|
|
|
 |
The first session of the BIG Conference, held in Chepstow from 16-18 May 2007, was a corker. It was the perfect way to start a conference, with its theme of 'Challenging the Status Quo'. Kathy Hurst chaired in front of the usual expectant first day full house, which only looked mildly hung over from the excesses of the night before. The title 'Web 2.0' has now become accepted shorthand for the new kind of internet we all want as consumers: one with which we can interact, to which we can contribute and which we can control. Whether we, as market researchers, want to extend this enfranchisement to our respondents, and how we optimise the research potential of this new and exciting (frightening) web in B2B research was explored in full by the three speakers. The keynote speaker was Ray Poynter of The Future Place on 'What does Web 2.0 mean for B2B?' To start with he gave us a few figures to concentrate our minds on the size of the user base and the level of their interaction with the web. Apparently 70% of 16-24 year olds use some kind of social networking site and LinkedIn (the site for business networking) has a membership of 10 million (I checked this latter fact this morning and they are now claiming 11 million!). He also gave us a brisk run through some of the ways in which big business was already successfully using their customers to participate in the development process. Particularly fascinating was a methodology called Co-Creation where the customer effectively decides the company's strategy by describing/designing a new product or voting for existing designs, which the company then produces and sells. He also mentioned the growth (aided by the omnipresence of the camera phone) of citizen journalism and the fiasco of the Number 10 website. He made the point that we can no longer keep the research process hidden from these fully empowered users and that we need to relate to those whose knowledge we seek to share in a completely new way. Helpfully he also gave us a checklist of things we need to know about Web 2.0 and he reminded us that our business would never be the same again. The other two papers concentrated more on a specific area which Ray had covered: that of blogs and other forms of social interaction on the web. The first of these, 'Blogs, logs and socialising in cyber space: research in the world of Web 2.0' given by Amanda Scott and Caroline Oates of Freshminds gave us some pretty exciting visuals: one featuring dropping a Mintos mint into a large bottle of Diet Coke and the explosion that resulted. The real importance of the footage was to show how quickly the discovery of the effect was disseminated and the equal speed with which the Coca Cola Company turned what could have been a PR disaster into further advertising for the company. They also showed us the business potential of conducting groups, with difficult to reach respondents, in virtual spaces such as Second Life (although isn't market research one of the things that people are fleeing from in their first life?) and other tools such as Respondent as questioner, Collaborative intelligence and Online communities. They gave us clear examples of areas where these techniques could benefit the researcher such as more full participation, ability to "play" with the brand, respondent empowerment, the sheer volume of online information, and of course cost. Like Ray they also mentioned some of the downsides, like biases both from the sample base and from the impact of influencers, and that blogs needed constant monitoring. Tools for which were the topic for the third speaker Pravin Shekar of Dexterity KPO Services on 'Blog research in the B2B space'. Like the other speakers Pravin gave us some entertaining examples of what is going on in Web 2.0 now. However, he also had some tools to deal with it. He mentioned both shareware and proprietorial software which could be used for blog/web mining, clustering, associations and sequential analysis. He also used an acronym which I for one hadn't heard before WIBNI (Wouldn't it be nice if…..). Apparently blog mining is the answer to this kind of blue sky question when asked by a client. All of these presentations were fascinating and I can heartily recommend reading the papers in full. All gave the audience a great deal of information to take away about the huge potential of the web for gathering information on a literally global scale. They were all similarly cautious in their attitudes to the reliability of the data thus collected. One question from the floor was "Are these
techniques complimentary or revolutionary?" The consensus among
the panel was - "We won't have very long to wait before we find
out!"
The second session was introduced by Nick Coates. He identified a few unifying themes, which all have implications for anyone thinking about B2B research and which were picked up on by each of the three speakers: innovation can be an exchange of ideas with opportunities for B2B and B2C to learn from each other. Convergence is another trend, not just between consumer and business markets, but also technical convergence and an increasing blurring of boundaries within social and working life. Each of the papers also touched on ways in which research innovation can also feed into organisational innovation. Jonathan Fletcher of Illuminas kicked off proceedings with a look at the increasing overlap between business and consumer decision-making with his paper entitled 'The convergence of B2B and consumer marketing and its implication for B2B marketing and research practice'. Jonathan set out to deconstruct two key myths in B2B research: the notion of rational decision-making, as opposed to emotional consumer behaviour, and the idea of purchase decisions as disinterested and impersonal choices. These myths, he argued, come undone in the context of "bounded rationality"; decision-makers lack access to information that allows them to identify possible alternatives, establish the consequences and compare benefits. Both are further complicated by the increasing hybridisation of business and consumer markets, illustrated by two classic cases in point: the business air travel market and the PDA/converged device market. Here, the balance between hard (rational) and soft (emotional) factors is a complex one, compounded by issues such as asymmetry of information between users and procurement functions and the importance of "time sovereignty" to business customers. This complex picture inevitably poses some significant challenges for the B2B researcher - learning to measure and interpret the interplay between factors and appeal to the "whole consumer" successfully will be a requirement for anyone interested in business markets. Traditional approaches tend to assume, and hence overstate, the importance of the rational underpinning of decision-making; using factor analysis we can see that relationship-based criteria become drivers of purchasing decisions. Those involved in marketing to business users have clearly recognised this and Jonathan highlighted examples from recent ad executions - 'Simplify your life with Kodak', Microsoft's "the 'I can't deal with all this data' era is over" campaign, and Accenture's use of Tiger Woods - as illustrations of the simultaneous appeal to consumer and business purchaser. A sheep in wolf's clothing, perhaps? Next up was Keith Bailey, from Nokia's Enterprise team, whose career has led him from industrial researcher to consumer (mobile) researcher and back to B2B specialist. Keith's paper posed a riddle - or what he called the "convergence conundrum" - which emerged from qualitative research and gave the title to his presentation: 'Why do businessmen persist in carrying an e-mail device and a phone (and a laptop), when their Blackberry (or Nokia E61) can do it all…?'. In other words, why - when consumers constantly tell us that they want a single, all-in-one, device - do they carry several? Industry data show that multiple device ownership is not just a business issue, with users owning on average 1.3 devices and 1.4 mobile numbers (rising to 1.7 devices for businessmen). Picking up one theme of Jonathan Fletcher's paper, Keith outlined some of the potential explanations for this seemingly paradoxical behaviour: the need (or desire) for separation of business and personal use, financial benefits in tariff maximisation, practicality (with or without camera), but also emotional drivers - fashion (the sleek little number for going out clubbing) and status "look at me, I'm so important I have to have two phones"! In many cases, irrationality can still dominate with users telling us that they want two devices "just in case". Resistance to the logical solution, a two-part device, was illustrated in Nokia's research - people remain unenthusiastic. In dealing with some of these issues internally, Keith walked delegates through one way his team has been innovating, in the form of a new set of small-scale research projects dubbed "Short Sharp Insights", or SSIs. These mini-projects have been used as a way of tackling and throwing light on some of the key strategic questions, such as the convergence conundrum, which do not always receive sufficient attention, or indeed funding. SSIs, he argued, are a successful way of challenging the status quo, driving Insight into the business, consolidating multiple data sources, and raising the profile of the Insight teams. The programme is now entering its second round of internal funding and has proved a useful way of providing seed-corn support as a springboard to larger investigations. The final presentation was a double-hander, illustrating
a collaboration between Jigsaw, represented by Ann Morgan,
and PwC's Judith Nicholl. The theme was an aspect of B2B
life which has always been present if never named as such: word of
mouth (WOM). Sales-driven, rather than brand driven, B2B markets,
especially where SMEs are concerned, have long depended on recommendations
and referrals, but the thinking about WOM has really blossomed in the
consumer sphere and the aim of the research conducted for this paper was
to ascertain how WOM tools and techniques are being measured and implemented
in B2B markets. An initial scan revealed that opinions are polarised between,
on the one hand, a defensive view of WOM as "old hat"
and, on the other, an "open-arms" approach which sees
the development of new techniques as an exciting opportunity. Ann and
Judith borrow from the WOMMA definition as "giving people a reason
to talk about your products and services and making it easier for that
conversation to take place". A more detailed analysis soon reveals
some differentiators distinguishing B2B and B2C influences: while for
consumers risk and cost of purchase are low, for business purchasers the
pattern is reversed. A greater requirement for expertise is also a feature
of B2B environments. So what are companies actually doing about WOM? Despite
the wealth of terms and tools available to marketers, the only direct
comparison seems to be "advocacy tracking", though a range of
techniques are being used under different names. These include: "tryvertising",
buzz marketing and community marketing. Cause marketing, referral programmes
and "conversation creation" seem to be off the B2B radar
currently, though the research identified other techniques that are perhaps
unique to this market: local business groups, conferences and presence
on committees. Building on this framework Judith outlined PwC's approach,
highlighting the use of customer satisfaction, discussion forum and press
monitoring, and recruitment referrals as key ways of measuring WOM. The
presenters concluded with a challenge to B2B marketers to go beyond simple
measurement of recommendation, exemplified by the net promoter score,
to dig deeper and ask why recommendations occur and where in the decision-making
process they exert their influence. If B2B marketers can move beyond their
position of reticence and embed these techniques in the mix, there is
a great opportunity to build on what is already being done to reap the
benefits.
The third session on Thursday gave us three quite different case studies, showing how successful outcomes were achieved in three differing but challenging B2B research projects. The first, 'Making contact with the middle men' written by Alison Pugh and presented by Andy Glazier of Consensus, looked at why intermediaries - such as mortgage brokers and financial advisors - are important. With the withdrawal of sales forces and the mounting complexity and regulation in certain markets, intermediaries are increasingly relied upon to provide advice and it is critical to understand how they make their choices. Using a Norwich Union case study, Andy talked about the challenges of researching a small, time-poor and research-resistant universe. Despite the apparent difficulties, the types of approach which Consensus had found worked best were outlined; for example, conducting the interviews face to face, using breakfast meetings and dinners, client participation workshops and providing respondents with a digest of the research. In 'Balancing theory with reality - an effective practical demonstration of client and agency partnership, flexibility and persistence' Victoria Riccalton from Acritas and her client Zoe Willment from Lloyd's then shared their experience of working together on a project which delivered in twenty months rather than the scheduled twelve weeks (and why that was fine!). Zoe started by explaining how Lloyd's, despite many misconceptions, is actually a marketplace for the 46 individual organisations which operate there. It is very paper-based with a complex distribution chain but it is slowly changing and modernising. They identified a need to measure satisfaction from their customers' point of view rather than just measuring the speed with which they managed to get documents out, which was what had been happening previously. Their case study involved desk research, qualitative and quantitative stages. Zoe stressed the importance of involving an internal project team from the outset who 'owned' the process. The workshop and consultation approach they adopted kept all the stakeholders on board throughout what was a long - and from the sounds of it - often tortuous process. And their willingness to be open in sharing and publishing the research results led to an improved response rate when the survey was repeated in 2006. Zoe and Victoria summarised the critical success factors as having an integrated client/agency team, an acceptance that the process (and particularly the sample) can't be perfect, a need for persistence, a clear definition of roles and a shared feeling that their loyalty is to the project rather than to two separate organisations. The third paper of the session was another joint client/agency presentation; 'Tackling climate change in the UK: developing a model to encourage sustainability among local authorities'. Jennie Abelman from the Energy Saving Trust and Fiona McAndrew from IFF took us through a very successful project, which had provided a segmentation of local authorities. Jennie first outlined EST's role in helping to fulfil the government's commitment to cut CO2 emissions - a result of the 1997 Kyoto protocol - emissions which are principally caused by the burning of fossil fuels. Whilst most of EST's work is with consumers looking at energy efficiency and sustainable transport, they also deal with Energy Efficiency Best Practice in Housing and Green Vehicle Fleets. A key influencer in these areas are local councils. They are a major landlord, owning 20% of housing stocks; they run large vehicle fleets, they influence building standards and they are an intermediary with the public. From the local council's point of view, they can save energy, improve the local environment, improve living standards for their residents - and save money. Jennie and Fiona discussed the challenges of working with local authorities and the need to produce a segmentation which would allow EST to focus its spend more effectively. As with the Lloyds' project, EST and IFF started with desk research looking at previous work and held a workshop. In 2005 they were able to get two-thirds of all local authorities to take part and, using a points based system, were able to segregate authorities into high and low motivation, performance and potential. Those with low potential were then not targeted and EST was able to focus on the high motivation segment. The segmentation has been used in many ways and continues to be used, with different approaches adopted for different groups. For example, a personalised promotion sent to local councillors got a 12% response rate and a list of all signatories to the Nottingham Declaration, which was sent to non-signatories, achieved a 22% response. After two years they have managed to move the high motivation segments upwards and fewer are now lagging behind. The segmentation has been used to set internal targets, many of which have been exceeded. All three papers gave a very useful reminder of
how effective research can be when agencies and clients work in depth
and in partnership with both sides prepared to be flexible and to invest
time in the project.
The opening session on Friday morning looked at the challenges and opportunities of working with clients to mutual benefit. The ability to meet clients' needs and goals can be heightened by increased involvement from both sides, as the pairings of Judith Staig, GfK NOP with Katie Davies, BT, and Mel Appleby, Nunwood with Katie Blight, Royal Mail Group, chose to illustrate. However, as Emma Pyke from BPRI pointed out, not every relationship is a good relationship, and she highlighted the necessary paths to avoid the pitfalls of a relationship just for relationship's sake. In their paper entitled, 'A new collaborative model for B2B research' Judith and Katie began by pointing out how the traditional linear approach to research treats research agencies as the middle-link between clients and respondents - as the host of a dinner party where guests have their meal chosen for them. They argued that their approach on the British Telecom Corporate Panel (BTCP), which let BT have direct contact with their respondents (large corporate buyers), led to greater collaboration, increased research effectiveness and a better long term relationship for all parties: client, agency and respondent. Corporate buyers are important customers but previously felt that they were not listened to by BT. BT felt that the traditional approach didn't give enough access to these customers leading to the collaborative approach being used. By being positioned correctly (incentivise with more than money, make the respondents feel like they are the drivers of change, guest speakers speak to respondents to "give something back"), BTCP managers found that they were able to fully engage with internal stakeholders as the "powerful voice of the customer". From this project, BT stakeholders have turned into research-positive ambassadors who can see the value research can have and the GfK NOP/BT relationship is much stronger too. This was followed by Emma Pyke's paper, which posed the question: 'Too close for comfort? Are immersed relationships necessary or can they be counter productive?' Emma began by stating that partnership is rarely for better or worse, and that whilst developing new client relationships costs two thirds more than maintaining and developing an existing one, there are challenges to making it work and it is easy to let factors slide, leading to termination. Understanding the client can lead to streamlining with regard to knowing their business and on winning and managing projects; again leading to greater efficiencies and deeper understanding. Agencies can use this to 'up their game', to reach the highest B2B table by developing these deeper links. In Emma's view client/agency relationships are getting shorter, through a lethargic, lazy dropping of the ball, by not challenging the client or using advancing techniques in operations, to drive increased efficiencies through the account; to an uncontrollable strategic upheaval through client/agency mergers and acquisitions; to a cataclysmic breakdown of relationships, such as Arthur Andersen/Enron or Sky/Virgin. Emma concluded by stating that to maintain a successful relationship and avoid the pitfalls with client/agency relationships it is vital that there is a mutual respect, a willingness to share company objectives, and transparency in aspects of the relationship that could cause it to become too close for comfort. Following this illustration of the dangers and pitfalls of an untrusting and opaque relationship, Mel Appleby and Katie Blight in their paper, 'Partnership in practice', highlighted how well a relationship can go when it is based on mutual respect, transparency and a willingness to share. They pointed out that the high-value relationships in the B2B world mean that great partnerships are increasingly important and lead to an equal footing between client and agency. This process takes time and money up front, and can lead to difficulties in convincing procurement that the less visible stuff is worth it, but the return on the investment can be huge for both partners. The most important part of a client/agency dynamic like this is the people who build and maintain it. Honesty and integrity are key for all involved and one way the Nunwood/Royal Mail Group partnership shows this is by co-interviewing for new account staff. This transparency maintains and grows the ever-important dynamic. The relationships should be measurable via, for example, account reviews to combat account lethargy. Continuous improvement is the order of the day. Partnership is not all about huge projects and
discount structures; it is about a willingness to help and having support
available. Nunwood managed to turn a project round for the Post Office
on stamp price changes in ten hours when Royal Mail was having PR issues
in the British press, enabling them to state in the papers, next day,
that new pricing was not an issue for the public, only for the media.
An impressive, high speed, example of partnership in practice.
This session had two excellent speakers - Richard Hepburn and Andy Dexter. Although Richard is now chief executive of FDS International, as well as owning two other research agencies, he is not a researcher. He has held a number of senior and director posts at the likes of IKEA so his view of the industry is inevitably a very commercial one. And he chose as his subject the use of 'value disciplines' in our work in B2B. These three disciplines were identified in 'The Discipline of Market Leaders', by Michael Treacy and Fred Wiersema. Essentially it discusses how successful companies have to excel in one of three different models - 'Operational Excellence' which is all about efficiency, 'Product Leadership' which is all about innovation, or 'Customer Intimacy' which is all about customer understanding and tailored solutions. Richard described these, and showed how this kind of analysis should become part of any B2B researcher's toolkit. It highlights three points:
The aim of the paper was to help researchers understand how to improve their own positioning away from that of 'industry supplier' to that of the professional, more on terms with consultancies, and delivering results more in their clients' own language. We hope Richard might be motivated to return and deliver other similar papers on high value models and approaches to thinking from which we can all benefit. The second paper was delivered by Andy Dexter, founder of Truth, and was much more an examination of the research industry itself. Andy pursued a theme that has been discussed before about where market research sits on the continuum from factory supplier through to high-level consultant. But he had taken a much more robust approach in analysing companies by their company accounts, and comparing both profitability, and expenditure on people, with similar figures from other industries. His conclusions were sobering - showing that whilst most professional services such as law, accountancy and consulting, made profits in the 25-28% range, the typical market research agency makes just 12% profit, placing it firmly amongst the production and manufacturing companies. Andy supported his analysis through interviews with a wide range of senior executives, both within the research industry and within the professions, and indeed city analysts. His conclusions only support the views that have been expressed by the likes of Simon Chadwick, that the wholesale move towards globalisation, typically within larger media groups, has made it much harder to provide higher level services that can compete alongside consultants. Indeed, the issue of reward for highly skilled people is one of the issues that has a great impact upon the ability to provide value added services. Andy wound up the session by concluding that a structural reorganisation of the MR industry into 'makers' and 'advisers' was likely, and indeed probably already under way. Overall, the session was felt to have been hugely
valuable, and the fact that it over-ran into lunchtime without anyone
leaving the room is simply testament to its quality.
The conference ended with an inspiring and extremely amusing talk from Guy Browning. Readers probably know Guy for his non-day job: he writes humour for The Guardian and BBC Radio 4 and is author of some of the world's great literary classics such as: 'Never Hit a Jellyfish with a Spade' and 'Never Push When it Says Pull: small rules for little problems'. He does also have a real job: Managing Director of Smokehouse, a leading-edge Marketing Agency. He works with major companies like Pepsi, Mars, Barclays and Shell, helping them develop new products and services. His talk was entitled "Five Business Lessons so Basic Everyone Forgets them". First of all he described his own business, Smokehouse. Of his recruitment policy he said they looked for the ethics of Mother Theresa, the IT skills of Bill Gates, the charisma of Britney Spears and the business brain of Rupert Murdoch. Unfortunately, the reality was more frequently the charisma of Bill Gates, the ethics of Rupert Murdoch, the IT skills of Mother Theresa and the business brain of Britney Spears. No surprise then that the most frequent winner of the Employee of the Month award was Guy Browning, himself! And their world ranking as a Marketing Services group is 893,671! And the Five Basic Lessons? True to form, I've forgotten them already, but I did like his worst definition of leadership. "Leadership is what senior management require middle management to get from junior management". And the best definition of leadership? "It's up to you". Many a true word is spoken in jest! It was a great way to end the conference, and we all went away uplifted and inspired. If you do get a chance to hear Guy Browning speak - BIG Conference thoroughly recommends him, and if you want to learn about B2B - come to the BIG Conference in 2008! Congratulations go to three first-time delegates for their papers at conference: Andy Dexter from Truth for the best presentation, Jonathan Fletcher from Illuminas for the best written paper, and Richard Hepburn for the best newcomer at Conference. These awards were announced and presented at the BIG summer party at London Zoo on the evening of 19 July.
Conference Papers 2007 For copies contact Pene Healey on 020 8864 1834 or e-mail info@bigconference.org Papers from other years are also available, more information on these can be found on the previous conferences page. 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 |
