OPINION:Where market research was once a rigorous discipline, it now often stands for little more than slipshod 'focus group' that produces faulty research – which, if acted upon, could end up ruining a business, writes JOHN FANNING
ONCE UPON A time, the world of market research was neatly divided into “quantitative” and “qualitative” – and the latter was neatly divided into “group discussions”, where groups of around eight people sat around and discussed a topic under review for an hour or more, and “depth interviews”, where an individual respondent was questioned in depth in a one-to-one interview.
But the American colonisation of the English language has meant that group discussions are increasingly referred to as “focus groups”, and in the process this market research technique has slipped so far from its original moorings as to be unrecognisable to the founding fathers of the discipline.
One unfortunate consequence of this development is the growing belief that anyone can gather a few people around a kitchen table and ask a few questions and that this constitutes market research.
Established businesses are unlikely to be that naive, but small firms and in particular start-up enterprises who are strapped for cash may be led down this path, and because they should be even more dependent on professional research to guide them, this could have serious consequences.
A brief outline of the origins of qualitative research can put this issue in context.
Vienna in the early 20th century was the spiritual home of qualitative research. It was there that Freud’s psychoanalysis emphasised the sexual roots of much of our conduct, it was where Jung developed his theory of the collective unconscious and where Alfred Adler grappled with the problems of self-esteem and inferiority complexes. Marketers were quick to spot the potential of these discoveries to provide better and deeper insights into consumer behaviour, and some of the students and disciples of the founding fathers emigrated to the main centres of advertising – New York and London – to make their fortunes.
Many of them succeeded and none more so than Dr Ernest Dichter, the self-styled “father of motivational research”, whose talent as a salesman and showman were equal to his psychological insights. He is associated with many of the most frequently rehashed tales of the new discipline. These include the observation that men secretly view convertible cars as mistresses and saloons as wives, and the famous coffee research where female respondents were shown two different shopping lists and asked to describe the characteristics of two different housewives. The two lists were identical except for instant coffee on one and ground coffee on the other. However, respondents described the first as a lazy slut and the second as a model housewife.
Dichter, who could even teach Damien Hirst a thing or two about self-promotion, was demonised in Vance Packard’s The Hidden Persuaders, where he is credited with extraordinary powers of manipulation over a gullible public – he is mentioned 44 times in a book of just over 200 hundred pages. Dichter just laughed all the way to the publicity bank.
But away from the glare of publicity, a growing band of qualitative researchers were developing a serious discipline, with established procedures and an impressive armory of sophisticated projective techniques, including word association, sentence completion, balloon and cartoon tests, role playing, model building and collage making. The procedures included rigorous recruitment criteria to ensure respondents were unknown to each other (unless this was a specific research requirement), and the avoidance of “professional” group attendees.
The widespread use of qualitative research is driven by the realisation that the real reasons behind purchasing decisions are difficult to unravel, not so much because people are defensive or unwilling to tell the truth, but because so many decisions are taken on auto-pilot that the original motivation is unclear.
Despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary, there continues to be a belief in rational consumers who cognitively and consciously process information about products and services to inform their buying behaviour, the details of which they are able to recall verbatim when interviewed. The reality is more complicated; but trained group discussion moderators, armed with a range of projective techniques and years of experience, can uncover the truth and in the process provide valuable information for their clients. As the professional discipline has continued to develop, new techniques have been added, and in particular, qualitative researchers have incorporated expertise and insights from the related fields of semiotics and ethnography and are making greater use of the technological opportunities afforded by the digital revolution.
But the very popularity of qualitative research has led many businesses to believe that we are all innately gifted when it comes to “talkin’ to a few people in an aul group”. Hence the belief among some of the budding entrepreneurs as evidenced by some recent editions of The Apprentice, that “doing a focus group” is just a matter of asking a few friends in to sit around the kitchen table, answer a few questions and provide a few opinions.
This is not only nonsense but potentially dangerous because decisions taken as a result of faulty research could end up ruining the business. It’s not just the lack of awareness of professional techniques but the lack of craft training which takes a long time to acquire; the professional ability to interpret not just what people say but what they don’t – the silences, the arm-crossing, the raised eyebrow, the words not chosen, the laughter, the leaning forward or leaning back, the change in group energy levels. All of these can be much more important in determining people’s real motivations and future behaviour than what they actually say. Needless to say, this type of professional expertise is expensive, and although there’s no excuse for established businesses endangering their future by carrying out slipshod research, start-up enterprises – which are probably more in need of professional advice – may simply not be in a position to pay the full rates.
So can anything be done to provide start-up businesses with professional research?
Growing awareness of the importance of new entrepreneurial ventures in Ireland combined with developments in new communication channels facilitated by digital technology means there are increasing options for carrying out more professional market research at more reasonable prices. Firstly, a number of government agencies can offer support in this area. Bord Bia has launched a number of innovative schemes to provide professional market research for new food and drink start-up businesses. Secondly, there is the internet and the resulting blogosphere which can be used to provide information, insights and inspiration when properly used. A new book; The Ad-Free Brand by Chris Crams sets out to show how successful brands can be established at a minimum cost by cleverly mining the wealth of consumer information and insight available online. Crams is inclined to overstate the case a little but unfortunately that’s par for the course in management books. A possible third route is to get in touch with the business studies department of a third- level college; the business needs market research, the students need practical projects and case histories: a perfect match.
Finally – and this may be unpopular with professional research companies – but they may wish to consider, given the times that are in it, “adopting” some start-up businesses and setting aside 10 to 20 group discussions a year for a small number of companies at a low price which would cover their third-party costs. Who knows? It could be the start of a beautiful friendship.
John Fanning is an adjunct faculty member at UCD Michael Smurfit Graduate Business School and a former chairman and chief executive of McConnells Advertising
