Keeping research respondents engaged and interested in research
•Télécharger en tant que PPTX, PDF•
1 j'aime•602 vues
In the push to provide actionable insights to clients and business partners, researchers should not forget another important stakeholder: the respondent. Respondents are people but are not always treated as such. Learn how to drive respondent engagement.
Recommandé
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
Tendances
Tendances (20)
Similaire à Keeping research respondents engaged and interested in research
Similaire à Keeping research respondents engaged and interested in research (20)
Dernier
Dernier (20)
Keeping research respondents engaged and interested in research
- 1. Respondents of the Future Keeping respondents interested in research in a feedback-obsessed world. Lorin A. Drake Consumer Insights Manager, Publix Super Markets, Inc. 1
- 2. Why even care about this topic? 2
- 3. 3
- 4. That’s a lot of feedback! 4
- 5. How do we keep people interested in research? 5
- 9. Big Idea #2 Respondents are customers! 9
- 10. Big Idea #3 The Market Research Industry no longer has the corner on the market as it relates to consumer feedback 10
- 11. Big Idea #4 People are tired of giving feedback – unless they’re engaged, passionate or have a stake in the outcome. How was your order at Subway? Go to www.crappysurvey.com 11
- 12. Big Idea #5: It’s an ADHD world Then why are surveys still 10-20 minutes+? Make it easy. Make it quick. Make it fun. Or I’m not playing. Vines are 6 secs Tweets are 140 characters Hitting the “Like” button takes <1 second The new ‘5x5’ environment 12
- 13. Who gets it? 13
- 14. And.. 14
- 15. And… 15
- 16. World’s shortest (and possibly best) survey 16
- 17. Who doesn’t get it? 17
- 18. Followed by… 18
- 19. Is there any hope? Endangered Species #1: Panda Bear Endangered Species #2: Market researcher 19
- 20. How can we get better? 5 ideas to increase respondent engagement 1. Humanized surveys 2. Short(er) surveys 3. Insights Communities 4. Go mobile! 5. A glimpse into a potential future 20
- 21. 1. Humanized surveys “Based on any advertising, such as TV commercials, roadside billboards, banners on Internet Web sites, or other similar forms of advertising, please list in the text box below the products or types of products that you yourself have seen publicly advertised between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2014. “ (Please type your answer in the box below.) 21
- 22. How I feel when I read that question 22
- 24. 1. Humanized surveys Source: Forget gamification; try writing a humanized survey. Published in Quirk’s Marketing Research Review, February, 2014. Author: Annie Pettit. 24
- 25. 1. Humanized surveys Source: Forget gamification; try writing a humanized survey. Published in Quirk’s Marketing Research Review, February, 2014. Author: Annie Pettit. 25
- 26. 2. Shorter surveys 26 Source: Effects of splitting long surveys into two. Annie Pettit, Ph.D. Published in MRA’s Alert Magazine, Fourth Quarter 2014..
- 27. 2. Shorter surveys Satisfaction Scores: At the end of each survey, a 4-item grid question to rate the survey was provided. The shorter surveys received significantly more positive scores in terms of the length and recommending the survey. • The last open-ended question was a voluntary question. 75% of responses on the long survey were positive. By contrast, 86% were positive for Short Survey A and 93% were positive for Short Survey B. 27
- 29. Why join? 29
- 30. How do you drive engagement among online community members? 1. Provide a meaningful proposition 2. Get the composition right 3. Create a private, safe and intimate environment 4. Tailor your facilitation 5. Leverage your brand 6. More nuanced approach 30 Source: A Successful research community requires a mix of strategies. Manila Austin. Published in Quirk’s Marketing Research Review, April 2012. Pg. 46.
- 31. How Member Satisfaction is Correlated with Participation But Varies by Community Type Participation metrics This community is a trusted forum for sharing ideas I feel I can give candid feedback to the brand Technology buyers Average # of posts/week 0.16* % Weeks actively engaged 0.23** 0.17** % Weeks lurking High net-worth investors Average # of posts/week 0.17* % Weeks actively engaged % Weeks lurking (0.16*) 31
- 32. How Member Satisfaction is Correlated with Participation But Varies by Community Type Participation metrics The brand is truly concerned with what we have to say. Teachers Average # of posts/week 0.22* % Weeks actively engaged 0.22* 32
- 33. The 1% rule 1% 9% 90% 33 Create content: 1% 9% edit or modify content Consume only- no contributions Source: The 64% Rule: What real customer engagement looks like. (Communispace Corporation.)
- 34. Insights Communities: the 64% Rule 34Source: The 64% Rule: What real customer engagement looks like..(Communispace Corporation.)
- 35. More activities = More participation 35Source: The 64% Rule: What real customer engagement looks like. (Communispace Corporation.)
- 36. To drive engagement: Smaller is better • Typical insights community is 300-500 members • Average monthly participation in communities with >500 members is 61.1%. That is 6% lower than communities with <300 members. • Small “gated” communities yield high(er) participation. • Exclusivity, intimacy, privacy, the opportunity to forge relationships with other members and with the sponsoring brand, high-touch facilitation, and the knowledge that one’s voice is being heard– are all important factors driving engagement. • That and size of the community. 36Source: The 64% Rule: What real customer engagement looks like. (Communispace Corporation.)
- 37. Don’t forget to reward 37Source: The 64% Rule: What real customer engagement looks like.. (Communispace Corporation.)
- 38. 4. Go mobile! 38Source: Mobile apps overtake PC Internet usage in U.S. CNN/Money. February 28. 2014.
- 39. 4. Go mobile Source: 14 striking findings from 2014. Pew Research Center.. Americans are now more attached to their cellphones and internet access than their televisions or landline telephones Over half of internet users now say the internet would be “very hard” to give up Among this devoted group, 61% say the internet is essential to them. Translated to the whole population, 39% of all Americans feel they absolutely need to have internet access. 39
- 40. 40
- 41. The news business is now 50% mobile. Breaking news is even higher. Source: SlideShare presentation entitled ‘We’re 50% mobile. Now what?” Sources include CNN, The New York Times and Internet aggregator Buzzfeed.
- 42. ONA 2014 #halfmobile hit 50% in August 2014
- 43. ONA 2014 #halfmobile NYT hit 50% articles views in April 2013. Source: NYT Internal 50%
- 44. ONA 2014 #halfmobile NYT Mobile visitors surpassed desktop in August 2014. Source: comScore
- 45. When news breaks, mobile is 65%+ of NYT traffic. Source: NYT Internal ONA 2014 #halfmobile
- 46. What is the market research industry doing to prepare for… 50% mobile? 75% mobile? 100% mobile?
- 47. Source: Surveys: The perfect time to optimize your content for mobile. Sundog Interactive, April 29. 2013. Progress bar Easy to read Easy to select choice Easy to move forward Easy to go back Back button 47
- 48. Exact same survey you would see if you accessed the survey on a larger computer screen. Without zooming in and scanning around there is no way to read the questions, and it’s not easy to tap your answers and see if you are almost done. Why waste your time? 48
- 49. 5. Research in 2025 and beyond 49
- 51. 1. Business Class Research 51
- 52. 1. Business Class Research 52
- 53. 2. SEO for Research? 53
- 55. Thank you! • For questions, or a copy of the presentation: lorin.drake@publix.com (863) 688-1188 x58901 • For career opportunities: http://corporate.publix.com/careers 55
Notes de l'éditeur
- This presentation is not about actionable insights. It’s not about how to be a better business partner. Today’s presentation is about a stakeholder group that is vital to successful research—yet somehow often overlooked. Today we are talking about respondents—those people who voluntarily participate in the research process—sometimes for a tangible reward and sometimes not. My goal for this presentation is to get you thinking more about respondents. Because without respondents, none of us would have jobs. If I can get you to think more about respondents after today’s sessions, I will consider my mission to be a success.
- The percentage of households in a sample that are successfully interviewed – the response rate – has fallen dramatically. At Pew Research, the response rate of a typical telephone survey was 36% in 1997 and is just 9% today. The general decline in response rates is evident across nearly all types of surveys, in the United States and abroad. At the same time, greater effort and expense are required to achieve even the diminished response rates of today. These challenges have led many to question whether surveys are still providing accurate and unbiased information. Although response rates have decreased in landline surveys, the inclusion of cell phones – necessitated by the rapid rise of households with cell phones but no landline – has further contributed to the overall decline in response rates for telephone surveys.
- I’d like to share 5 ideas with you. I use the term “big idea” somewhat facetiously as these are more intended to be things to get you thinking about this topic.
- Soylent Green is a 1973 American science fiction film directed by Richard Fleischer and starring Charlton Heston. The film depicts the investigation into the murder of a wealthy businessman in a dystopian future suffering from pollution, overpopulation, depleted resources, poverty, dying oceans, and all year humidity due to the greenhouse effect. Much of the population survives on processed food rations, including "soylent green". The 20th century's industrialization has left the world permanently overcrowded, polluted and stagnant by the turn of the 21st century. In 2022, with 40 million people in New York City alone, housing is dilapidated and overcrowded; homeless people fill the streets; about half are unemployed, the few "lucky" ones with jobs are only barely scraping by themselves, and food and working technology is scarce. Most of the population survives on rations produced by the Soylent Corporation, whose newest product is Soylent Green, a green wafer advertised to contain "high-energy plankton" from the world's oceans, more nutritious and palatable than its predecessors "Red" and "Yellow," but in short supply. New York City Police Department detective Frank Thorn (Charlton Heston) lives with his aged friend Solomon "Sol" Roth (Edward G. Robinson). Due to Roth's advanced age, he remembers life before its current miserable state, and he routinely waxes nostalgic for his youth when the air was clean and the weather wasn't perpetually summer. Roth takes Soylent's oceanographic reports to a like-minded group of researchers known as the Exchange, who agree that the oceans no longer produce the plankton from which Soylent Green is reputedly made, and infer that it must be made from human remains, as this is the only conceivable supply of protein that matches the known production. Unable to live with this discovery, Roth seeks assisted suicide at a government clinic called "Home." Thorn rushes to stop him, but arrives too late, and is mesmerized by the euthanasia process's visual and musical montage – a display of forests, wild animals, rivers, and ocean life, now extinct. Under the influence of a lethal drug, Roth tells Thorn his discovery and begs him to expose the truth. To this end, Thorn stows himself aboard a garbage truck to the disposal center, where he sees human corpses converted into Soylent Green. Returning to make his report, he is ambushed by Fielding and others. He phones his precinct for backup but the precinct is engaged on a priority call. Thorn asks to be connected with Shirl, and to be "cut in" when the precinct is free. Thorn retreats into a cathedral filled with homeless people. In the ensuing fight, he kills Fielding but is seriously injured. When the police arrive, Thorn urges Hatcher to spread the word that "Soylent Green is people!".
- It’s easy to forget that respondents are people. We think about our clients. We think about getting our questions answered. But how often do we think about the respondent experience? Who are these mysterious people taking our surveys? Answer: they are people just like you and me!
- A customer is someone you perform a service for. A customer is someone you need in order to stay in business. Without customers/respondents you cannot do research. Therefore, it is important that respondents (customers) have a good customer experience when participating in research. Hey, that was fun. I’d like to do it again! How differently would we write surveys or moderator’s guides or screeners if we thought of respondents as customers?
- We’re over-surveyed. Every sandwich we eat, every taco we order—we’re constantly being barraged with request for feedback. Opportunities to win sweepstakes or shopping sprees or a lifetime supply of bean burritos simply aren’t working anymore. Also, we survey people but never share the results with them. How interesting would it be to see the results of a survey you participated in? We use this in B2B research as an incentive—why can’t we do it with consumers? Have you ever seen those instant surveys where you vote on a single question and then see how everyone else voted—pretty powerful stuff.
- 3. The new 5x5 reality Today’s consumer is willing to interact spontaneously during an interview for no longer than five minutes. Face-to-face communication is being replaced by communication via FaceTime, Skype or Hangouts. And most will interact via a five-inch screen (the smartphone), hence the new 5x5 reality. On the bright side, researchers get real-time, location- and context-specific information from respondents. Future marketing models will be loaded with a string of rich information snippets that require advanced methodologies but generate almost real-time and enriched insights. As a consequence of the 5x5 reality, traditional long-form interviews will be segmented and doled out over time. It will still be one assignment but executed in different steps, building upon what we learn from one step to the next.
- Sorry, CNET, I’m out. Not only does this show every sign of making me miserable, it also doesn’t appear to have anything to do with your business, since I can’t imagine a product review site launching its own rewards program. If the research looked like it was directly connected to improving the site I actually was interested in viewing when I went to cnet.com this morning, I might have been willing to go further with this, but not for this.
- Respondents were sourced from the Peanut Labs online research panel, a non-probability incentivized source of prescreened adults who have agreed to participate in online surveys. Test (n = 530) and control (n = 532) groups were matched on U.S. census-rep demographics (age, gender, ethnicity, Hispanic, region). The research was conducted with a non-branded survey about computer- and video-gaming opinions and behaviors. The survey was first written using traditional survey wording and style. It was then copied into a second version where about 90 percent of the questions were rewritten in a more casual and humanized style. Some of the revisions were very slight, incorporating only the addition of a few words, whereas other revisions were complete rewrites. Some rewrites ended up in questions or answer options that were much longer or shorter than the original version. Regardless of whether the question and answer at hand was revised, responders in the test group would have been exposed to all of the previous humanized rewrites. Table 1 provides several examples of matching questions from both versions of the survey.
- Figure 1 shows that the humanized survey generated slightly more favorable data quality results for the straightlining, open-ends and speeding measures. Additionally, the humanized survey generated a lower overall failure rate. These results suggest that the humanized survey did not create data quality issues but may have in fact improved data quality.
- Five data quality measures were designed to identify data that did not conform to what was expected. Straightlining: Failed if data demonstrated straightlining to a half-positive, half-negative eight-question grid. Open-ends: Failed if less than 10 characters were provided in response to a request for “Three reasons why…” Speeding: Failed if the survey was completed in the slowest 5 percent of completion times. Red herrings: Failed if two fake computer games were selected. Acquiescing: Failed if 14 or more items in a list of 16 were selected
- In this example, the researchers took a 20-minute survey about hotels, airlines, and loyalty programs and split it into two, splitting the incentive as well. However, it wasn’t a simple chop. They were careful to include matching sections from the beginning, middle, and end of the long survey in each of the two short surveys for comparison. This resulted in two, 12-minute surveys. Six hundred U.S. Census representative individuals completed the long survey, while each short survey was completed by 300 U.S. Census representative individuals. Table 1 illustrates the breakdown of the three surveys used in this study
- Following Instructions: In two cases, people were asked to select one item from a list where the question was set-up as a “select all that apply” question. In both cases, people answering the shorter survey were more likely to follow the instructions correctly. Six open-ended questions were evaluated for quality. After coding for poor responses such as “asdf” and “NA”, five of the six questions generated better data for the shorter surveys. Satisfaction Scores: At the end of each survey, a 4-item grid question to rate the survey was provided. The shorter surveys received significantly more positive scores in terms of the length and recommending the survey. With regard to ease of answering the survey and how boring it was, the short and long surveys fared the same – with the long survey scoring in-between the two short surveys. Positive Comments: The very last open-ended question was a voluntary question that did not need to be filled in before the responder could continue to the next page. Where 75 percent of voluntary responses on the long survey were positive, 86 percent (Short Survey A) and 93 percent (Short Survey B) on the short survey were positive.
- Market research online communities (MROCs) are an increasingly popular research method. They allow market insights professionals to engage with consumers via a number of different research activities, and provide in-depth insights in a relatively quick nature. They are, in most instances, more cost-efficient than traditional forms of qualitative and quantitative research. According to industry research, the fastest growing major new research methodology is the use of market research online communities. Greenbook’s most recent GRIT study (GreenBook Research Industry Trends) reports 36% of client-side researchers currently use MROCs. The most high profile communities are those run by consumer facing companies, such as retailers, banks, consumer packaged goods, media, and travel. Many major grocery chains, Wegmans, Safeway, Lowes Foods, Whole Foods, Kroger, and Wal Mart just to name a few, use MROCs. MROCs provide a platform where companies can engage directly with customers in ongoing, two-way or even group conversations, as opposed to the one-way interaction of traditional research methods. Traditional research methods rely on “asking” questions, where communities emphasize “listening” to customers.
- There is intrinsic motivation to join and participate in an online community because of a relationship with a brand. This would be especially true for Publix because of our customer-centric focus, and the deep relationships we have with our customer base. People who sign up for panels and communities do so because they want to be involved and want to be heard. Listening to customers and acting upon their feedback can create greater loyalty and advocacy. The most common reasons customers will participate in a community include: To be part of a club To feel exclusive To have an impact To get insider knowledgeable To give advice
- Stood the test of time While community design is arguably as much of an art as it is a science, the following tactics have stood the test of time for us, helping us deliver value across multiple demographics and industry verticals, and in support of any number of business objectives. Provide a meaningful proposition for members. First and foremost, remember that online research communities are intentional and purpose-driven. The community designer must create and communicate that purpose, which becomes a center of gravity for members and which can help differentiate the research community from public social networks. So be it a shared experience with a medical condition, being frequent shoppers of the same retailer, being fashion mavens or style leaders or having professional interests in common, finding that common bond that creates social glue for the community is a critical first step. Get the community composition right. Hand-in-hand with creating a compelling, shared purpose is the need to be thoughtful and targeted about who to invite into the community. Recruitment costs can be expensive but the cost of assembling the wrong group of people is even higher. Not only do community members need to meet specific criteria as determined by the research objectives, they must also find the notion of interacting with one another interpersonally appealing. So research design in online communities is just as much about designing an engaging social context as it is about writing good survey questions or moderating discussions. Create a private, safe and intimate environment. Unless the business purpose is to spread word-of-mouth (which is arguably a marketing, not a market research, goal), then the person-environment fit is almost always improved by keeping the community small and private. From the members’ perspective, the fact that the community is closed and exclusive makes them feel as though they are participating in something special. Additionally, privacy – along with the intimacy and trust that develop as a result of it – are crucial contextual elements if the content of the community is at all sensitive. From the brand’s point of view, closed communities allow companies to test products early on in the innovation stream, to get to know individual members in ways that would be impossible in a large and public network, and – conversely perhaps – to hear a greater range of opinions. One advantage of a small and private online environment is that it is difficult to remain anonymous or to be a passive participant; this means that the formation of cliques, which do occur in public settings, is deterred, creating a more inclusive dialogue with a greater diversity of members Tailor your facilitation. The value proposition is based on more than the structural elements of community design, which are often determined before a community launches. Of equal importance are the ongoing interpersonal actions community managers perform on a daily basis. While cultural norms are often codified in member agreements and information on the homepage, they are enacted and reinforced daily by facilitators. We have learned, for example, that the style of communication and activity design are very different in B2B versus B2C communities. It is fine and even welcomed in a community of moms, for example, to field activities on lighthearted or sentimental topics. In business customer communities, whose members look for and expect a much a more business-focused experience, communication and research activities need to be clearly aligned with members’ professional interests. Leverage your brand. Research has shown that branded communities consistently outperform unbranded ones (Lerman and Austin, 2006) and companies should not underestimate the power of a brand to bring people together. Even for low-involvement categories (e.g., fabric softeners, toothpaste, motor oil) we have found that people are energized by the opportunity to engage with companies when they believe their time and effort are being well spent. More nuanced In order to engage people in online market research we must view them in more nuanced ways than one-dimensional demographic or consumer categories. Historically, the measure of good research has been to mitigate and control systematic error as much as possible (Austin, 2012). In online research communities today, however, we must figure out how to engage people before we can consider measuring (or predicting!) their behavior. Thus the design of the setting – putting in place those features that will make a given community compelling to members for various reasons – is a new core competency.
- Despite the explosion of social media, the “1% rule” first identified in the early 1990s, still largely holds true. Opinion, feedback and knowledge-sharing forums such as blogs and rating and review sites (Trip Advisor, Netflix, Amazon, Yelp, etc. etc.) show the same social technographics that they did at their inception: 1% of people create content, 9% edit or modify that content, and 90% view the content without contributing. While roughly 35% of the Facebook users who log in weekly update their status, that content is generally private and inaccessible. To market researchers, and the public feedback gathering tools within Facebook –as of this writing, a simple polling capability – show response rates of about 5% (based on very limited data).
- In contrast, in the private, recruited 300-500 person insight communities run by Communispace Corporation, an average of 64.1% of community members contribute new content every month, and only 7.5% “lurk,” i.e. read content but do not contribute.
- More opportunity breeds more participation A more significant variable than either community type (B2B vs. B2C) or industry vertical is the volume of facilitator-initiated activities each month, where an activity can be a discussion, survey, brainstorm, image or video gallery, or other special assignment such as journaling projects, mind maps, mobile diaries, etc. Just as there is an optimal community size (discussed on the next slide), there is also an optimal number of activities per month. With fewer than four activities per month, there simply isn’t enough fresh content to keep members engaged. With more than twelve (when fielded to the community as a whole, as opposed to smaller subgroups), members become overwhelmed by too many activities competing for their attention. However, even within that four-to-twelve monthly activity range, we see notable variations in participation and lurker rates. Service levels that include more monthly activities yield a higher rate of participation and number of contributions per member. In communities where facilitators start at least seven activities per month (and the typical client engagement is for eight activities per month), participation rates are over 10% higher, and lurker rates almost 4% lower than in communities offering a maximum of four business-related activities per month.
- To best deliver on a community’s purpose, which is to generate deep insight and engage consumers in co-creation, large numbers are neither desirable nor effective. Data from the current study echo findings from our 2007 research, indicating that when it comes to community, it is definitely possible to be too big. Average monthly participation in communities with over 500 members is 61.1%, which is 6% lower than that in communities with fewer than 300 members. Prior research by Communispace has revealed several reasons why small, “gated” communities yield high participation. Exclusivity, intimacy, privacy, the opportunity to forge relationships with other members and with the sponsoring brand,high-touch facilitation, and the knowledge that one’s voice is being heard– these are all important factors driving engagement. And the total number of members – whether the group feels like a large reception vs. a crowd vs. a mob – is a major determinant of whether those essential conditions can exist.
- NEW YORK (CNNMoney) Americans used smartphone and tablet apps more than PCs to access the Internet since one year ago this month -- the first time that has ever happened. Mobile devices accounted for 55% of Internet usage in the United States in January. Apps made up 47% of Internet traffic and 8% of traffic came from mobile browsers, according to data from comScore, cited Thursday by research firm Enders Analysis. PCs clocked in at 45%. Although total Internet usage on mobile devices has previously exceeded that on PCs, this is the first time it's happened for app usage alone. The shift follows a freefall in PC sales, which suffered their worst decline in history last year. Smartphone adoption, meanwhile, increased 39%, acording to research firm IDC. This trend will likely continue thanks to improved user experience on mobile apps and the expansion of high-speed 4G access, said Andrew Lipsman, vice president of marketing and insights at comScore (SCOR). As of January, 55% of American adults had smartphones, while 42% owned tablets, according to the Pew Research Center.
- Americans are now more attached to their cellphones and internet access than their televisions or landline telephones, marking a shift in their communications habits since 2006. Over half of internet users now say the internet would be “very hard” to give up. And among this devoted group, 61% say the internet is essential to them, either for work or other reasons. Translated to the whole population, 39% of all Americans feel they absolutely need to have internet access.
- In the six years that Flurry has been reporting on our mobile app usage, and in some cases addiction, we’ve seen stunning growth. This last year was no different. According to Flurry Analytics, in 2014 overall app usage grew by 76%. In this context, Flurry defines app usage as a user opening an app and recording what we call a session. In 2014, Shopping, Utilities & Productivity, and Messaging experienced triple-digit growth and were the key drivers. As our mobile devices become more and more a part of our everyday lives, we are increasingly using them for always-on shopping, working, and communication. Where years past have seen massive growth in games and entertainment, 2014 was the year apps got down to serious business. Every app store category has again seen session growth in 2014. While 2013 was the year messaging apps took off, 2014 was the year retail came to mobile in a big way. Sessions in shopping apps on iOS and Android increased by a whopping 174% year-over-year (note: for iOS, the “Lifestyle” category includes more than shopping). On Android alone, the shopping category increased by 220%. Smartphone users opened more Utilities & Productivity apps in 2014, confirming that our phones and tablets have become indispensable devices that help us work and keep our lives organized. We need look no further than Microsoft’s mobile moves this past year. The quintessential productivity suite - Office - is now available on mobile, and not just Windows devices but Apple and Android. Microsoft also made other moves to show its commitment to mobile by buying email app Acompli. It makes sense that productivity in the cloud should be mobile-first, powering the “anytime, anywhere” nature of the way we work today.
- This example comes from a Toyota dealership in Denver. At the dealership the customer was assigned a customer representative, and when her car was finished she indicated that she would receive a survey by email, and it was extremely important to her and the dealership that I fill it out and give my honest feedback. A few days later a link to the survey appeared in the inbox of her personal email. She almost never logs in to her personal email on my laptop. Rather, the endless reminders about sales at Nordstrom and that bills are due just get checked on her phone, so only work email needs to be pulled up on a larger screen. She appreciates (especially as a marketer) that for businesses, these surveys can offer some really valuable insight. However, she will admit that she is lazy enough to pass on a survey if it means she has to turn to her computer (or go and get her bag, or set a reminder for when she is near her computer again) in order to complete it. She decided to just tap the link to the survey on her phone and give it a try. She didn’t have very high hopes for what it would look like, but she was pleasantly surprised to see that the survey was perfectly optimized to be done on a mobile device. The text was easy to read, it was easy to tap her choice, go forward or go back, and it was nice to have the progress bar at the top. While she was surprised to have had such a good experience, the more she thought about it the more she wondered why every single business isn’t making their surveys work on mobile devices. Please note: Optimized for mobile does not mean that you can take the survey using a mobile device. Optimized for mobile means that the survey is programmed, customized and tailored entirely for the mobile user experience. It also means taking advantage of the unique features and benefits that the mobile environment offers. This is a time when your business needs something from someone else, and the participant doesn’t usually get anything in return. You should make the experience as easy as possible, and that means no matter what device someone opens the survey on, it should work. Lots of proponents of mobile content complain that even if a website has a mobile version, it might not include all the pages really needed or, at the end of the day, it just doesn’t work well enough. This would be an excellent example of that. Maybe your home page works well on mobile, but what about the pages people are likely to click into after receiving an email?
- This survey came from a customer who had some maintenance work done in her apartment recently and they, again, sent her an email with a survey and asked that she fill it out. When she clicked into it, this is what the survey looked like. It’s not a total train wreck, but it is the exact same thing you would see if you accessed the survey on a larger computer screen. Without zooming in and scanning around there is no way to read the questions, and it’s not easy to tap your answers and see if you are almost done. If your customers have that sort of an experience on their mobile device, they might very will just give up and not send you the feedback you claimed was so valuable. As you go forward, consider mobile, or work to make your mobile experience better, don’t forget the times that might involve asking customers for a favor. I’m guessing I’m not the only one busily checking emails on my phone only to forget about them a few minutes later. The purpose of content optimized for mobile is to give people what they need, when and where they need it. Why should a survey be any different?
- How many of you got to Miami on an airplane? [ask for show of hands] How many of you felt like this guy on the plane? [again, show of hands]
- How many of you got to Miami like these people? If airlines have separate experiences for different passengers—why can’t research? Should every respondent have the same experience? Why? Business class research: For the real high rollers and super-hard-to-reach participants, incentives aren’t enough: you need to retool the whole research experience to make it as seductive and delightful as possible – a kind of first- or business-class research to set against the economy experience we usually offer. Whether this is a bespoke, beautifully designed and smooth online questionnaire or a luxurious one-on-one interview, there will be some participants who are definitely more equal than others. Example: health care, such as doctors or other highly specialized, highly paid, highly sought after individuals. Or HR or IT executives. Again, highly sought after populations.
- 6. Spontaneous surveys: The rest of us might find ourselves faced with authorless surveys. If we can be served ads based on our searches and interests, why not questions? Researchers will be thinking in terms of short, highly modular questions anyway – release those as streams of individual attitudinal questions and let Google serve them individually. Eventually it might auto-generate its own questions and let you buy “information terms” like you buy ad words.