I've never been one to spend a whole lot of time agonizing about the state of the research profession or the kinds of people we should have in it. But a few weeks back when I posted something on eye candy in Web surveys it attracted a comment from Chris Ryan that raised the more general issue of the usability of Web surveys, whether plain or fancy. The obvious implication of the comment (at least to me) is that researchers are busy designing these graphical presentations (plain and fancy) of survey questions and arguing about design when in most cases we really don't know a whole lot about usability. We are, in fact, mostly amateurs.
This reminded me of a conference talk I heard Pete Cape from SSI give earlier in the year in which he started by asking everyone in the room to stand up. Then he asked everyone who had wanted to be in MR since they were a kid to sit down. Nobody sat down. Next he asked about high school and then college and then grad school and when he finished most of the room was still standing. His point was that most of us did not aspire to careers in research and few of us were actually trained in school to do it, we just have sort of fallen into it. We are, in fact, mostly amateurs.
I freely admit that the "amateur" tag works on me as well. I have a Ph.D. in History, which is not exactly the ideal training ground for market researchers. But at least I had the good fortune to spend over a decade at a place (NORC) loaded with first class survey researchers and survey methodologists. I learned an enormous amount in that time and, as corny as it sounds, some of my best friends are survey methodologists. None of this made me a good survey methodologist, but at least I know good work when I see it and, frankly, the more I look around the industry the less really good survey work I see.
Then I read a short opinion piece in IJMR by Anthony Tasgal arguing that what MR needs is "more seers, fewer craftsman." Unlike me, he sees us an industry of skilled craftsmen (and craftswomen) churning out our work like the loyal and hardworking Boxer in Animal Farm. He makes the point that we are living in a time of dramatic change in marketing, communications, and consuming habits brought on principally by the Web and our industry must change with it. To effect that change, we need different kinds of people, fewer craftsmen and more creative types. Seers. To that end he tells us to send our "people out to art galleries, take them to the cinema, give them non-marketing books to read, and allow them to turn their wandering into wonder."
In the same talk I mentioned above Pete Cape said, "We have allowed our industry to be taken over by venture capitalists and technology geeks." Given that perspective, more seers would be a real improvement. But let's be careful. It seems to me that the MR industry has always rested on our ability to assemble information, evaluate evidence, and draw conclusions that help our clients make good business decisions. Mostly that has meant doing surveys. I am willing to accept the fact that our future might be fewer surveys, or at least less emphasis on surveys as the centerpiece of research. It's harder for me to believe that the empirical part of what we do, the ability to evaluate evidence in a systematic way, and the need for disciplined thought about a client's problem will go the way of the dodo. We probably need more craftsmen, not fewer. But the craft surely is changing.
Comments
5 responses to “And now, for a little pointless rambling”
I love your anecdote about Pete Cape’s presentation: one I will definitely repeat! I would say that while many of us are amateurs most of us are also enthusiasts. And hopefully we can all channel our enthusiasm into improving our skills at craftsmanship.
I’m headed out early today to catch a movie.
I’m an absolute amateur and will happily admit or deny even *being* a market researcher as the situation requires!
I’m probably also more ‘seer’ than ‘craftsman’, though when I saw Tasgal give that talk at the MRS I ended up more on the craftspeople’s side: seemed to me classic MR “why can’t we be the cool kids?” handwringing, though maybe it reads better than it listened.
But – to be productive – one positive trend I have seen recently is the proliferation of research blogs and social media activity by people who genuinely ARE passionate about the craft and skills of research: yourself of course, Jeffery Henning, Annie Pettit, Katie Harris, Cathy Harrison, lots of the people on Tom HC Anderson’s LinkedIn group… At the moment this bunch doesn’t necessarily have much reach in terms of voice but it’s those kind of proactive and pro-MR initiatives that’ll be a bedrock for keeping standards high in future. Whether or not social media transforms research, it has the potential to greatly improve its self-image and self-belief.
I agree that the craft is changing. Rather than attracting different types of people, we need to use the skills we have to diversify into new areas which add value to our organisations. For example, in my clientside team based within a b2b media company, we have expanded from traditional market research to offering advice on the user experience of our websites. We use the skills honed through our MR backgrounds to do this.
I think there is a recognition that perhaps we had swung too far in trying to be cool, edgy media types and had forgotten a little bit about the core skills. I’ve certainly seen a lot more talk about research craft in the recent past than I did when I first started out.
I always sum market research up in the simplest possible terms – finding things out and telling people about it. The challenge for the researcher is that the skills required to do those things effectively are almost completely diametrically opposed to one another – the design of clever sample plans and questionnaires and the interrogation of data do require some creativity, but they are fundamentally left-brain activities. Building a compelling story from that data and conveying it in an interesting and engaging way are more in the right brain camp.
I think it’s very difficult to find people who are exceptional at both of these things – particularly when, as you say, most people stumble into research in the first place.