Consumers and their values have changed; the way in which brands need to interact with them has changed; and research has changed. Some of these changes were in the works prior to the recession, but what is clear is that the downturn provided a huge impetus to their acceleration. Social media, in particular, have changed the way in which consumers interact with each other and the brands they use. This has tremendous implications for research itself. If we think about it, the value set of CMOs, their companies and their research directors are all changing fundamentally. This will mean that not only the types of research but the very definition of research itself will start to change. In the end, it is all about understanding people and how they affect our business decisions. How we go about doing that is less important than the fact that we continue to be the pre-eminent people who can do it.
Qualitative research is actually innovating ahead of quantitative - and leading that innovation into the quantitative arena itself. Think of what is being done in biometrics, neuroscience and ethnography. It all starts in the qualitative arena and then people start trying to work out how to bring it into the world of quantification. Today, there are companies trying to figure out how to bring to market mass ethnography and even mass semiotics. I would further argue that the 'new' qualitative is bringing fun (read engagement) back into research for both the respondent and the researcher - and that this too is making quantitative researchers think about how they do the same. In addition, some of the new technological platforms in qualitative research, which make it possible to combine ethnography, one-on-ones, billboards and focus groups, both offline and online, are showing the way to quantitative researchers in terms of what 'integrated' or holistic research can mean. This is not just to give qualitative researchers a pat on the back.
For the traditional researcher, this issue of Research World may turn out to be the most heretical yet. Our contributors this month suggest that not only is our concept of research being challenged, but that it may also be a very good thing. Paradoxically, the last five years have probably seen more innovation in the world of market research than the previous 60. The concept of traditional research is being challenged by the very people who not only form our main resource and asset but also are the subject of our study: our 'respondents. In fact, people are no longer 'respondents because they have told us in no uncertain terms that they do not wish to participate in traditional surveys where the model is interrogatory questions within a framework that we lay down. Rather, they want to interact with brands and manufacturers on equal terms or, more to the point, their terms. And that means: in their environments (eg, social networks), at their convenience. For researchers, this means rethinking many of our precepts about how to intercept people.
In this issue, we unabashedly celebrate the creativity of research. This time, we are rummaging through the toolboxes of anthropology, ethnography, behavioural economics and the neurosciences and allying what we find with new technologies to produce new methodologies that are capable of providing insights that otherwise would have remained hidden. But, to prove our case, we need to define what we mean by creativity.
The debate on global vs. local marketing (and research) is one of these debates which have been going forever. The basic question is can you apply the same advertising/packaging/ positioning (fill in the blank) on a global basis or are there local cultural norms that require a more nuanced approach? To which the answer has been, for as long as I can remember, local culture will always trump standard globalisation. The same goes for research too - you cannot (however much you insist you can) simply apply one standard methodology worldwide to a research survey without taking local culture into account. Another old chestnut is the debate on how to rate the quality of research agencies. A better route down which to go would be to check on the agencys public credentials: does the agency subscribe to the ICC/ESOMAR Code?
Our theme this month is return on marketing investment (ROMI). But just that one Insight throws the discussion of this aging concept into very sharp relief. Just what is ROMI? Is it return on investment on the entire marketing effort? Or return on each element of that effort? we have to acknowledge that research is not just about measurement of marketing's effectiveness. Research should be about generating and predicting as well as about demonstrating and measuring. Yes. the ROI debate is important. But it should not overshadow the inherent creativity not only of marketing itself, but of research. Research provides Insight.
Research for social and political purposes is a fundamental building block in the making and sustenance of a successful democracy. The return on research in the social and political domain far outweighs its cost. Research is indeed a fundamental plank of democracy, allowing the governed to speak to those in power in between elections, ensuring that those who rule are kept close to the realities of their peoples' needs and helping them inform their electorates and engage them in rational conversation. In todays world of utilitarian politics, it is perhaps the most important tool that we have.
What are memes and whats the idea behind this first guest-edited edition of Research World? Memes are contagious ideas spread between people through speech, gestures, rituals or other imitable means. Richard Dawkins coined meme to rhyme with gene' to describe how one might extend evolutionary principles of copying and natural selection, to explain the spread of ideas and cultural phenomena such as popular songs, crazes, catchphrases, dances, religious beliefs, fashion, social behaviour and I would suggest, the spread of successful brands. The guest-editor idea is to provide the opportunity for a fresh, provocative perspective and to engage diverse contributors to share their content and creativity.
Shoppers are, after all, not distinct from consumers or moms or people generally. Shopping is just another facet in the diamond of human personality and behaviour. But now the severity of the recession perversely gives research a real opportunity to step up to the plate and bring real innovation and understanding of the dynamics of shopping and the motivations of shoppers. These had already been changing dramatically as a result of the increasing influence of the Internet. The TNS Digital Life study shows that students, young people and housewives now routinely spend over a third of their leisure time online. Much of this time, it may be assumed, is taken up with comparison shopping and price checking. This in turn changes the dynamics of the actual, physical shopping experience itself, since people are much more informed by the time they reach the store. Globally and domestically, therefore, research into the attitudes, behaviours and psychology of shoppers is more relevant today than ever before. Now is the time for research to innovate and for researchers to invest in this area.
The distinguished economist Brian Reading in this issue forecasts that we are very likely to see a 'W-shaped' recovery this time, with fiscal stimuli providing temporary relief before we see a second slump. It is also distinctly possible that even the faster-growing areas of the world, such as Asia Pacific and CEE, will not escape this recession, depriving the industry of at least one crutch as it seeks to cope. There is a real need for the industry to prove (very loudly) the incredible value of research in a recession. How else to understand the consumer in hard times? There is also the need to display the real evidence of how investment in both research and advertising during recession creates the seeds of greater success down the road. Two articles in this issue prove the point - one, which outlines the investment in research by The New York Times and the other by the MSI relating to advertising expenditure. We as researchers need very proactively to shout this message from the rooftops. Research directors need proof to convince management that research is not discretionary spending' but a vital strategic tool with which to manage through recession and emerge stronger on the other side.