Research makes sense only when you interpret it in the right manner
“It is the new and different that is always most vulnerable to market research.” Malcolm Gladwell, Blink: The Power of Thinking
Without Thinking, 2005
“If we knew what it was we were doing, it would not be called research, would it?” Albert Einstein (1879 - 1955)
“Advertising people who ignore research are as dangerous as generals who ignore decodes of enemy signals.” David Ogilvy
Ogilvy & Mather advertising
 |
| Rupin Jayal |
No this isn’t an article on the intricate technicalities of formal research in advertising and brands. There are many far better qualified to write on that subject. What this article is about is reflected in the three quotations above.
Research is truly a paradox. Many point out that most of the really big inventions, creations, paradigm shifting ideas, etc, were not the result of clusters of eight people sitting in a room answering questions. It is also true that there have been many new products and ideas that did very well in research and then bombed afterwards and vice versa. While still others talk about great ideas that came out of research or how if people had listened to what the research really said the product, brand or campaign disaster might have been avoided. And that is the paradox. They are all absolutely right.
The fact is that research is merely a tool. It isn’t a mysterious black art that will reveal the secrets of the future nor is it a means of getting inside the complex mechanism of the human brain. At the end of the day, all research largely depends upon how people respond and how “experts” interpret that response. Just like any tool it can be marvellously effective or horribly wrong depending on how it is used and the intent behind it. Also just like any tool it works within a system. This system comprises individual human minds interacting with each other and the world around them in myriad ways. Some of these are easier to identify, understand, interpret and explain. Others however are driven by factors that lie far deeper and are much more complex. Within each of us there are conflicting imperatives, needs and desires. Different categories create different interactions amongst these. Sometimes brands transcend their category dynamics and operate at a far higher level and are thus even more difficult to neatly analyze and interpret. Yes the echo of “New Coke,” that epiphanic moment in the history of modern marketing, is loud and clear. That moment is a vivid metaphor for the complexity that researching human beings entails. It should have been a success—it wasn’t. Its failure should have doomed that brand – it didn’t, in fact it strengthened and refreshed people’s relationship with the brand.
Is the answer to simply go by gut feeling? Or can it be resolved by ever more complex methodology aided and abetted by the vast leaps in computing power?
Actually the answer lies elsewhere. Research helps you understand what people say they think about something. It gives you a sense of where they are at. If you use it to explore and understand their relationship with a category or a brand it can be very illuminating. If you use it to check comprehension or how something new might be received, what the barriers might be and what the real strengths are, then research can be very insightful. If you use it to understand how people deal with the contradictions of life and how they use brands to resolve these contradictions or challenges then (with sensitive and insightful analysis) research can truly be a enlightening. If you seek to understand a particular piece of research within the larger context of the brand, the category and of society itself, then just like a piece of an infinitely large jigsaw puzzle it would “fit in” and probably be very useful.
However the basis for research sometimes lies elsewhere and that can be a problem. There are four major errors that often happen in research:
- One doesn’t really know what that one key objective is for a particular piece of research or there are multiple reasons
- The methodology is so complex that it becomes the focus rather than the research itself (it is amazing to see how often professionals who recommend a particular methodology struggle with executing it afterwards)
- The research is being done either to pass judgement or protect or demolish a project—in other words the research is motivated
- The respondents are incorrectly or inaccurately defined
In addition there often is a lack of a larger contextual understanding against which to interpret the findings. There are very few consumer choices that occupy a significant portion of a person’s day. The brands that we sweat over so assiduously do not occupy even a fraction of that space in most people’s lives. So when people sit for a couple of hours in a room talking about just one thing or when they fill out long questionnaires it often is no longer a true representation of the actual space occupied by that brand (and category) in the lives of most people. Their responses too can become exaggerated. Their responses therefore need to be understood in that context and therefore what is actually driving them has to be understood. Sometimes the most revealing information comes from pure observation and not intrusive questioning. Often responses when understood against a larger social context become far more meaningful.
So if you asked most people how important safety is when buying a car they are most likely to give it a fairly high rating. However few, if any, automobile brands sell in India on the basis of safety. Why this contradiction? First of all ours is a youth-driven country (half our population is below the age of 25). We are also “young” as consumers—the real fruits of liberalisation, an open economy and the availability of a wide variety of brands, are barely 15 years old. The average age of customers for many categories is falling. We are fascinated by the excitement of new technologies, of the availability of the “latest, latest,” we are excited by all the opportunities and options that increasing incomes are beginning to allow us. The future looks promising and the “rise of India” story has now acquired a certain conviction. We are, not surprisingly, one of the most optimistic countries on earth. So we seek things that excite us. We seek things that challenge and stimulate us. We seek to juice the maximum out of this new world that is coming up around us. Health is now more about “healthfulness”—having the energy and positivity to achieve our aspirations, enjoy life more and look younger, rather merely maintaining one’s health. Even insurance investment is about allowing people to retire earlier from work rather than from life and to continue enjoying a youthfully exuberant life. So when an automobile brand tries to talk about something as defensive as “safety” we pay lip service to it and give it a very high ranking when asked, but pretty much pass it over when we actually choose, prefer and buy. And to complicate things further, indoctrinated by an educational system that emphasizes the “right” answer, respondents sometimes tend to try and give the “right” answer rather than express an independent opinion.
So understanding the larger context is critical. Every piece of research is like a precision component in a highly complex organic machine. It cannot describe the machine itself and if viewed in isolation it could be very confusing at the very least. If the four deficiencies are factored in, it could be doomed from the start.
So what should be done? Here are some pointers that might help:
- Understand what people really seek from the category and your brand
- Understand what role it plays in their lives
- Define very sharply what it is that you seek from the research that you intend to do
- Do not get people to judge your concepts, communication or positioning
- Ask the right questions. If you have a good sense of the first two, you should be able to do this
- Don’t interpret the findings in isolation. Set them against what you understand is happening around you, what the category dynamics are, where your brand is at and most of all what the research expert’s experience has been when addressing similar categories or talking to similar people
- Try and identify personal biases and as often as possible avoid allowing them to cloud the results. But do not subordinate your experience and judgements when deciding the way forward (this balance is sometimes the most difficult to achieve)
Research is very helpful and in most cases can play a critical role—ignoring it is truly as dangerous as “generals who ignore decodes of enemy signals." However, if not used with care and understanding it does endanger new ideas, new concepts and anything that departs from the familiar. At the end of the day we do research because we are not absolutely sure of the answers. We do it because we want to discover and understand.
“If you want to study a river you don't take out a bucketful of water and stare at it on the shore. A river is not its water, and by taking the water out of the river, you lose the essential quality of river, which is its motion, its activity, its flow.” Alan Watts: The Wisdom Of Insecurity
“If I asked my customers what they wanted they would have said a faster horse.” Henry Ford
“The truth is more important than the facts.” Frank Lloyd Wright
The author is Director-Strategic Planning at M&C Saatchi.
Subscribe to this comment's feed
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
