|
|
|
 |
B2B Research:
Your Future Click on shortcuts to jump to sections: Lack of Innovation and Vision will Kill B2B Research – How are we doing so far? The conference was opened by Kate Pitts, Innovation Manager and Futurist at Royal Mail. The theme of Kate’s paper was ‘Will there be research in 2015?’ and she set out to challenge our thinking by telling us how technology will affect us all in the future, both as consumers and business people. Kate admitted that, when talking about 10 years out, it’s difficult to get it completely right or completely wrong – but basically, though technologies which are currently being piloted, and within not too many years, manufacturers, retailers and service suppliers will know more about us than our mothers do! The impact of technology is always overstated in the short term, and under-estimated in the long term. So, just as in the early ‘90’s IBM couldn’t understand what PC’s would be used for, we researchers find it hard to conceive what all this information will be used for. Kate predicted that data-mining tools will become much easier to use and our role as researchers will change, moving away from quantitative data collection and towards locating, integrating and interpreting data that the client has already collected via passive technologies. We all need to develop these skills – and she ended rather ominously with the prediction that we have a lot less time than we think. This was definitely food for thought (and potentially a theme for future conference sessions!). Kate was followed by Ian McMaster, a freelance market research consultant and associate of Infoseek Market Research. Ian’s paper was entitled ‘Attributional analysis in brand positioning research’ and addressed the issue of how to distinguish between those respondents who say they like and approve a new product concept, but don’t actually buy it, and those who do actually go on to purchase/use it. Basically the attributes for ‘approval’ can be different from the attributes for ‘choice’, and the subset of ‘key values’ – those attributes which drive both approval and choice - can be identified via attribution analysis. Ian described a successful case study where sales of a healthcare product were greatly increased simply by changing the wording of the communications and emphasising the key values. Jack Murray of TNS gave the final paper in the session, entitled ‘Predictive Customer Commitment Modelling – is there more than one way to skin a cat?’ Jack gave us an overview of the Commitment approaches used by the research industry. Commitment is generally promoted as a better predictor of future behaviour than loyalty (which is somewhat backward looking) and customer satisfaction. There are certainly a variety of ways of defining commitment – but Jack noted that most were focused on consumers and SMEs and relatively few on that key segment – Major Accounts – where commitment measurement and monitoring can be most effective. To round out his paper Jack gave us some examples, most interestingly of a Major Customer Survey for Royal Mail which ably demonstrated the value of commitment modelling. Kate Pitts commented afterwards how useful the research had been for Royal Mail – who had used it to completely remodel their major account salesforce. In summary, the session showed that B2B vision and innovation is far from dead – but the world is changing fast and we need to work hard to keep up with it. We may have less time than we think. Quantitative Case Studies: Research in Action This session covered a number of case studies demonstrating how research can be translated into action. These studies ranged from using traditional research methodologies to highly creative holistic approaches. Rob Cooper of East Midland Electricity and Justin Gutmann of WirthlinEurope jointly presented a paper entitled ‘Pricing Yourself Into the Market’. The research study was for Central Networks and showed how using the Van Westendorp pricing model can be highly effective in providing a robust basis for charging customers. Jeffrey Peel from Quadriga Consulting focused on the development of the Aakers brand and ensuring that a number of its products sat well under the main brand umbrella. This case study showed very well how researchers can play a greater role in consulting to clients and maintaining close involvement in implementation. Francesca Brosan from Omobono presented a fascinating paper on how a creative approach can lead to effective change. The East of England wanted broadband, but the telecoms companies weren’t supplying it. The East of England Development Agency (EEDA) had identified that the lack of broadband in the region was a major constraint to economic growth and the paper summarised the campaign to drive telecoms companies into supplying broadband to the East of England region. Her challenge was to drive the demand for broadband by mobilising groups of people to exert pressure on suppliers and the use of research was fundamental in ensuring the right messages, campaigns and networks were set up to drive the change in attitude by the suppliers. It was effective. Francesca deservedly won the speaker award for Best Newcomer at the conference. Though not exclusively a qualitative pre-requisite, there is no doubt that creativity is an essential ingredient in all good research. Process is useful, but following a process can never direct you to creative solutions and with an increasingly complex decision–making environment, it is clear that the need for this fresh thinking is and will continue to be of paramount importance. The purpose of this session was therefore to examine, from several viewpoints, the nature, contribution and execution of creativity. The session kicked off with a presentation by John Habershon of Momentum Research about how the use of facial expression analysis could assist in the review of product pricing. John illustrated his presentation with photos showing the reactions of his subject (a young woman with a very expressive face) to a range of pricing questions and concluded that by adopting a merged facial and textual analysis of how she was reacting at/to any specific point in the interview and stimulus material, research was enhanced by allowing access to unspoken as well as spoken reactions. The session time allowance was set at 20 minutes and clearly John had sufficient material for a much longer presentation – more’s the pity, as the latter part of his talk was full of concrete examples of the contribution that this technique could make, and more information and insight into this underused approach would have been welcome. He was followed by Lisa Garthside of TGA who led us through a presentation on the use of Edward De Bono’s 6 Colour Thinking Hats. The premise here is that the brain uses an amalgam of techniques for thinking, and that by encouraging the respondents to focus on these one at a time, the researcher can isolate and investigate each in turn. The hats are modes of thinking and are used individually. Respondents are required to think in the mode required by the hat, whether it be critical, creative, positive, cautious, etc. Each hat has a different colour:
New products, marketing materials etc. all lend themselves to such an analytical approach. The last speaker in the session was by Dr David Smith, Chairman of Incepta Marketing Intelligence, and Professor, University of Hertfordshire Business School, and a Spurs season ticket holder. In spite of (or because of) this latter point David deservedly won Best Paper. His multi-media tour through “What is creativity in market research?” raised a vast range of issues, concepts and thinking, and we were treated to an exemplary lesson in how to provide in-depth thinking, clearly and cogently thought through, while at the same time retaining humour, attention and impact at the same time.
It would be impossible to paraphrase the content in a few words, but the essence is that there is no one dimension to creativity and likewise there is no one model of what constitutes classically good research. There are many ways to achieve each and the best advice is to listen to David speak at his next conference and be treated to seriously imaginative insights. As he quoted in his presentation, these words by Charlie Mingus probably stand as the fitting summary of David’s paper: “Anyone can make the simple complicated; creativity is making the complicated simple”. David has the knack of doing this and was thoroughly good value for his contribution and his Best Paper accolade. Researching the B2B respondent Friday morning started with a session devoted to ‘The B2B respondent’. The three papers all addressed the issue, though in very different ways. The first slot on a Friday morning is very difficult, especially if the subject is statistics. However, Ray Poynter, director of Virtual Surveys, managed to make his piece both interesting and informative. The presentation was concise and even, dare we say, fun (nice chatty presentation style). Ray's points were duly noted about sample error and also his observation that whilst it is important, we should be more pragmatic and less obsessed with it in the B2B context. Ray suggested more use of “simulation” as a tool and suggested that his paper could be used as a reference point for those sampling in B2B markets – a suggestion that many of us will indeed take up. Martin Stoll, of Ipsos Insight, also came across as a seasoned speaker. As with the first speaker, the audience could have heard more, had time permitted. Martin gave a whistle stop tour of qualitative techniques and their uses together with insight to future possibilities such as cat scanners. He discussed how observation and ethnography and other techniques used more commonly in B2C and FMCG situations were less common in the B2B context, however, some more lateral thinking projective techniques and other more up to date qualitative approaches might be usefully considered, even when interviewing in a B2B context. The final talk by Owen Hillis, lecturer at UCE (University of Central England Business School) looked at how small and medium enterprises (SMEs) use research. The talk gave agency staff some useful insights into how to sell their services to this audience who may need research but often do not use it. It was useful too from the perspective of clientside companies trying to sell their products to SME's as it gave insight into the psyche of this category of customer. Owen felt that there was an opportunity there but that the SME eagerness to sell, or basic understanding of what market research is all about (confusing it sometimes with selling), alongside their usage of distributors rather than direct contact with customers, militated against uptake of research as a discipline. He did suggest ways in which researchers might address these misconceptions and demonstrate the usefulness of research and ended on a more positive note. “Marketing – Past, Present and Future” Following the creativity of Thursday (Dr David Smith’s entertaining multi-faceted presentation), the second session on Friday gave us an equally entertaining, impassioned, engaging, well-researched call to arms to refocus ‘marketing’ – a real ‘keynote’ presentation. Professor Malcolm McDonald, Emeritus Professor from Cranfield, argued that:
The paper was a wake up call for business. Businesses are all too often focused on the past not the future, concerned with the short-term, look at costs in isolation, focus on the aggregate not on the individual and are more concerned with products and brand than customers and value. He persuaded us that MANY businesses don’t know where they have come from, where they are going or how to get there. Did you know that of the forty three ‘Excellent Companies’ – identified by Tom Peters in his book ‘In Search of Excellence’ (1982) only six were still excellent just eight years later? Names such as Polly Peck, Blue Arrow and Atlantic Computers are illustrations of how in the short term we can all have the wool pulled over our eyes. …..“risks and uncertainties make business leaders’ preoccupation with managing costs wholly understandable” but “what if a finely-honed execution strategy is geared to achieving inadequately wrong objectives?” Professor McDonald described many businesses as suffering from: “anorexia industrialosa – an excessive desire to be leaner and fitter, leading to emaciation and, eventually, death”. He argued we are doing business and marketing wrong, and are suffering. Having grabbed our attention and persuaded us that all is far from well in the business world, he refreshingly gave us a route-map for a better future. The future is marketing, but not as it is generally perceived. The future is a new ‘marketing’ – differentiation (or a suitable new term – suggestions please to Prof McDonald) that centres on the attribution of value – ensuring that the whole organisation (yes even the bean counters and human resources!) focuses its attention on its customers. We were reminded that the secret of successful marketing is using the right measures and measuring the right things. We need, both as businesses ourselves, and as consultants to business to understand the real profitability of our customers, who are our most profitable customers, who will be, and how to balance customer and commercial interests. It is not enough to just look just at customers, we need to look at the differences between them – which customers are most profitable, which are most at risk, and how can we deliver value to them. He spoke of ‘Consultants’ and their ‘fads’ (e.g. IS0 900 - laudable when used sensibly but in the main a guarantee that organisations can produce rubbish perfectly and consistently), and about Academics who increasingly are focusing on ever more narrow and esoteric subjects– thus creating little that is of relevance to the real world. Again his message was that much is needed to be done to rescue and refocus business. The positive message was that we as professionals in the B2B world are ideally positioned to take on the task and move marketing on. We need to help businesses to put the customer at the core of their operations and to understand the differences between customers to succeed - ‘Customentation’ the new Marketing perhaps? Will we rise to the challenge and get involved, or will we become just another ‘Fad’? It’s up to us. Download the full paper in Word format (101KB)>> Those who avoided the temptation of heading home early or sampling the superb facilities of Marriott St Pierre were well rewarded by the last session with three papers that presented a clear view of client requirements. Maureen Duck, FT Business, provided valuable insight into what clients are looking for when selecting suppliers and believed that aspects of service, deliverables and communications could be improved. She was seeking improved value via faster turnaround, new techniques or enhanced output. Maureen had been disappointed with new agencies who demonstrated a tool that promised value in the pitch but later found staff lacking in enthusiasm, software that did not work properly and presentation of stats and slides with little insight or referral to the original objectives. Trusted suppliers provided a dependable service but lacked initiative in terms of ideas and technology. Maureen reported on a survey of AURA members which showed that suppliers need to demonstrate understanding of the buyers’ needs and objectives and have the ability to translate them into the research plan whilst avoiding “off the shelf proposals”. Preferred suppliers, those used continuously, offer intellectual value and dependability and understand the client business, objectives and culture. Findings are distilled to a few key implications or recommendations, presentations are credible and authoritative and there is an avoidance of “death by powerpoint” or a “brain dump of 100 slides”. Existing suppliers, previously used but still asked to quote may have lost business as a result of a bad experience, loss of key personnel or failure to make buyers aware of new methodologies or services. Buyers frequently review suppliers or consider new ones offering alternative methodologies or invite pitches to add value to the research. New suppliers are normally found via word of mouth or from the Research Buyers Guide. Maureen gave hope to those of us that write many proposals, as new suppliers can readily move to the position of preferred supplier. David Gidney, Dow Chemical Company, looked at the peaks and troughs of the client side market researcher. He described hard times with pressure from spiralling raw material costs, new competitors and the need for cost reductions, greater efficiency and the use of minimum resources – in short “to do more with less”. There seems to be hope for suppliers who can offer objectivity, industry expertise, refreshing theory and design capabilities and who can work together and share knowledge with clients. He echoed Maureen’s sentiments in requiring solutions that were not off the shelf and it is clear that researchers should do plenty of homework before meeting the client and be prepared to work with third parties. Steve Wills, Strategic Research, provided a thought-provoking finale based on a client side project on Best Practice in the Management and Communication of Customer Insight. Customer Insight is a term that has been bandied around but is not simply a new name for market research. Steve indicated that ‘Insight’ has two forms – it can be flashes of inspiration or penetrating discoveries that can lead to specific opportunities and this can be delivered by market research. More importantly insight is the ability to perceive clearly and deeply. It is about having a deep, embedded knowledge about the customers that helps to structure thinking and sound decision-making and this form of insight is needed by everyone involved in marketing. This requires us to have the “big picture” not just some pieces of the jigsaw, but all the pieces joined up to produce a picture that all can see and understand and is essential to board decisions. It is built upon multiple sources, of which MR is only one, and includes data from databases, finance, planning, market and competitor intelligence plus feedback from sales and customer service; and it forms a coherent picture that addresses anomalies and apparent contradictions. Just as computers have been around for years but are now only a minor part of overall IT solutions, so market research has been around for years, but now needs to recognise that whilst still an essential component, there are other sources of information that are just as important to customer insight. Insight is a strategic asset and must be managed to ensure that the right information is being supplied to the right people, at the right time and in the right way so that it is applied to maximum effect. Complementary skill sets required are those of the practical or technical project-oriented researcher and the ability to see the bigger picture and to interpret results within a wider business context. However, this is about creating rather than applying insight. The researcher needs another set of skills to understand business processes, and have the strategic and political skills to ensure that insight is not simply generated but is communicated and actioned. These last skills will enable us to have the influence enjoyed by management consultants. Workshops Three training workshops at conference were designed to be informal and interactive. Expanding boundaries –
technology in presentations & beyond In the recent past research has become radical and innovative
in terms of methodologies, applications and content. The world is shrinking
and it is becoming commonplace to have regional/global teams at the client’s
end. People sitting in the UK managing projects across their own country
as well as Europe and Asia !! Travel is curtailed and they hence depend
on our ‘presentation’ or report to give them the insights
required to stay ahead of the game. In addition, given the turnover of
personnel at both ends – client and agency, it is becoming more
important that the documentation of the project findings is self explanatory
for future reference. How to get the best from qualitative research – what’s new & what’s good The workshop was led by Neil McPhee of Nuance Research and some 25 delegates attended it. In spite of the planned content, it proceeded much as requested by the audience, covering both some basics of b2b qual (planning logistics, sampling, interview mechanics etc) and also some of the newer, b2c topics (nlp, semiotics, TA, projective techniques). One of the nicest parts of these sessions has been, for the past few years, the degree of interaction between not only session leader and the audience, but between members of the audience and each other. The session was fortunate to have a good proportion of clients as well as practitioners and academics, thus it covered a large amount of ground and after 2 hours could probably have gone on longer. One key theme running through the session was how to apply particular techniques in practice, and it may be that with sufficient support some form of qualitative training “in practice” session may be considered for next year. Thanks go to all participants for making it a really lively session. Making it work on-line Another lively session led by Ray Poynter of Virtual Surveys explored the practice and pitfalls of conducting B2B research online. The workshop attendees varied from experienced net-hounds through to people looking to take their first steps. Whilst the group identified plenty of reasons to be optimistic, much of the time was taken up by the potential challenges created by laws and guidelines. The Data Protection Act, anti-spam legislation, spam-blockers, firewalls, and popup blockers were all identified as challenges to be met. The group recognised that the rules and laws relating to online B2B research change much faster than those which apply to other data collection mediums. Two hot topics identified by the group were Category 6 research and the Disability Discrimination Act. Category 6 research effectively allows research companies, on a case-by-case basis, to engage in database building, CRM type work. In the context of online research this can mean that it makes more sense to contact a census rather than a sample, and to use identified results rather than anonymous results - a very strange place for some people. The DDA comes fully into force on October 1st (having been phased in since 1995) and amongst many other things means that websites and online surveys will need to be compliant in terms of accessibility. This raises a number of significant issues, particularly for people using software written in the US, where there is no legal or commercial pressure to be compliant. Previous Conferences: 2008 - 2007 - 2006 - 2005 - 2004 - 2003 - 2002 - 2001 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
 |
BIG
Conference Secretariat, 9 Graham Court, Eastcote Lane, Northolt, Middlesex
UB5 4HT
tel: +44 (0) 20 8864 1834 email: info@bigconference.org -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Home | What is BIG? | About the Conference | Conference 2008 | Conference Committee | Sponsorship| The Hotel Previous Conferences | BIG Newsletter | Feedback | Left Handed Research | Links |
