Posted by Ray Poynter, 19 July 2020 The full GRIT report is 166 pages, here’s my take on the key points. Context The data is mostly North America, with a chunk from Europe. From ESOMAR’s data, these 2 regions account for 80% of global MR spend Globally. The data is pre-COVID and very early COVID – so its predictive power is uncertain. Many research companies lack a clear mission Participants described the company they worked for in terms of different categories (e.g. Technology Provider, Full Service, etc). People from the same company often picked different categories – this needs addressing. Want to be famous, don’t just focus on clients GRIT lists the 15 ‘top of mind’ suppliers of ‘Strategic Consultancy. For clients the top three brands are McKinsey, Kantar and Ipsos. Interestingly most of the variation between Buyers and Suppliers is shared. If you want to be top of mind with buyers, you will be top of mind with suppliers – don’t waste effort focusing on just buyers – focus on being famous. Very few projects fail, so you need to try harder Buyers judge that fewer than 10% of projects do not meet the business needs, and 30% exceed […]
Face-to-face events are on hold and organsiations around the world are rushing to find suitable virtual alternatives. What questions do we need to ask and answer to determine good solutions to the problems created by the lack of the F2F option?
In this post Eileen Campbell reflects on the recent GRIT study and makes the case for accelerating innovation.
Ray Poynter shares the six things he learned from the latest GRIT report.
Ray Poynter the seven key messages from the latest GRIT Report.
The NewMR survey closed on 31 May and the data is currently being processed. The future of the market research and insights industry is dependent on our ability to add value to data. The digital revolution (including the rise of passive data, automation, and more recently AI) means that data is plentiful and every month it becomes cheaper and ever more plentiful. If market research and insights are to prosper, it will be because we can add something that the machines can’t, for example, design skills, qualitative insights, presenting flair, storytelling, the ability to synthesise information, and the ability to act as consultants. However, if our future is based on adding value to data, in a knowledge-based economy, our key asset has to be our people, and developing that asset requires training. The 2017 NewMR Knowledge benchmarking study suggested that too many researchers, globally, were not getting the sort of support they needed to develop their skills. So, Sue York and Ray Poynter have launched a new study in 2018 looking to benchmark training. Once the data is collected we will write and distribute a report on our findings, along with our recommendations. When you have finished the survey you will be asked […]
I have just published Five Market Research Trends for 2017, covering issues that I think will be important over the next year. So, it seemed only fair to look back to this time last year to see how my previous predictions performed. A year ago I published “My Predictions for 2016”, which contained nine predictions. Here is an assessment of how I think those predictions performed. 1) Bigger Legal Problems for Facebook and Google. This has been true in the sense that they have faced a growing number of court cases, especially in Europe, along with investigations into their poor records in terms of paying tax. However, the problems they have faced have not markedly impacted their ability to grow or make money. 2) Automation. We saw lots of movement on Automation in 2016 and that trend looks likely to continue into 2017 (check out the NewMR Debate on Automation being held as part of the Festival of NewMR). 3) Surveys will continue to suffer. This is a slightly tricky one to judge. Each year for the last few years (according to the EOSMAR Global Market Research Report) surveys have become a smaller part of the total research mix, but […]
There are three key challenges for any company trying to operate at the cutting edge of market research and insights: Money – until the revenues come in there are bills to pay, and without some money coming in it is often hard to gain investments. Awareness – you may have a great product or service, but you need a lot of people to be aware of you before you get a good flow of business interest. In the early days you might find you need 100 people to be aware of you to get 1 person interested in talking to you, and you might need to talk to 25 people who are interested to sell a single project. Feedback on your idea – you might think your idea is great and that it solves a key business problem. However, you will be unaware of what many other companies are doing, especially in other countries. Claims that you are the first to tackle X or Y or Z can make you look pretty silly if the people you are speaking to are familiar with other solutions. Using IIeX to tackle these three problems There are lots of ways of tackling these […]
In February next year, I am, once again, curating and co-chairing IIeX Europe. We are currently putting the structure together and will be issuing a call for speakers and contributions shortly. For the last few years IIeX has been at the forefront of showcasing innovative MR and we want to ensure that 2017 is another leap forward. IIeX will be held at Beurs van Berlage in, Amsterdam from 20 to 21 February 2017. In good NewMR fashion I would like to crowdsource ideas for where the cutting edge is going to be in 2017. Here are a few questions and I urge you to either: enter your suggestion below as comments, or contact me directly via firstname.lastname@example.org. 1 – What cutting edge topics should IIeX should cover in 2017? 2 – What companies are you keen to hear more about? 3 – What new thinking is most worth sharing? 4 – Which new technologies are you most interested in? BTW, if you think you or your company meet one or more of these four criteria, give yourself a shout out below or contact me to say why you should be on the agenda in Amsterdam.
Most weeks there is something in the MR media about a new force for disruption, which is often followed by somebody else saying ‘that is not disruption, it is X’, where X tends to be one of ‘Hype’, ‘Same old, same old’, ‘Just the continuation of a trend’ or similar. In a recent GreenBook post Jeff Resnick wrote about ZappiStore and its potential for disruption, and this elicited at least one comment from somebody who wanted the word ‘disruption’ to be removed from the list of words used by MR bloggers. However, I think the attacks on the term disruption in MR blogging probably miss two key points: When writing about the future it important to alert people to what might happen, to allow people to consider and perhaps plan for such contingencies. Disruption in MR is both real and frequent. When we are talking about disruption that has not happened yet, there has to be a probabilistic element. If the commentary waited until disruption had happened, it would hardly be very interesting. However, this means that not every disruption written about will happen, but that does not invalidate the process of looking at changes and considering them. The process […]