The type of engagement we specialise in is online and so requires very little of people’s time to participate. We find that people will happily and readily participate on issues of concern to them and that they will pick and choose what to engage on.

I think this picking and choosing is the key. Market research does not allow the community to choose it asks only specific questions and often also limits the answers.

In Australia market research agencies have been slow to embrace the changing marketing landscape compared to UK/US counterparts.

Internationally qual and quant silos are being broken down into a more dynamic and organic style of research.

Next time you speak with a market researcher ask them how the changing marketing environment has impacted on their methodologies.

It makes sense to support marketers in a social media environment with market research that

(a) understands what they are trying to achieve and

(b)treats research participants with respect (rather than the old parent/child structure).

Who knows your research participants might just be your WOM/ brand advocates in the near future.

Cheers

I actually agree with you both about the difference between “researching” the community (with either a commercial or social policy agenda) vs starting/maintaining a “dialogue” with them wholeheartedly.

What I should have said was that qualitative METHODS (not necessarily qualitative market research per se) can work beautifully to develop that dialogue.

(And thank you for the kind words; very glad you like my blog! : ) It’s a WordPress platform).

I think Crispin has put the case well – I suppose what I am arguing against is a trend to commission a quarterly survey of a thousand or so people and tick the box on community engagement – job done, no need to talk to them any more.

I agree that well managed and delivered qualitative research engages the community, though I wonder what your thoughts are on how this should best be supported with open dialogue?

Thanks for the interest (by the way I love your blog – I wish ours looked that good!)

I agree with you but would argue that there is qualitative research and qualitative research. Not all qualitative research is born equal!

Open question surveys where a skilled “questioner” has lots of flexibility to explore the rambling pathways of the conversation with generosity and goodwill are invaluable sources of qualitative information. They also build rapport and encourage ongoing dialogue and “engagement”.

On the other hand, closed question surveys can too easily, and quite possibly unconsciously, be preordained to lead the “questioned” to a particular conclusion. I heard a great example of this recently where the question was framed so extraordinarily broadly that anyone answering “No” would have seemed completely unreasonable – “Should we have any standards at all to manage this issue?” These kinds of questions are pretty much inevitably designed to produce “quantitative” output to support a pre-existing policy position, e.g. 51% of residents think we’re doing a great job (therefore we must be on the right track!).