Are you comfortable with doing surveys in which up to half of the responses you’re receiving are fraudulent? Or in which you’re getting a heavily biased group of respondents?
Why do we ask respondents to diagnose themselves?
With the drive for speed in research, are you sacrificing getting quality respondents?
There are so many different techniques and approaches available to the consumer insights professional today. But have we simply lost the ability to do good research, even with all these new options?
When political polls fail to predict the exact outcome of an election, maybe they’re not wrong…maybe we are.
How can we have confidence in the future of our industry when a major research vendor has so little basic research competence?
Fortunately, Angry MR Client, Angry MR Respondent, and Angry MR Vendor seem to have faded away. Unfortunately, too often the complaints vendors and clients have about “the other side” are still there. Don’t get angry – get better. Or buy a saddle (and you’ll have to read to the end to know what that means.)
In articles about the quality of consumer insights, a common opinion is that research quality has gone downhill in recent years. I question that perspective.
With all of the changes happening in market research, we can’t forget the importance of basic skills. Without the basics, all the shiny new stuff doesn’t work.
Online surveys often use sliders in an attempt to spark respondent engagement and relieve the tedium of grids and radio buttons. But in relieving the tedium, you are probably getting biased data.