Mindspace

I was asked this week to quote for a job requiring one focus group of 12 people.  My immediate thought was that this project is not for me, for two main reasons that I feel quite strongly about.

1.  12 people in one focus group just seems too many.  Firstly, within the available time, each individual is seriously limited in respect of the number of opportunities he/she will have to contribute to the conversation, and also the length of time they would  be allowed to give their opinion.  Large groups I’ve run (usually not by choice) have often ended up being little more than a round-table list of what each person thinks, and the only way to really get things going is to form smaller break-out groups who have discrete conversations that are much more productive.

Secondly, in any group situation you run the risk of the presence of  ’the silent ones’ who really don’t contribute.  Given that larger numbers means there is a good chance of there being more silent ones, it can end up with there being little point in up to half the group being there.  The same principle applies regarding the risk of there being more ‘loud ones’ who will dominate the conversation, leaving the silent ones even more able to stay silent throughout.

Including this number of people means the dynamics of the group are often unbalanced and makes it very hard for the moderator to ensure that everyone who is there has a fair and representative say.  Critically for the research output, this means that there is a real risk that the depth of debate and achievable insight is compromised and nothing has been gained by including a high number of people just to ‘get the numbers’.

b.  I have a nervous reaction when people say they want to do just one focus group.  Qualitative research doesn’t need high numbers of respondents, granted, but it does need the opportunity to take different sets of opinions and put them back into further discussion for context and comparison.  One focus group may reach a conclusion that is biased/directed for any number of reasons and if the first response is not ‘checked out’ in further research, it could lead to the researcher making recommendations that are not appropriate or substantiated.

So I gave the enquirer a price for 2 groups of 6 respondents.  I suspect because of the higher price to access 12 people  they’ll put my quote in the bin – but I’d rather not get the job than take the professional risk of not being able to get the best out of the sample or the best research results for the client.

Mindspace has put together a talk which looks at developments in the world of qualitative research in relation to new online methodologies.

The presentation is titled ‘What’s happening in the world of qualitative research?’ and covers online focus groups, bulletin boards, private and public communities and social media research.

It’s designed to be a straight-facts synopsis of the individual methods with a pros & cons summary of each, and has been well received as clear and helpful in terms of recognising what approaches are suitable for different types of business.

If you’d like to see the presentation get in touch – it can be delivered in person or online as suits.  Contact Clare Wade on ( UK code 0044) 01337 810494, clare@q-mindspace.co.uk.

I have determined 2 words which currently sum up for me the world of social networking – flogging and twitterage.   Flogging as in Forums and bLOGGING because to be honest I do find it all a bit of a flog, and twitterage as in twitter-rage because I simply still don’t get what the damn thing is all about.

Here I am on a Sunday evening in a flood of guilt thinking I must, I must write my blog.  Not that I expect anyone to read it, or god forbid any business to come out of it, but the era of social networking now demands that we give up even more of our precious time to avoid not being out there just in case it mattered.

I try, I really do try, but I just can’t avoid the thought that it all seems an awfully long way round to get business.  In the last 2-3 months I’ve probably done the equivalent hours of a full week’s work trying to get to grips with it all, but when I cost my time and think what I could have achieved by making a few phone calls/knocking on doors, it simply doesn’t stack up.

I seem to pick up in an incidental way that a lot of others think the same as me.  As a member of the 300-strong Independent Consultants Group, I belong to an e-group where we put technical research questions and general chat to each other.  I recently put up a post asking what others thought about the whole flogging scene and received precisely 3 replies, which pretty much said it all.

Further, I put up a tweet yesterday inviting people to join an online focus group to discuss ways they felt Twitter benefitted their business.  Responses?  Nil.

I understand all the stuff about lateral/organic marketing strategies, but when my website hit the top slot on Google today (search on ‘online focus groups’) I firmly put it down to the excellent work done by my SEO guy (Neil Smart, look him up) – I simply can’t say it was due to my e-space activity.

My friend John Clay, who is a professional hand-holder to businesses of the I’m-about-to-burst-into-tears-because-I-don’t-understand-it-all category, sent me an article recently which suggests that Twitter is not the be all and end all.  And when I read that Marketing magazine has just published an article about all the flogging/twitterage soul-searching that’s going on, I felt that maybe it’s ok to feel this way after all.

But who am I to talk?  Here I am blogging, and now I’m going to put up a tweet about it.  Question:  do I keep at it and hope that the penny will drop and I’ll feel less resentful about having to do it all, or will I just go back to my old bad habits of long lunches and good old human contact?

I mentioned recently a paper that has been published in the International Journal of Market Research which supports ‘online audio’ as a sound qualitative research methodology.

This is backed up by a paper from George Silverman who writes extensively about qual research, and unequivocally supports the use of the telephone in focus groups.  As in the IJMR paper, he makes the point that online groups are usually compared with face-to-face groups, whereas telephone-based groups are a separate format altogether and, when compared to face-to-face focus groups, are invariably stronger in every aspect.

His opening observation is that ‘the telephone is the preferable way to conduct most focus groups’, and he goes on to to explain in detail why he supports this view, concluding that ‘the telephone focus group is the more natural, less artificial, superior environment for a focus group’.

As with the IJMR paper, this reflects very well on our Mindspace t-group online focus group method, which really does seem to tick all the boxes in both worlds.

www.onlinefocusgroups.co.uk

I’ve put up a new chat page on the website – a kind of combination of blog, twitter and general marketing thoughts (could be called a page of twoggle or something).  Have a look and contribute if you can http://www.onlinefocusgroups.co.uk/chat.htm

The May edition of  the International Journal of Market Research published a paper on the viability of ‘online audio’ group discussions, which relates directly to Mindspace t-groups.  The following summarises the key points.

Notes on key points from the IJMR paper

Using a range of objective and subjective measures, this study compares the effectiveness of online audio (OA) and face-to-face (FTF) qualitative research methods.

Overall the results, based on both qualitative and quantitative information, suggest that the performance of communication in audio focus groups seems to be much more effective and efficient when compared to FTF focus groups.

The online audio method generates more information, greater quality of information and does not affect the level of participation. In addition, online audio groups will create more respondent interaction, and allow participants to feel more satisfied and act with more openness. 

Compared with online typing, being able to speak leads participants to higher levels satisfaction and self-disclosure.  It also gets round the concerns of slow typing and therefore message expression.

All in all this represents good news for t-groups as it completely endorses our methodology and approach.

www.onlinefocusgroups.co.uk 
http://www.q-mindspace.co.uk/mindspace_online.htm

 clare@q-mindspace.co.uk

The seismic change in the state of the economy has generated a flurry of marketing effort from a sector not normally known for its activity in this area – the rural building trade.  Following a recent application for planning permission for a conservatory on our farmhouse, we were deluged with over 30 letters from local builders offering their services – whereas previously you couldn’t get a builder for love nor money.

Following their initial approaches however, not one of those companies has followed up with any further enquiry or expression of interest. This is seriously missing a trick, since as a customer I am no further on in my decision about which builder to use because no one has come forward to help me decide.

The issue of how to follow up on initial contacts is always a tricky one – don’t want to seem desperate/pushy, but at the same time don’t want to lose the sniff of an opportunity.  Obviously each situation has to be judged on its merits, but I am increasingly sure that repeated follow-ups are valid – even if they are dismissed – because something somewhere will sow a seed in the recipient’s mind.

All too often in the qualitative research industry we are invited to pitch for a job and having put 3 or more full days’ work into a proposal, hear absolutely nothing up to several weeks later.  However nicely put, I always think an airy ‘just by the way, any news?’ email can sound a bit naggy or petulant and risks making the original enquirer feel annoyed or guilty and therefore reluctant to reply.

So the trick is to make the followup look like something that they can benefit from.  It can take various forms, but the objective should always be to make the recipient feel they have learned a bit more about you and have something to base their opinion on – and haven’t been made to feel under pressure.  

It’s about sounding constructive and upbeat and demonstrating you’re going the extra mile to take an interest.  A credible and effective way to prompt awareness of your existence/skills/offer is in the form of news about what you’ve been doing, in order to create a link in the reader’s mind.  It needn’t be anything dramatic, but enough to create a reference point (eg if builders told us that they’d recently completed a project in the local area, the next time we drove past it we’d register it was them).

Or, pass on a random snippet of information relating to their project (eg a relevant website/article reference – ‘I thought you might be interested to see this ….); or an industry observation which lets them know you’re up to speed and professionally aware of the broader market.  It’s not re-selling yourself but offering something for nothing, and thereby giving them a reason to log you.

Certainly it’s often quite difficult to think of something relevant or sparky to push forward, but the internet is a huge ally here.  A scan of the news pages, industry forums or a quick google on your topic will virtually always yield something you can pick up and pass on as a couple of sentences just to ‘keep in touch’.  I’m amazed at how often I notice something relevant on emails that come in from Brand Republic or Purple Penguin’s Marketing Blog that can be noted and forwarded to clients who will find it of genuine interest, and allows me to take the credit for bringing it to their attention.  Even if it turns out not to be new news to them, the main point is that you will be seen to have made an effort on the customer’s behalf – and that’s not going to go unnoticed.

We have recently completed a project where we used t-groups (online focus groups) to test a direct mail campaign for a national loyalty scheme. It was very successful in terms of both methodology and output, and represents an excellent case history in support of t-groups as an innovative and highly time/cost effective qualitative market research tool.

If you haven’t heard of t-groups, they are a qualitative market research method based on web-conferencing. People meeting certain criteria in terms of their shopping habits were identified and approached to take part in the t-group session. Everyone dialled in on a conference call number and at the same time linked to the interviewer’s pc screen via the internet. The interviewer loaded the creative layouts for the direct mail materials on to the screen so everyone was able to see them really clearly, and then a conversation took place about the strengths and weaknesses of the proposed marketing ideas.

The big advantage to everyone was that there was no need for anyone to travel anywhere. This included the interviewer, respondents and also clients, who were able to observe the focus groups from wherever they happened to be. As well as the convenience aspect this saved an enormous amount of time and cost and effectively knocked hundreds of pounds off the research project.

The client was satisfied enough to give us another project using t-group online focus groups and it is without doubt a qualitative research method that we’ll be doing a lot more of.

Find out more about qualitative research

Business blogs are the most useful tool in a company’s online arsenal. The functionality is huge and the flexibilty offers companies greater control over their online content and the way it looks.

Another benefit is that business blogs are great marketing platforms. Create your own communities and obtain more targeted sales.

Get ahead of the game and get information, special deals and products up online before your competitors.

If you would like to know more about business blogs and their benefits visit: The Path Web Design here