Abridged with the author’s permission from Marketing Trenches.
In many of our projects, we’re expected to either conceptualize, execute, or review various forms of research and testing. Some of it is what I’d call traditional market research, or an exploration of consumer attitudes towards a particular product. Some of it is usability research, or a test of how a user navigates through a particular website. Some of it is keyword research, used broadly to gauge demand or narrowly to forecast search engine marketing traffic and spending.
More often than not, the scenario looks like this. Expensive research firm is asked to provide insight into topic X, based on research and testing on potential consumers. Expensive research firm presents findings at the big annual meeting, and some of the data (in particular, the stuff that supports the CEO’s strategic direction) elicits the standard oohs and aahs as it appears magically on the PowerPoint. Here’s what typically happens next:
- Research firm receives big check—job well done.
- CEO or the sponsoring exec reminds everyone that the team now has a lot of material to digest, and that everyone needs to take this new data seriously.
- There is an implied agreement that everyone is going to review the findings, and figure out how this data can be used to improve their function or department.
What actually happens? Nothing. Sure, an occasional email gets shot around—you know, the unproductive kind that involves 18 people—that cites stats from the research report as some type of justification for a new plan of attack.
But it typically ends at that. Why?
Because when research is ordered—be it extensive or narrow in scope—there is rarely a plan for how different individuals or entire departments are going to systematically review it, digest it, and incorporate it into their planning.
I happened to be privy to one of these planning emails last week, sent from the COO of a medium-sized software company to his staff regarding the group that was coming into to present some market research. I am paraphrasing to protect the innocent, but it read something like this:
The Johnny Come Lately Research Group is coming in to present its research next week. Let me remind you that we decided to hire and pay the Johnny Come Lately Research Group because many of you felt that we were flying blind in terms of the real demand and consumer attitudes towards our category of products. We know the research will be relevant and high quality, because we guided the entire process. Listen intently, because your teams will all have exactly one week to take what you heard and saw and work it into your 2011 plans. This data is not intended to represent cool numbers that we can throw at investors and partners, but rather data that shapes exactly how plan and execute in areas like products, services, communications, marketing, and business development.
I couldn’t have said it better myself.
Michael Sweeney is a managing partner at Right Source Marketing.
