Checon Pesquisa

Category: market research

  • How to hire a research firm?

    How to hire a research firm?

    There are several aspects to be analyzed when hiring a market research company. The starting point is to make it clear that no one (including the research companies themselves) is better acquainted with all facets of the problem than the contractor.

    Therefore, for the study to be successful, it is essential to share this knowledge and doubts with the future service provider, that is, conducting a survey involves details of confidential strategic plans, confidential ideas, fears or changes in the development of products & services. shared.

    In this way, the relationship needs to be based on the confidence that the identified points, whether flaws, weaknesses or opportunities, will only be used by those entitled to.

    Another aspect involved is that of competence. An important prerequisite is that the research company knows this market, having carried out work in the area, not needing to “learn” everything from scratch to start the analyzes.

    Finally, there is a commitment, since the team responsible for the study must be deeply involved with the matter in order to effectively achieve success in reaching the requested conclusions. The basic premise is that, if the questions were trivial, it would not even be necessary to contract the research.

    The 3 factors mentioned are conditions to be fulfilled and equally relevant to the success of the research project and the relationship between the parties.

    The commercial discussion of the project should only continue with the fulfillment of these requirements. However, as the evaluation of these points is not trivial, I allow myself to highlight some tips to guide this analysis:

    • What is the size of the research company in relation to the size of the work? If it is too large, there may be some failure in the commitment, since the study may be carried out by interns or professional-beginners. On the other hand, being too small, the lack may be of competence and experience in similar projects.

    • How are the research company’s facilities? Are there rooms, equipment, infrastructure, even if minimal, or is it just virtual, working in homes, in parallel to other activities or even only by cell phone?

    • Does the company focus on research, or does it simply “also do research”, in addition to marketing, communication, advertising, recruitment & selection, …?

    • Which company customers can give you a reference?

    • How long has the company been in business? Is it linked to any class entity in the research area such as ABEP, ABIPEME, SBPM, ESOMAR …?

    • In research work, what activities are carried out and which are outsourced? If there is outsourcing, are they in the core or middle activity? What is the control over researchers in the field, training, supervision, checking, typing and recruiting? Are these activities carried out in other host cities or by strangers such as telemarketers, computer service providers, etc.?

    • Who are the company’s employees and who will be responsible for the development of the project? What is the professional and academic training of these interlocutors, in whose hands your future, or investment decision is being placed?

    Finally, it is good to keep in mind the question of accumulated knowledge.

    The relationship with a research company should aim at the long term, and not be restricted to specific projects, such as advertising agencies, where you don’t contract (at least shouldn’t) just for the product launch or every new date commemorative!

    The relationship, in principle, should follow a logic and be guided by measurable goals, at longer lasting intervals.

    However, in research there are still frequent price measurements for carrying out works, considering this factor exclusively. Not that this is not important, quite the contrary, it just shouldn’t be the only criterion.

    With each survey, the target market can be better debugged, but not all information is always presented, either because they are not relevant at that moment to that specific hypothesis, or because they are secondary to the project under discussion, or even because of the short time for presentation and discussion of results.

    However, this unique and exclusive knowledge, still in the possession of the research company, is already the right of the contracting company and constitutes a differential for subsequent studies, practically at zero cost, and with a great multiplier effect!

    Trends and behavioral changes are now more clearly perceived, since experience already exists, even more so if the same research company has the opportunity to constantly deepen, with successive work, such knowledge!

    But such a situation will only become real as the relationship continues and the new projects bring the opportunity for the accumulated knowledge to be shared.

  • Is market research expensive? I must do?

    Is market research expensive? I must do?

    Should I do market research?

    Before answering whether companies should do market research, it is worth reflecting on the following Brazilian reality: more than 71% of new companies close over the first five years! On the other hand, the understanding of “expensive” may be that of:
    • Invest in equipment, raw material, packaging, hiring, records, lawyer, accountant, human resources and not having the expected return.
    • Apply equity or third parties’ funds after a few months “discover” that there is no market for the product!
    • Spend on design, decoration, rent, renovation, stock, advertising, marketing and only then come to the conclusion that the profile of the clientele that has access to the chosen point of sale is not that of compatible income to consume the services offered!

    The concept of “expensive” is, therefore, very subjective and could not be analyzed only in absolute values! All of these situations are examples that, in a large number of times, explain the high percentage of enterprises that are unable to survive or consolidate.

    But they also demonstrate how the research could guide the decision-making of entrepreneurs that involve risk.

    There is still no awareness that research is carried out to reduce business risks, to eliminate “guesswork” (I think it will work, I think it will sell, I think the consumer will want to buy, I think there is a market , I think it will be cool …) and to test hypotheses!

    The aspect to be considered in the question “is market research expensive?” It is always: what is the relationship between the cost of the necessary research vis-à-vis the amount you intend to invest? In other words, if the project in question requires a certain volume of resources, how much of this amount should be directed to research in order to reduce uncertainties?

    Nobody does a search just because it is interesting, chic or trendy!

    Market research exists and is developed to answer objective questions, clarify doubts that involve risks, provide guidance on strategies and positions, support decision making, in short to help companies grow, projects to be carried out and ideas turned into results!

    Serious research considers data collected from the past, monitors information from the present, and signals trends and directions for the future.

    However, to properly process this set of numbers and indicators, experience, accumulated knowledge and much, much study and analysis are required. But that would already be part of another theme, the subject of the next article, about the most appropriate criteria for choosing a research company.

  • Customer, how are you? How do I understand it?

    Customer, how are you? How do I understand it?

    Knowing the customer

    The basic requirement for the success of any enterprise is the knowledge and monitoring of your market and, more specifically, your customer’s expectations and needs

    To the desperation of businessmen, consumers, however, have become increasingly invisible to companies.

    This change is the result of a radical transformation that has been causing the power to migrate from organizations to customers.

    Current days

    Nowadays the customer has started to dictate the forms of relationship by which he wants to keep in touch with his suppliers, and almost always the most relevant criteria have considered comfort, convenience and agility!

    If in the past, to make a payment or withdraw an extract, it was necessary to go to the bank, today with the telephone and ATMs, physical presence at the branch itself is no longer necessary.

    To buy an appliance or a car, the trip to the store or dealership, which was previously essential, nowadays, with the Internet, has become almost expendable.

    Even the food or household supply of consumer products has undergone changes with the most frequent home deliveries both from restaurants and through apps (iFood, for example) and restaurants.

    Thus, direct contact between customer-seller or customer-manager of establishments is becoming less and less possible.

    In addition to being more sporadic, this link has also been changing and becoming impersonal, as it started to materialize much more through the telephone, instant messaging applications. social networks or emails than by your own voice or physical presence!

    Distance

    If this direct and personal relationship does not occur between the parties, it becomes much more complex for the executive or entrepreneur to monitor or identify the constant changes in his clientele.

    The distancing prevents one from understanding the profile changes, the surprising changes in habits and from becoming aware of the inevitable criticisms and the desired suggestions.

    In other words, despite meeting the demands of modern consumers, the distance between the parties has grown so much that it is no longer possible to know & foresee the behavior of the customer, even though he is present “at the counter”!

    If with him present, it was no longer an easy task, what can we say from a distance!

    In these times of globalization, with the increasing offer of products, services and channels, the consumer, naturally, prefers the one who understands him best and, due to this knowledge, has to offer what he really wants, under the conditions that please him. and in the time frame you need!

    Large companies, in order to solve such problems, have used sophisticated tools through computerization and the use of modern (and expensive) CRM / customer relationship management software.

    It is, however, only one of the possible ways to solve this difficulty and, even so, a solution aimed at large enterprises, due to the considerable investments required.

    Qualitative Research Techniques

    Another way much more accessible, and available to all, would be qualitative research, through different techniques that are able to present numerous solutions. Some examples of the techniques are:

    • Focus groups make it possible to apprehend countless personal sensations, impressions and assessments. Something that other techniques hardly offer, even in comparison with the most sophisticated ones.
    • In-depth interviews, on the other hand, help to understand the individual behavior of clients in relation to certain more complex issues.
    • The “hidden customers” simulate the situations of interaction between company & consumer, a technique that can signal any flaws for the necessary corrections.
    • There is also ethnography, the newest methodology that has been applied with great success in the field of qualitative research, based on the knowledge accumulated in anthropology, whose results are, in the same way, surprising.

    And the most important is that these are low cost alternatives, with high return and very high speed of response.

    Despite the sophisticated computer systems in use, even large companies periodically do not give up “listening” and “analyzing” what consumers think. Let them be your “customers”, “ex-customers”, “competition-customers” and even still “non-customers”.

    These studies make it possible for executives, entrepreneurs, planners and managers to be even more (or again) in direct contact with their audience. They rescue an “intimacy” that has been lost in these modern times and providing valuable knowledge for directing business towards success.

  • Like & Dislike in Advertising

    Like & Dislike in Advertising

    It almost always seemed to me a considerable exaggeration to expect that advertising campaigns should make people fall in love with brands, products or services.

    Even when it comes to admired and inspiring companies like Apple, Coca Cola, Google or Microsoft or products like Nespresso, i-phone, it may be a little too much to talk about the consumer’s ‘love’ for brands or products.

    In my opinion, an advertisement reaching the goal of making a person ‘like’ a brand, product or service is already a considerable challenge, even more thinking about items such as: toilet paper, toothpaste, banks, insurance, telephony cellphone etc.

    In this way, the evaluation of ‘like & dislike’ – ‘likability’ – consists of something more realistic, more plausible and more logical, if we think in terms of conquering the target audience through advertising.

    There are different studies on the market in the market, some including those from the ARF – Advertising Research Foundation, highlighting the predictive potential of ‘likability’, while others are already less emphatic and even skeptical.

    The way in which ‘like & dislike’ has been measured in conventional research is mostly based on two classic formulations: ‘Did you like the advertising you watched?’ And ‘Would you like to watch it again?’

    It is important to note that both the usual findings of this ‘likability’ are based on the declaratory and rationale of people, regardless of whether they are qualitative or quantitative approaches.

    Far from stating that the results obtained in these formats are invalid, the point that deserves to be discussed is the extent to which such an evaluation would be sufficiently correct or adequate for an evaluation of advertisements.

    A point to be considered in this ‘traditional’ criterion is the risk that respondents ‘(or participants’) responses will be contaminated by ‘politically correct’.

    The format also does not allow for a more refined metric in terms of precision, tending to polarize between the two extremes (‘liking’ and ‘not liking’) which, in a way, makes it difficult to identify the necessary adjustments or even comparisons with the competitors.

    On the other hand, when we evaluate the existing possibilities of measuring the same ‘like & dislike’ of advertisements with the resources of neuromarketing, the options present themselves with much more abundance.

    Initially, it would be worth highlighting the multiplicity of measurement techniques available and capable of fully meeting such expectations, certainly with better results.

    The techniques range from the assessment of the participants’ facial expressions, through the skin current, pupil dilation, EEG (electroencephalography), among others.

    Each of the techniques offering more precise results, and especially much more sensitive to the reactions of the participants, in scales and frequencies that allow a more accurate understanding of the impacts.

    Unlike conventional research, the collection pattern with these techniques allows an evaluation of advertising, according to the second, which facilitates the identification of interventions and corrections in a more precise way.

    In addition, the analysis of the results also with eye tracking makes it evident to what extent all elements of the commercial were (or were not) perceived by the participants.

    This is an important finding as it makes it possible to know which elements are influencing ‘likability’ and those that still need to be highlighted, whether for the message, for the brand itself or for the context.

    The main point to be praised would be the great reliability of the results obtained by the simple fact that they are totally spontaneous biometric measurements, not subject to interpretations or rationalizations.

    The numerical format of the results of these techniques constitutes another relevant differential as they are accessible and understood by everyone, regardless of technical knowledge.

    Unlike conventional research, where the diagnosis of ‘likability’ could be interpreted as an ‘approval’ or a ‘death sentence’, with neuromarketing it is possible to improve and build a solution.

    Having overcome the expected initial fears about the novelty of the approach, and overcoming the barrier of mistrust between the agency (creation) and research (analyst), it is to be expected that a new working relationship can be built.

    This relationship of partnership, with a much more intensive use of these research techniques, not only with the campaign concluded, but since its creation, so that the steps can be tested already in the hatcher.

    It is important to note that such a cooperation process between the advertising agency and the research company would in no way imply any interference in the creation process itself.

    Even because, it is clear that this expertise is lacking for research specialists, but it is likely that working together and with greater proximity between the parties will certainly result in more effective campaigns.

    more information:

    Faris Yakob, Being well liked

  • Brand loyalty and neuromarketing

    Brand loyalty and neuromarketing

    The meaning and scope of what is ‘loyalty’ has undergone considerable changes, as did most of the ideas and premises we were used to with the advent of the digital age.

    Several voices even advocate the end of the search for ‘loyalty’ to the brand for the most varied reasons, be it the high investments made without the expected return, the inefficiency of the programs in ensuring increasing sales, etc.

    Until recently, the understanding of what was loyalty was satisfied, or restricted, to a mere repetition of purchases, if possible, in a constant manner and as often as possible, and that’s it.

    The idea was almost exclusively centered and restricted to the transactional, as in the loyalty programs where every 9 purchases the consumer would get the 10th product for free, or in the discount coupons.

    In principle, both sides (brands & consumers) would be satisfied and prepared to start a new cycle, on the same basis, with the same format, in a repetition without much differentiation.

    The truth is that the concept of ‘loyalty’ in the digital age has been gaining different connotations and a much broader understanding, something that has started to demand a differentiated response from brands.

    In the digital age, the idea of ​​‘loyalty’ has come to encompass different connotations that are very different from the objectives sought at the time when the relationship of the brand with the consumer was fundamentally with physical presence.

    Not anymore! There are growing signs that consumers are no longer completely satisfied with the solutions of the old model and indicate a growing expectation for something more, in addition to the transactional one.

    Increasingly, ‘loyalty’ has been linked by consumers to brands providing a remarkable experience, consistently over time and, above all, adding more value to the relationship.

    But how do you ‘deliver’ to the consumer a better experience? What are the factors to be observed by the brands for this delivery to meet the new expectations and materialize in the ‘loyalty’ sought?

    The idea is to go beyond transactions and create attitudes and behaviors among consumers, such as the ‘lawyers’ of the brand, the ‘passionate’ for the brand and the ‘promoters’ of the brand.

    These are consumers who defend, advertise and promote the brand to acquaintances, to co-workers, to family members and (mainly) on social networks.

    These are consumers who, in return for the experience received, in recognition of the product or service purchased, spontaneously begin to praise, propagate and comment positively on the brand.

    In other words, this still new ‘loyalty’ exists and is achieved when consumers go beyond mere purchases and naturally take an active stance, with concrete and spontaneous actions aimed at the brand.

    Unlike the conventional ‘one-to-one’ effect, what comes into being is ‘one-to-hundreds’, ‘thousands’, perhaps even ‘millions’, given the exponential effect that social networks have.

    There are basically three aspects to be sought by brands to provide consumers with a better and more remarkable experience: relevance, usefulness and purpose.

    Relevance is related to knowledge by the brands of the consumer journey, in facilitating the decision making of these people and in offering what is already known to be of interest to them, using big data as a platform.

    This is the case with Amazon or Netflix suggesting new products based on their previous preferences, or from what a large number of people are already choosing at this time.

    The examples do not stop there, they also extend to Booking.com, to Airbnb, to i-food, to Uber, to international publications, among so many other active brands and already acting according to this new model.

    Providing simple and coherent experiences with the history of each one, that facilitate the choice for the consumer, ‘lost’ among multiple options, is an important stimulus to the growth of sales and consolidates the ‘loyalty’.

    The utility consists of using the resources that the digital medium provides so that the consumer experience is not only interesting, but also easier, more pleasant, that solves problems and eliminates difficulties.

    The experiences that achieve these goals add value, retain customers and can still be fun, such as the ASOS application that, from photos, identifies pieces of clothing similar to the customer’s taste, or allows the clothes to be tried on at home free of charge.

    Or as they already occur in certain hotels, where it is possible for the guest of your room to check the account via the web, authorize the debit and no longer need to go through the checkout queue, combining simplicity with ease.

    The examples are multiplied with boarding passes on cell phones, hotel rooms that do not require the use of keys or check in, functionality buttons that already select the last option of pizza ordered, speeding up the process, etc.

    The purpose refers to how brands expose and disclose what they are, think, value. Although many initiatives predate the digital age, with current resources such actions have gained a lot in visibility and in their repercussions.

    The objective is to strengthen the relationship, reinforcing values ​​and creating an identification of the consumer with these ideals, as to justify the purchase of these products, encouraging them to feel better people and contributing to worthy causes.

    Case of Patagonia and responsible consumption or recycling of used parts, Airbnb with a special program to assist people who are victims of natural disasters such as the hurricane in Florida, Adidas with Team Messi (Twitter, Facebook or Instagram), where 94% of the participants were new to the brand and currently have an average spend of 10 euros on e-commerce.

    However, like almost everything, it is a double-edged sword. The success in the strategy can take the brands to the heights and with much more ‘loyalty’, but, on the other hand, the error can imply the loss of the consumer, the de-characterization of the brand and a reductionism, back to the transactional one.

    The challenge then for research is how to measure the type, quality and intensity of the experience provided to the consumer. How to assess whether the experience has had an impact and whether it is transmuted into future purchases?

    Although some answers may come from the conventional techniques of market research, it is clear that there are limitations and the need for more answers.

    Scales of options such as ‘yes & no’ or ‘good & regular & very poor’ are not the most appropriate metrics, they do not allow for greater progress in evaluating experiences, even though they are a relevant starting point.

    Neuromarketing, in conjunction with conventional research, already has techniques and tools to assess most of these issues in more depth.

    In the end, the answers sought consist in the evaluation of the reactions caused by the experiences, at which point they were impactful, where they differed from the competition, and to what extent they were constituted in permanent effects.

    Responses with neuromarketing are more appropriate because they are not based on ‘rational’ or ‘declarative’, but on ‘emotional’ and ‘reactions’, spontaneous and instinctive people to these stimuli & experiences.

    Therefore, these metrics are much more sensitive and credible, either because of the precision of the technical resources employed, or because of the notorious inability of most people to describe precisely the feelings or emotions

    The truth is that many of us don’t even know how to properly interpret these emotions, perhaps describe them or put them in numbers, which is why neuromarketing can and should be a solution to be used with increasing frequency.

    more information:

    Amy Brown, Rethinking ‘loyalty’ in the age of digital, Admap, November 2017

  • Campaign Pre-Test

    Campaign Pre-Test

    Campaign Pre-Test – A new approach

    One of the types of qualitative research that Checon has carried out the most in these 25 years of experience in the market are the pre-tests of advertising campaigns, whether for films, concepts or even graphic pieces.

    Apparently the analyzes and results presented by Checon must be on the right track, given the volume and the return of a large part of the agencies and advertisers to other different jobs over time

    Like most other players, we have also normally used the technique of focus groups and, as a rule, with segmentations by age groups, socioeconomic classes and most of the time by geographic regions

    Thus, for smaller evaluations, we have carried out an average of around 9 groups and, in a large part of national campaigns, of larger size, there is often a demand for more than 20 focus groups

    The use of verbatim with edited audios, with the statements and positions of the participants, was an innovation developed by Checon that added a lot of information and more understanding to the comments and suggestions that we present as recommendations

    In addition to a high capacity for convincing, the audios invariably made the testimonies real, more credible, added feeling and humor to the situations, considerably enriching the presentations.

    So much so that, countless times, the interest of agencies and advertisers was concentrated almost entirely on the audios themselves, given the strength of the messages and information transmitted directly from the target audience

    But in several situations in these pre-tests, it was not always possible to have an absolutely clear and undoubted answer to some questions of a subjective or emotional nature of the campaign concepts.

    The dominant impression was that there was still a lack of a more adequate and reliable metric to support these questions, since the focus groups, by themselves, were not always sufficient to clarify all doubts, both from advertisers and the agencies themselves.

    Among the cases of responses that were not always satisfactory were the impact of the campaign in which the commercial was watching, or the extent to which certain positions were effectively perceived as ‘security’, ‘trust’, or even what message was actually apprehended

    In an exploratory way, we have already tried to complement the focus group assessments with individual footage of the participants to assess reactions based on changes in facial expressions, but without much success, as the variations are barely noticeable

    Or even with the attempt to use other biometric measurement techniques such as GSR (skin current conductance), used abroad to predict the box office of films and plays, but still with results that are less than expected and unclear to laypeople.

    In international congresses, both from ESOMAR and NMSBA, we have been constantly looking for new options that can, in a transparent and mainly clear way for agencies and advertisers, add other supporting elements to such questions.

    This insistence by Checon Pesquisa to innovate, as well as to diversify the technique, for a better understanding of people’s reactions to advertising campaigns, led us to implicit test.

    Implicit association tests were originally developed as an instrument to explore the unconscious roots of human thought and emotions, as people often have difficulty expressing their own emotions or even know for sure what is going on in their heads.

    Such problems are even more aggravated the lower the education, or when people are shy, and also with a certain frequency the politically correct appears, with the risk of compromising the evaluation

    The reasons for using implicit association tests in pre-test evaluations are justified by the ability to measure responses, ideas and beliefs at a subconscious level, regardless of an not always ‘desired’ rationalization

    The results of the implicit association tests, moreover, are easily interpreted, regardless of any knowledge about psychology, and yet flexible to deepen the specific aspects of each advertising campaign itself

    According to the Checon methodology, the tests must take place after the focus groups are carried out, which will serve as a reference for the development of the protocol of what will be tested, when determining the aspects not yet properly clarified

    Checon suggests that the implicit association tests be carried out with the same participant profiles, with a control group with people who have not seen the campaign and another with guests soon after seeing the material (film, spot or graphic pieces)

    Thus, it is possible to establish a very clear comparison criterion for assessing the impact of aspects that have not been sufficiently clarified with the focus groups.

    In general, each implicit association test has a duration of 3 to 5 minutes and allows an assessment of up to 5 distinct attributes, which is usually more than enough for the demands that we have met

    Checon suggests performing a minimum of 30 tests, 15 of which are usually with the control group and another 15 with participants watching the same material presented and tested in the focus groups.

    This number can be changed in particular situations where there is a need for more specific assessments (such as results by class or age group), or when comparisons with competitors are also necessary.

    As advantages, it is worth highlighting the need for a much smaller number of groups, avoiding the repetition that normally occurs from the 10th focus group, directing efforts in the measurement of very specific aspects

    Another positive point is the use of a tool capable of evaluating beyond the conscious and the rational, with metrics that, although without the intention of quantitative research, complement the results of the focus groups.

    Therefore, there is a saving in both processing and analysis time, as well as in investment, since the results of the implicit association tests are immediate.