Bureau West

When conducting market research, it’s tempting to simply ask participants direct questions:  Would you buy this product?  What do you like about that product?  What do you think of this brand?

The problem is, research participants lie.  Well, it’s usually not on purpose, so perhaps “lie” is too strong a word, but they don’t tell the truth.  When asked a direct question, people try to theorize how they would make a decision in a given situation, which can be different than actually being in that situation.

The good news is, we have ways to get around that.  When designing a research study, we can try to avoid direct questions, and instead, use approaches that provide participants with the context that enables us to get at how they really think.  For example:

• Instead of asking if people would buy a product, we might tell people to imagine they have a certain amount of money, describe the various product choices and prices, and ask them how they would spend their money.
• If we wanted to find out the perceived benefits of a product, rather than asking what they like about it, we might ask them to imagine a situation where the product wasn’t available and to describe their reactions.
• Rather than asking what people think of a certain brand, we might ask them to describe the typical customer of that brand and then compare that customer to themselves.

Those are just a few examples of a wide range of situations.  These aren’t new approaches; my point is, in many cases, we need to avoid the temptation to take the easy route and ask a direct question, and consider whether one of those indirect approaches might provide us with better answers.

Want more examples? I’m writing a presentation about how to get at what customers really think.  I’d be glad to give the presentation in-person or by phone.  Let me know.  Call me at (818) 752-7210.

I just got back from the QRCA annual conference and my favorite presentation was given by Liz Monroe-Cook, about how to handle situations where we have two opposing forces and both are necessary.  She calls her approach Polarity Management®; I was struck by how a theoretical approach can have a great deal of real-world benefits.

I decided to conduct an exercise where I used her approach to handle a polarity many of my clients face: simplicity vs. more features.  This dynamic tension exists with regard to many client offerings as well as web applications: users want a simple product that’s easy to understand, but they also want cool features.  How do we find the right balance between the two?

I went through the process of developing what Monroe-Cook calls a Polarity Map™, first defining the benefits of each pole (e.g., simplicity brings about quicker adoption but more features could make a product appeal to a wider range of users), and then the potential downsides that can come about from over-focusing on each pole (e.g., simplicity: product could be perceived as low-end, more features: product could be difficult to use).  I then was able to define the positive result of balancing the strengths of both poles (popular product) and the potential negative outcome if the two aren’t balanced (no one wants the product).  The process also includes defining action steps to obtain the benefits of each pole as well as early warnings that we’re in danger of the downside of neglecting one pole or the other.  Click here to see the map I developed.

Each of the above steps on their own might seem obvious, but put them together and we have a great process for dealing with a variety of situations where we have two opposing and necessary forces, ranging from running an organization (e.g., structure vs. flexibility), to obtaining consumer input (e.g., cost vs. quality), even to personal growth (e.g., individual work vs. teamwork).  We can obtain valuable insights on the best way to balance the two poles.

To discuss ways to handle your complex issues (at least the work-related ones!), give us a call at (818) 752-7210.

Sources: “Power Up through Paradox:  Polarity Management® as a Tool for Addressing Complexity,” Liz Monroe-Cook, QRCA 2011; http://www.polaritymanagement.com/

Those funny-looking squares are popping up everywhere – and no wonder.  Advertisers love QR codes, since they provide an easy way to engage with prospects.  People with smart phones can scan the codes using the phone’s camera and immediately receive information from the advertiser such as text or a web page (QR stands for “quick response”).

Creating a QR code is easy: the code above was created for free using the Google url shortener: http://goo.gl/ .  More important, though, is how to utilize the codes most effectively.  Customers want to receive something they value when they scan the code – not just an ad.  Some examples of the use of QR codes include directing consumers to online contests, games, recipes, book excerpts, performances, even how-to videos.  Such engagement can result in prospects providing contact information, word-of-mouth referrals, and of course, sales.  And remember to change the content over time, to keep it relevant and interesting.

To find ways to engage your prospects, give us a call at (818) 752-7210.

Sources: “Want More Information? Just Scan Me,” New York Times, September 21, 2011; “How to Use QR Codes to Market Your Business,” Inc.com

OK, first, a shameless plug: I’d like to give a presentation at South by Southwest on the topic of getting inside web users’ heads.  You can help make that happen by going to the SXSW “panel picker” and voting for my presentation.  Go to: http://panelpicker.sxsw.com/ideas/view/11545.  Thanks!

And speaking of what web users want, that seems to be a moving target.  My current theory is that they want us to just read their minds!  Of course, the next best thing is to conduct research with them.  How else can a site figure out the optimal balance between simplicity and added features, just to give one example.

And then there are the questions of social interaction vs. privacy.  When users go to a site and see their Facebook profile picture and a message to “tell your friends,” some consider that to be a great benefit, while others call it “creepy.”  For example, Ticketmaster has just introduced seat maps for venues indicating where a customer’s Facebook friends are sitting. The idea is that people would want to know which of their friends are attending, and try to get seats near them.  Sharing your seat tag generates a “Check out my seats” post on your Facebook wall. Along with the “like” and “comment” buttons is “buy tickets” – clearly, a potential money-maker for Ticketmaster.

A quick look at the comments to a Fast Company article about the new feature show that some like the idea, while others worry about personal security.  The devil may be in the details.  Once you connect to Facebook from Ticketmaster’s site, the default setting is to share your seat with everyone, not just your friends.  Based on our conversations with web users, we think they may prefer a less public default option.

To learn your site users’ preferences, talk to them!  Give us a call at (818) 752-7210.

Sources: “Ticketmaster Teams With Facebook So You Can Sit Next To Your Friends,” Fast Company, August 23, 2011; Bureau West research