The Future of Market Research – Where are we Heading?

Edward Appleton, Happy Thinking People

A high-profile panel discussion on 4th February 2021 with the editor in chief of marktforschung.de, Holger Geißler, Andera Gadeib (Dialego), Sven Arn (Happy Thinking People), Peter Kautz (Statista). This virtual event was hosted by Rhein-Main BVM Regional representatives Susanne Stahl and Dr. Christian Holst – to whom our thanks.

Edward Appleton: The Future of Market Research – Where are we Heading? (Bild: Appleton)

Quo Vadis Market Research? This topic is familiar, but clearly still a popular one: over 160 participants attended.

The discussion was collegial, detailed, disciplined, partly familiar, at times disturbing.

The industry continues to undergo profound change. There was a clear sense that research needed to re-invent itself in an ever-expanding world of analytics, e-commerce and more, where vast quantities of data, mainly digital, need to be made sense of. Legacy MR approaches are becoming obsolete.

Our industry needs to re-define itself, skill-up, potentially re-structure, to re-emerge hopefully stronger.

Future opportunities are no doubt there for "research" – data is hugely important for all sorts of business decisions. Data-driven, empirical decision-making will continue to replace instinct.

The key question remained: are researchers collectively and individually willing and capable of grabbing future opportunities, of morphing into more highly skilled and valued analytics and insights consultants? The space is there for us. The jury is out.

Here are the main areas and inputs discussed. Enjoy.

Where is MR going?

Each of the panelists opened with a statement on their vision of the future of research.

Sven Arn highlighted how "research" is about insights rather than data. Activation is a key task, with strategic projects increasingly the norm for agencies. Despite constantly evolving methods and an explosion of data points, the exchange with consumers is central, and a constant. Conversations remain the key to understanding.

Digital for him isn't and won't be the be-all-and end-all in future.

Andera Gadeib noted the overall very slow acceptance of digital in MR over the years, which has improved in 2020, but still isn't really popular she felt. Client-side changes – all about speed.

The human aspect remains is a central factor, but given the mass of available data, often in real-time, this needs to be balanced with the use of algorithms to help researchers cope.

New competences are key to thriving in future – and a central challenge is to ask oneself: what can people do that machines can't – not the least to remain employable. A key challenge for agencies was getting lost on a project tread-mill, often reactive rather than pro-active – an area we need answers to as a profession to remain attractive. The USP of MR as a go-to discipline needs to be crystal clear in a sea of data options for clients, mainly digital...what's the most useful and most relevant?

In summary for her: the ability to re-invent oneself is key – and a huge challenge.

Future opportunities she saw as

  1. co-operation and collaboration
  2. a focus on creating experiences,
  3. making sense of data
  4. the merging of qual and quant, as well as
  5. the mix between digital and face-to-face.

Holger Geißler confessed to not being a believer in the power of crystal balls, but still he saw the following future shifts:

  1. More MR projects, but fewer market research companies. Data collection will lose relevance, esp offline – MR turnover in Germany is likely down vs 2019. Qualitative research will gain in relative importance in his view.
  2. Market definition will continue to broaden – to include UX, CX, social media, data analytics. Does this leave legacy or traditional MR as the fossilized rump? A clear danger.
  3. Data isn't "the new gold" – there's too much of it, clients need more people who can handle it all. In-sourcing on client side is a big trend...but maybe it goes back to external experts outside who can help with data fusion.

Finally, he noted lots of analytics activity going on outside of MR e.g. e-commerce, but the data doesn't come from MR companies.

He stressed the need permanently re-educate ourselves – esp. handling different data sources and making sense of it all.

No pressure then ;-)

Peter Kautz differed on data – he reminded us of the ongoing explosion of available data, with almost all the world's most valuable companies being based on data.

A future opportunity and ongoing challenge was how to find the needle in the haystack, sort the signal from the noise? There was also a clear need to answer the "So what?" question – and strengthen our role as consultants.

From a method P.O.V. he saw no money to be made in data collection.

Researchers have methodological expertise and need to find ways of data simplification, curating data points, visualizing....in a short, bite-size format, easy to deal with and intuitive.  

Will there be enough Jobs for MR in future?

This very pertinent question came from the audience.

After all, newer analytic competitors – Experian, for example – that crunch data, generate insights, are huge, much bigger than even the largest MR companies. Does that make tradtional MR redundant?

Peter Kautz saw room for both analytics and MR companies to arrive at "human understanding", establishing the context of decision making for example.

Sven Arn stressed that data isn't the same thing as insights. Predictive analytics are powerful, for sure – but insights are about creating meaning for a specific client challenge.

Simpler stuff will be automated, done client side with standardized software in his experience – cheap, quick, efficient. MR folk need to be really insight-driven to survive, and deliver stuff that can't be automated.

Co-moderator Dr. Christian Holst pointed out a paradox: ever increasing amounts of data available, so more room potentially for MR to act...but there were far fewer people working in MR over past five years. He even suggested a headcount reduction of 30 percent in this time-period, an alarming figure which no-one got the chance to understand more fully.

What did MR do wrong in the past - what would it need to do differently?

Holger Geißler suggested that industry associations could have operated more openly in the past, and embraced new fields e.g. UX. Sven Arn agreed. Both bold points of view – given this was a BVM sponsored event (!) – but the-times-they-are-a-changing, it seems.

He also suggested that too little was done for marketing the category space – and we still appear as old-fashioned. Dustiness was indeed a recurring theme throughout – MR having an image problem which seems difficult to shake off.

Andera Gadeib's exhortation was less towards the past – more "think big, innovate.....be idea-driven", however "mad" – adopting simple approaches like "yes, and" instead of "yes but...". Researchers were too risk-averse, in her view, needed to be more opportunity-driven. And yes, MR's messages are not getting across.

Peter Kautz repeated his belief that to be impactful, insights needed to be packaged more attractively, communicated more effectively. The aim: that buyers and stakeholders people really want to use them. Insights should be as desirable as a consumer good – that's what managers expect.

Sven Arn stressed the positives arising through COVID-19, qual research in particular has been forced to accelerate digitally. This full digital transformation has enthused customers, research has become much easier, more comfortable – esp. international research – and a very different experience.

Susanne Stahl posed a key question:

What do Agencies need to do to remain attractive for Clients?

Sven Arn agreed with Peter Kautz, that content needs to be sticky, entertaining, fun. Many marketing directors have short attention spans.

Holger Geißler saw the need to ensure relevance, not just entertainment.

He also suggested that many agencies needed to bite the digital bullet, digital being a deflationary force. They will likely need to take a hit on turnover, shrink to more profitable and core areas, before re-emerging stronger. Some were taking this route in his view, but plenty were not, still hoping that legacy business models would carry them through.

Andera Gadeib beat the digital drum, stressing that MR folk need to up their digital skill sets, above all be open for it. Then the task is to find the right mix and balance between algorithms and people. Clients would continue to need help in sorting through the sea of data available to them.

Who is our client?

To conclude, the panel discussed the changing nature of buyers of research on the client side - briefly, as the discussion was curtailed by time running out.

A few clear themes emerged: an increase in diversity of the types of buyers on the client side, traditional client-side researchers were decreasing in numbers.

"Newer" types of customers require a different approach from agencies – talking statistical significance might not be relevant to people with a clear operational focus, be it R&D or marketing.

Some companies engaging in research don't actually have a research department at all – opening the door to agencies to adopt a different role.

Finally, accessing senior managers, even the C Suite, was invaluable – in unlocking budgets, and getting projects moving.

Conclusion

Overall, a stimulating session – thanks and kudos to the BVM for pulling it together, a galvanizing industry debate in changing times. Susanne Stahl and Dr. Christian Holst – take a bow!

About the author

Edward Appleton, Happy Thinking People
Edward Appleton is Director Global Marketing at Happy Thinking People. Appleton has worked in market research for over 20 years, both on the client and agency side.

Täglicher Newsletter der Insightsbranche

News +++ Jobs +++ Whitepaper +++ Webinare
Wir beliefern täglich mehr als 9.000 Abonnenten

/mvw

Kommentare (3)

  1. Edward Appleton vor 3 Wochen
    Lieber @Jan Strasser - Thought leadership geht, meiner Ansicht nach, wenn es eng gekoppelt mit Business Impact einhergeht. Inhalte, ja - aber Impact, und das womöglich sehr agil, wie Sie andeuten. Business Understanding - zumindest auf Kundenseite - ist damit verwandt, und essentiell, wenn man als betr. Marktforscher operativ ernst genommen werden will. UX Researcher sind sicherlich gefragt, A/B Testing ist ja bekannt und wichtig , ein Umgang mit DIY Software unumgänglich - aber das muss alles energisch fürs Business eingesetzt werden. Ich glaube, wir als Branche verkaufen dagegen unsere Fähigkeiten im Bereich der Psychologie noch nicht gut genug - Beispiel geänderte verhaltensmuster und Einstellung in Zeiten von COVID-19, da ist die Quali-Forschung mehr denn je gefragt, sie muss nur agil reagieren können.

    Liebe @Natacha - tja, ein Riesenthema, Daten Erhebung und Data Quality - nur was ist da Quality? Und wer ist bereit wieviel mehr für welche Qualitäten zu zahlen? Ich bin sicher, es gibt genügen qualifizerte Leser, die diese Frage gut beantworten können ;) In der Quanti-Bereich ein Riesen-Challenge; in der Quali Bereich ist das schon seit eh und je ein zentrales und sehr ernst genommener Bereich, oder? Gerade die jüngst digital getriebene Ausweitung des Recruitment Prozesses erleichtert den Zugang zu mehr "frischen" Participants, was als positiv zu betrachten ist finde ich. Die Gefahr der subkategorischen Vernachlässigung und gar Kommoditisierung die Du ansprichst fordert ggfs eine Qualitätsoffensive - dafür braucht man Zeit, und vielleicht ein bisschen Geld. Etwas für die relevante Verbände, vielleicht?
  2. Jan Strasser vor 3 Wochen
    Danke für diesen sehr aufschlussreichen Artikel. Was mir in der Diskussion noch fehlt: Der "Purpose" von Marktforschung. Welche Insights kann MaFo liefern – abgesehen von Aussagen über Verhaltensmuster, Meinungen, Präferenzen, Bewertungen, usw. der Konsumenten? Ist Tiefenpsychologie als traditionelle Wurzel der qualitativen Marktforschung den heutigen Aufgaben unserer Kunden noch angemessen? Was kann ein heutiger Manager noch mit "360-Grad-Kundenanalysen" anfangen? Sieht ein Millennial-Marketer noch den Nutzen von ethnografischen Analysen? –
    Ich sehe eine große Chance darin, die INHALTE des Insights Research neu zu denken. Hier verharren Marktforscher häufig noch in den Research-Paradigmen des letzten Jahrhunderts, während die jüngeren Manager auf Auftraggeber-Seite den Konsumenten zunehmend wie einen Computer betrachten, den man an seinen "Biases" packen, mit iterativem Testing kennenlernen und mit Neuromarketing "hacken" kann. Dazu braucht man kaum noch Marktforscher, sondern eher UX-Researcher, A/B-Tests, Workshops, DIY-Umfragen und andere interne Aktivitäten. –
    Die Marktforschung sollte wieder die "Thought Leadership" übernehmen. Dies erfordert außergewöhnliches Engagement, echte Kompetenz und viel Ehrlichkeit.
  3. Natacha Dagneaud - Séissmo Markt und Forschung vor 3 Wochen
    Vielen Dank an Edward Appleton für die knackige Zusammenfassung.
    Ich fand an diesem Abend fast befremdlich, dass wir uns für die "Feldarbeit" fast schämen müssen. Datenerhebung ist aus meiner Sicht immer noch das A und O: Wie kann ich Sinn aus schlecht erhobenen Daten schaffen? Zugegeben, wir müssen (schon längst) mehr als nur Daten erheben - wir sollen darin den verborgenen Sinn finden und das tun wir auch. Aber der Fokus auf die Verarbeitung (die ja margenträchtiger ist) gefährdet das, was uns unterscheidet: empirische Kompetenz. Ich bin gern eine "Bauerin auf dem Feld" und habe anschließend Spaß, diese "Produktion" zu verarbeiten. Ähnlich wie die Sterneküche nicht ohne engagierte und passionierte Lebensmittelbetriebe, Züchter, Landwirte, etc. auskommen kann! Man sieht in der Lebensmittelbranche, wo es uns hingeführt hat, jahrelang den Ursprung des Produkts zugunsten der Weiterverarbeitung zu vernachlässigen. Die Feldarbeit ist tot? Es lebe die Feldarbeit!

Neuen Kommentar schreiben

Kommentare geben ausschließlich die Meinung ihrer Verfasser wieder. Die Redaktion behält sich vor, Kommentare nicht oder gekürzt zu veröffentlichen. Das gilt besonders für themenfremde, unsachliche oder herabwürdigende Kommentare sowie für versteckte Eigenwerbung.

Über marktforschung.de

Branchenwissen an zentraler Stelle bündeln und abrufbar machen – das ist das Hauptanliegen von marktforschung.de. Unser breites Informationsangebot rund um die Marktforschung richtet sich sowohl an Marktforschungsinstitute, Felddienstleister, Panelbetreiber und Herausgeber von Studien, Marktdaten sowie Marktanalysen als auch an deren Kunden aus Industrie, Handel und Dienstleistungsgewerbe.

facebook twitter xing linkedin