As researchers, or buyers of market research, we know full well the value of what we do. We know why we ask the questions we ask, and we know what to do with the results. But do participants?
You may not think that this matters, that they should just answer the questions put to them, honestly and thoughtfully. However, this overlooks the question of motivation, why would participants want to fill in surveys at all, and why do it well?
One of the key drivers of motivation, and we all want motivated participants filling in our surveys, is value.
One of the key drivers of motivation, and we all want motivated participants filling in our surveys, is value. That the activity has value, not that the information gathered has monetary value. As part of Dynata’s Global Trends Report we asked a number of questions about the surveying process, and consumer feedback to brands in general. On the question of value, we asked if they thought the opinions they expressed in surveys would make their experiences with the brand or company better or not.
Well, there is good news and bad news. Looking at it from a glass half full perspective, over half of all participants, almost six out of ten, agreed that it would. This opinion was shared fairly consistently across the nine countries we covered. Even in Japan, the most pessimistic country in our survey, just under a half (47%) think their feedback is valuable, in that improvements will result. Within Europe the French are most positive (65%) followed by Germany (59%), the Netherlands (58%) and the UK (55%).
Making a difference
The glass half empty view of the world has one in ten (13%) sure that their opinions will make no difference to products and services. It is hard to say if they are lost to us, but their motivation for doing market research surveys must be low, perhaps leading to less effort being expended on the surveys and them getting less enjoyment from the process. As we track the results to these questions over time we may also track who from this particular sample remains with the panel and who quits. Repeating these questions in the future to those who remain may unveil the impact of the surveys we put to people.
Perhaps the most intriguing group are the just over a quarter (28%) saying they don’t know if it will or it won’t make a difference. Japan is highest here at over a third (36%). In Europe the Dutch are most likely to take this position, with 33% unsure if their input will make a difference. Are they on a journey from “yes, I can make a difference” to “no, there is no point filling in surveys”? Or have we just not given them the information they need to make this judgement?
Clearly there is a need for us all, researchers, clients and even panel owners, to stress the importance and value of what we are doing, and it costs us nothing to giving it just a little thought. Or we can do more. The power of a message of thanks from the client cannot be over-estimated, feedback on success stories on the usage of data, for example, could radically transform the relationship between client and participant, decreasing the number believing what they do has no import and, hopefully, increasing the quality of the work done. What may be required for this to happen is a change in our attitude towards participants from mere “respondents” to “stakeholders” in the value creation chain.
Recall
Participants recognise that companies can get customer feedback from a variety of sources, traditional market research being only one such way. We must not forget, however, that all the participants in the survey are panel members and part of the market research paradigm, so it is perhaps not unsurprising that market research – being invited to do a survey, not necessarily immediately after a purchase – is rated the best method by almost four out of ten (37%). This was a fairly consistent global finding with the Netherlands and Australia slightly more likely to endorse this view (both 43%) and the USA, the UK and Japan lagging – although at “only” 33%. In no country was market research not the top answer. The second most popular answer was the post-purchase feedback option with 29% selecting this as the best method. Assuming few participants would be aware of concepts like “choice-supportive bias” or “endowment effects” they must be thinking of the recency of the purchase and how much easier it might be to answer some of the questions we standardly ask about the path to purchase and alternatives forgone. This speaks to a need to be more careful in our questionnaire construction, allowing time for memories to be evoked and the role of various communication channels (perhaps) to be correctly recalled.
Product reviews
Our panellists don’t exist in a vacuum, they also exist in the real world. Just over one in ten (12%) thought that companies should read their product reviews. This rises to 15% of Japanese and American participants. The potential to add colour and candour to market research data, from unsolicited comments such as these, even if the source material may be somewhat biased, should not be under-estimated. The movement towards appending external ‘big data’ should not necessarily exclude ‘small data’ such as this.
Our panellists don’t exist in a vacuum, they also exist in the real world.
A further 8% of participants mentioned reading social media posts (as distinct from product reviews per se). When we add these two sources of information (product reviews and social media) together we get a substantial minority (one in five) saying this is the best way to garner feedback from them.
Finally, the last one in ten suggested that they would like the opportunity to contact companies directly to give them feedback about the customer experience. Perhaps the growth of intermediary review sites like TripAdvisor may have sparked this development. Companies would do well to take heed should this demand grow. It is something we shall look closely at with the next edition of our trends report for, like mighty oaks growing from small acorns, it is often the unexpected minority view that grows to being a true trend, a change in society.
