile submissions weren’t demonstrably different from what we received last year…Keep in mind mobile research has been around for over a decade,’ said Anderson.

‘Mobile is getting a lot of attention, partly because of the iPhone App bubble and also in polling circles as the number of cellular-only households continues to rise,’ he added. ‘But I think people equate the buzz around mobile with innovation, and from what we’ve seen, there’s simply not anything terribly disruptive happening in this space. That doesn’t mean mobile isn’t an important tool; it’s just not causing an earthquake at this point.’

Regarding neuroscience, Anderson said that from a research perspective, ‘The field shows promise, but it isn’t fully baked. Clients clearly are interested in it and experimenting with it, but the jury is still out when it comes to results. It’s tough to make a case that neuro-based tools have had a genuinely disruptive impact on how research is conducted’yet. I honestly think neuro has a few years to go before it really shakes things up.’

Last but not least, where were the text analytics providers? Only Radian6 (acquired in March by salesforce.com) made the list. This threw me.

I think it’s safe to say social media monitoring qualifies as ‘disruptive’. And Anderson is an outspoken text analytics proponent whose own agency, Anderson Analytics, this year introduced a new text analytics DIY software, OdinText.

Anderson conceded he was disappointed with the lack of submissions from text analytics providers, but that there was a valid reason for it. ‘Of course, I was initially troubled that we weren’t hearing from companies in this space, so I asked around. I thought that perhaps they felt there might be some competitive conflict of interest with me as a judge on the selection committee,’ said Anderson.

‘It turns out that, yes, that was a factor, but only to the extent that they were guarding their IP pretty jealously from everyone,’ said Anderson. ‘There’s a lot of development activity going on in the text analytics space right now, and it’s very competitive. So at the end of the day, the providers I know and who know me well enough to be frank told me that they were interested, but decided they were better off keeping their cards close to the vest.’

Shifting gears, a review of the finalists in the ‘Individual Disruptor’ category was, for me, like looking at a line-up of the usual suspects, to their credit. Here we have a very solid list of folks who push the innovation envelope, and I don’t envy the judges; narrowing it down to just one will be difficult.

Although the reason/s they were nominated and selected might seem obvious to anyone familiar with the names on this list, I wondered if there were any specific criteria the judges were particularly keen on.

Anderson told me that while not all of the people on the list possess all of these traits, they tend to share the following:

- Early adopters of technology

- A record of contributing intellectual capital and sharing ideas to help move the industry forward in new directions

- Willingness to take controversial and potentially politically incorrect positions that they believe are in the industry’s best interest

- A chronic dissatisfaction with the status quo’whatever it may be

The winners’and the three new award categories’will be announced November 8 at The Market Research Event. Anderson will moderate a panel of the winners directly after the ceremony.

For information or to register, please visit us online at TheMarketResearchEvent.com.

Editor’s Note: A list of the individual and company finalists is available on the NGMR blog.

Congratulations to the finalists and good luck!

ABOUT THE AUTHOR/INTERVIEWER
Marc Dresner is an IIR USA communication lead with a background in trade journalism and marketing. He is the former executive editor of Research Business Report, a confidential newsletter for the marketing research and consumer insights industry. He may be reached at mdresner@iirusa.com. Follow him @mdrezz. You can meet him at TMRE 2011 in Orlando this November!

The New Face of Marketing Research Intelligence

Re-posted from Tom H. C. Anderson – Next Gen Market Research
Candid Thoughts on Industry Trends & 2011 MRIA Conference The Annual MRIA Conference was held this week in gorgeous Kelowna, BC, Canada. This was the third time I’ve been asked to participate in an MRIA event. This time as part of the final panel on industry trends and challenges entitled ‘The New Face of Marketing Research and Intelligence.’ Bermie Malinoff, CEO of element54, did a great job moderating the panel which was to consist of myself and Angus Reid, CEO of Vision Critical; Gary Bennewies, CEO of Ipsos Canada; and Donn Mills, CEO of Corporate Research Associates. Unfortunately, Angus’ private jet decompressurized in mid air and he was forced to return to Toronto. Sounded like a pretty cool excuse to me. I may use that one my self in the future . I was rather looking forward to meeting Angus and hearing his viewpoints as I understand we may share a few similar concerns in regard to our industry. However, Jean-Marc Leger, CEO of Leger Marketing, was good enough to step in on short notice and also had some very good points on where we are going and how to get there. I’m not going to attempt to summarize the conference or even our panel session. I will however share some of my candid thoughts on a couple of the interesting questions raised by Bernie and the audience, even though we had an hour, we did move rather quickly across a wide range of topics. How have client needs changed and how do we need to respond? I think we all agree on the fact that clients tend to want insights faster. There’s also a desire for more DIY (Do It Yourself), in large part, I believe, because of a desire to control the speed and secondly cost of research. Many client side researchers seem to simply be asked to provide a lot more research projects, faster, and for less money. It’s becoming a volume game to some extent. In regard to DIY Research, personally I don’t believe in fighting trends. This is part of the reason Anderson Analytics recently began our own software development effort (OdinText). I believe if researchers can put some of our tremendous domain knowledge into easy to use software we not only help our clients, but create something that is easier to scale and will have exponential value later. As importantly, I believe many of our clients are being expected to and want to engage in more than traditional marketing research. Many already see the writing on the wall and understand that ‘insights’ today really does mean a lot more than surveys and focus groups. By working with other data sources like CRM or web analytics, it becomes easier for them to measure ROI and move up the value chain in their organization, thereby avoiding the DIY ‘Do More with Less’ cycle. I think helping these clients climb the value chain in their organizations, by helping them understand how to leverage Big and Streaming Data are one of the best future strategies many researchers can focus on. How do traditional research companies avoid becoming road kill? This question was asked verbatim and it’s telling that many now seem to understand that probably well over half of the ‘research’ firms out there won’t be around 5-10 years from now. Evaluating our industry as it is currently using Porters Five Forces or any other method does not paint a pretty picture. Other than looking beyond ‘research as usual’ (focus groups and surveys), I do think all the firms in our industry, including mine, have a bit of a positioning problem. This is a problem you wouldn’t think market researchers who help other companies with positioning strategies constantly should have, but in fact we all say we do pretty much the same things! This problem is even worse for some players like survey software firms who are not just competing with lower offshore labor in developing countries (allegedly offering the same quality service at 30% of the cost), no they are actually competing against completely free products like Zoomerang and Survey Monkey! Most researchers you speak with will admit that over 90% of surveys can be conducted using one of these free tools. Clients certainly know it. Suppliers have been slower to adopt them on scale partly because they have been afraid to use free tools on client projects because it may question their value and pricing (same reason offshoring is not mentioned by those who engage in it). However, several researchers I’ve talked to on the supplier side agree with what we’ve been seeing, most clients don’t care to see the details of the surveys (never mind know the source of sample for that matter). That means that more and more suppliers who have been willing to pay a lot more in some cases to use white label survey technology simply in order to make it look as if they have their own software running on their own domains (co. URL) will now start thinking a lot harder about the dollars they’re forking over for some rather high priced solutions which more or less do the exact same thing as the much cheaper or completely free options. Whether a survey software provider and/or a panel provider, assuming these companies don’t want to become road kill, they will need to start thinking about adding features beyond what the free tools have (such as text analytics or other streams of data with analytics dashboards). Just about all parts of full service research have now also become commoditized. Set aside the fact that almost anyone and everyone outside of research believes they can create a perfectly good survey themselves (especially true at more tech/engineering driven companies), even the last bastion of value, analytics is becoming a commodity. What is the future of individual (CMRP, PRC) and corporate (ISO) certification? From the outset, I’ve said that the ISO certification push driven by ESOMAR and more recently, very unsuccessfully by CASRO in the US, has had the intended purpose of further commoditizing the research process (from design to fielding and even analysis and reporting). Certification like ISO is the ultimate differentiation killer. More useful for factories where everyone follows the same recipe to get the same result (a 9 millimeter widget +/1mm). It’s obvious why the ISO certification is being pursued. A highly un-proportionate amount of ESOMAR’s and CASRO’s income is from the ‘Honomichl’ Top 5-10 research firms, almost all of which have had a quiet but ambitious offshoring (cost cutting) agenda. ISO certification would partially serve as a protective veil, allowing these companies to say ‘don’t worry about what’s being done, where, under what rule of law, etc., we’re following the same recipe, it’s the same quality everywhere.’ Bullshit! [If you agree with me check out FTO, a completely free organization founded on transparency] I urge all researchers to carefully consider the benefits they receive from any trade organization and more importantly to question how their dues and donation of time are used. Ask, who really benefits from the initiatives being pursued, is it really your industry as a whole? I hope in the near future, research trade organizations (those that remain), will pay more attention to the ‘long tail’ of their membership rather than focusing on just the top few firms. As for individual certifications such as CMRP and PRC, it’s a bit tougher to disagree with as I do understand the underlying desire to create some barriers to entry and prestige in our profession. However, partly for the same reasons I had a problem with ISO, I tend to disagree with these certifications as well. I work hard to position myself and my firm and its members as better, much better, than the competition. If I were to seek such accreditation for myself or my co-workers, we would de facto be saying ‘look we’re just as good as EVERYONE else. We are AVERAGE.’ Thus we would simply be further commoditizing the research that what we do. Now if PRC and CMRP were only awarded to the top 1% brightest market research professionals, I might be among the first in line to take the exam! Unfortunately, we know that’s not going to happen’ There’s no money to be made by the certifiers in such a certification scheme. What is ‘Next Gen’ Market Research? Business needs, methodology, and technology are the three areas researchers need to build greater expertise in. Arguably, this is easier for the client side researcher who can reach out to forge relationships and mentors in other parts of their organizations than for supplier side researchers who are more specialized. Reverse mentoring (looking to learn from someone younger) or cross mentoring (sharing knowledge and data with those in other departments or professions) are two good strategies for development. Importantly, the goal for all of us needs to be to resist further commoditization and cost cutting. Instead let’s increase the value of insights. I believe part of this will have to do with positioning. We will never be able to convince the masses again that the skill of survey design is extremely valuable and warrants the investment of a lot of time and money. Certifications won’t help here. Instead look to your clients, clients, clients to really understand the information which is most valued. As you move in that direction you will help make your client more valuable. You may even see more opportunities to measure ROI of your work, assuming you are on the quantitative side. If you are on the qualitative side the goal will be greater creativity, more ‘marketing’ in both cases. We need to become more than traditional researchers while retaining the methodological principles which have served us well for many years. Dissenting views, research trade organizations and the MRIA During the panel in Kelowna, I mentioned Dr. William MacElroy, Chairman at Socratic Technologies, Inc., who recently presented at The Tech Driven Market Research Event conference I took part in. His presentation was entitled ‘Are You Scared of Change’? and proved how the biggest firms in our industry have stifled innovation because it has been in their best interest to do so. I want to say again what I said at the conference. I am very happy and impressed to see that the Canadian market researchers and their MRIA are progressive enough to allow and encourage active debate and dissention even on topics they may be pursuing. As always, it was a great pleasure to be with you this week. Thank you again! @TomHCAnderson For more photos and info, visit Next Gen Market Research.

Disruptive Innovation: A Research Industry Award That Rewards Everyone?

NGMR Disruptive Finalists Announced
By Marc Dresner, IIR USA

As a mix of social science and commercial enterprise, consumer research tends to innovate cautiously in order to maintain methodological rigor and preserve normative data.

But with the advent of the Internet and a torrent of turns since, the industry has learned quickly ‘ and in cases painfully ‘ that we can no longer afford to dictate the pace of change.

To adapt and thrive, researchers have to an extent been compelled to forgo temperance and embrace disruption. No easy task, but one that IMHO is critical to survival in an age when change is an accelerating constant.

So in addition to the venerable EXPLOR awards ‘ which through a case study competition recognize the most innovative applications in research ‘ The Market Research Event this year is hosting a new award celebrating research industry change agents that make us uncomfortable for our own good.

Leading online networking group Next Gen Market Research (NGMR) will be presenting their 1st annual NGMR Disruptive Innovator awards at TMRE Nov 9th.

The nominations have been collected and vetted by NGMR’s Advisory Board, and divided into three categories: Individual, Agency and Client.

NGMR’s founder and chairman, Tom H. C. Anderson, told me the response has been overwhelming, and that based on the volume of nominations received per category, finalists have been narrowed down to 15, 10 and 5, respectively.

I’ve got the sealed envelope, and today I’m pleased to share the finalists by category (alphabetically):

INDIVIDUAL (15)
Peter Corbett, iStrategy
Tom De Ruyck, InSites Consulting
Jeffrey Henning, Vovici
Diane Hessan, Communispace
AJ Johnson, Ipsos, and Sean Conry, Techneos
Joy Liuzzo, InsightExpress
Kevin Lonnie, KL Communications
Kristin Luck, Decipher
Bernie Malinoff, element54
Linda Mauro, Illume Market Research
Dr. Ros Picard, Affectiva
Jon Puleston, GMI
Steve Schwartz, Microsoft
Kelly Styring, Insightfarm

AGENCY (10)
Affectiva
Clear-Ideas.com
Communispace
Converseon
EmSense
iModerate
Infosurv
Nielsen Media Research
RapLeaf
Tealeaf

CLIENT (5)
Facebook
LinkedIn
McDonald’s
Microsoft
3M

Why is disruptive innovation so important to research that it warrants an award?

I asked Sony Ericsson Global Insights Manager Gordon Morris, who serves on NGMR’s advisory board.

Here’s what he had to say:

‘The market research industry is, by nature, introverted, intellectual and risk averse. It is not given to exploring new techniques, but instead revises and refines existing techniques in an attempt to innovate. These are subtle, evolutionary increments, not the groundbreaking paradigm shifts other industries pursue,’ said Morris.

Morris added, ‘In an industry often lacking genuine innovation, it’s important that we recognize and celebrate those among us who achieve such shifts. In so doing we inspire the dreamers among us to find the next one.’

Like anything else, I suppose example leads and practice makes perfect’