The problem isn’t always the insight. It’s what the insight runs into once it’s shared.
Sometimes market research does exactly what it’s supposed to do. The findings are clear, the pattern is real… and yet the client’s decision still doesn’t reflect what was learned.
Most of us have seen this happen. And when it does, it’s easy to blame the usual things: Maybe the story wasn’t compelling enough. Maybe stakeholders interpreted it differently. Maybe the recommendations weren’t sharp enough.
But thinking back on certain projects, I’ve started to notice a pattern.
- In one study, I was asked to conduct qualitative research using a discussion guide built by pulling questions directly from a survey. Participants struggled, not because they had nothing to say, but because the questions didn’t match how they actually think about the topic.
- In another, a new product concept resonated with customers, but the advertising had already been developed. None of the directions really worked, yet the team still had to pick one. What came out of the process wasn’t a strong decision so much as the “least bad” choice.
- And in another project, participants kept raising the same issue on their own. It clearly mattered to them. But it was also something the organization wasn’t prepared to deal with. The finding made the room uncomfortable, and that discomfort told its own story.
On the surface, these are very different situations. But they point to the same thing. By the time the findings are presented, a surprising amount has already been decided. The research has been framed a certain way. The questions have been narrowed. Sometimes there are topics no one wants to touch. And sometimes, more quietly, there are things the organization just isn’t ready to hear.
One way I’ve started to think about it is that insights don’t just land in organizations – they run into things.
Sometimes what they run into is a decision that’s already been made. Sometimes it’s an investment that’s too far along to revisit. And sometimes it’s something the organization isn’t ready to hear. In that context, the question becomes not just “is this insight right?” but “what is this insight going to run into?”
I’ve found it can be useful to think about that ahead of time. What existing decisions, assumptions, or constraints might this challenge? Because that often shapes whether the insight has any real chance of being used.
It has also changed how I think about the goal of the work. Early on, I probably would have said the goal is to get the insight exactly right. Over time, I’ve come to think the goal is to make the insight usable.
And in some cases, that means using the insight to open a conversation rather than close one. Especially when it touches on something sensitive, presenting it as something to explore can create more movement than presenting it as a final answer.
Some client-side researchers see value in bringing in an outside consultant for this reason. It’s not just about a fresh perspective. An external voice can say things that are harder to say internally, which can create space for the insight to be heard. (Or, at times, take the heat for it!)
None of this guarantees that the insight will be used. But it does improve the odds. Because the real question isn’t just whether we found something important. It’s whether the work was set up in a way that gave that insight any real chance to matter. Let’s discuss the best way to make your insights land most effectively. Contact me at info at bureauwest.com.