Research 2.0: The Changing Internet Landscape and Implications for Researchers

1. Research 2.0: The Changing Internet Landscape and Implications for Researchers April 2007

2. Agenda • Web 2.0: Fact or fiction? • Impact on the relationship with customers and stakeholders • Research 2.0 • New methods of engagement, research applications • Parting thoughts

3. What is Web 2.0?

4. What is Web 2.0? (cont’d) Common elements of the Web 2.0 concept: • Interfaces and applications  no longer about pages and sites. • Personalization  users can customize their experience. • Community  users interact with one another, sometimes forming social networks. • Creation  the platform facilitates creation, not just communication or participation. • Collaboration  creation is collaborative rather than isolated (and users can share data in different forms). • Cumulative  it’s an ongoing process, where creation can be built upon.

5. What is Web 2.0? (cont’d) • Web 2.0 is not just about the tools and technologies. It’s about the people and what they are doing with them. • It represents a shift in behaviour – to some extent what people envisioned for the Web at the very beginning. • “It's no longer all about idly surfing and passively reading, listening, or watching. It's about doing: sharing, socializing, collaborating, and, most of all, creating.” - Eckart Walther, Yahoo! Inc. Vice-President for Product Management • It also represents a shift incontrol.

6. Web 2.0: Fact or Fiction? Is it just another buzzword? Consider… • Roughly 25 million people are using YouTube. • At MySpace.com, 21 million monthly visitors spend up to several hours a day sharing their thoughts, photos, and music with friends on personalized home pages. • Cyworld claims almost a third of South Korea's 48 million people as members. • Technorati tracks more than 70 million blogs.

7. Web 2.0: Fact or Fiction? • Nike placed this video of Ronaldinho on YouTube. • It costs them nothing to place it, and it’s been viewed more than 12 million times.

8. Web 2.0: Fact or Fiction? (cont’d)

9. The New Relationship with Stakeholders

10. Example: Communication Environment Old Communication Process Code Decode Communicator Message Audience For message to be received, presumes communicator and audience connect New Communication Process Communicator Audience

11. Research 2.0 • So, what does this all mean for research (2.0)? • It means we have to consider both the behavioural and technical changes that have occurred to: • Better engage the people we need – respondents, participants. • Leverage the power of their thinking to generate ideas, identify issues. • Tap into water-cooler discussions. • Attain more accurate results. • It involves… • New methods of engagement (a different mindset in approaching research participants). • The application of new technologies within existing methodologies. • Observing users, listening in on conversations. • It does not mean that we discard traditional methods.

12. Research 2.0: Implications

13. Research 2.0: New Methods of Engagement • Traditional research approaches are framed within the top-down, command and control model. • We tend to cast people as passive “respondents” with little control over the enquiry process. • Response rates continue to be a challenge, in part because people are becoming more discerning about lending their time to organizations with which they have little or no prior affinity. • Need to adapt approaches to the new, collaborative nature of the relationship. • To address problems of participation, we need to adapt to cultural change. • There is an opportunity to tap into bottom-up, interactive communications by engaging people in different ways.

14. A Scenario… • A group of people are asked to attend a focus group to discuss their attitudes towards a sensitive communications campaign. There are people from a sponsoring government organization viewing the session. • The same group of people happen to be at somebody’s house for a social gathering, where they have a “water cooler” type discussion about the issue and the related campaign. • Which do you think will be the more honest and insightful discussion?

15. New Methods of Engagement : Private Online Communities • Private online communities differ from online panels in that they are: • more collaborative (bottom-up rather than top-down); • less controlled; and • people develop a stake in the community because they can see how results are being used. • Benefits include: • higher participation, engagement; • user-generated ideas; and • surfacing of unasked questions. P&G’s Vocalpoint engages a community of moms in part because they get "a voice that is going to be heard by companies.”

16. New Methods of Engagement : Private Online Communities • I’m not suggesting that online communities replace traditional methods altogether. • Recognition that panels need to be properly constituted, managed

17. Research 2.0: Using Technology to Improve Methods • Typically, online surveys have emulated the paper-based version. • Acknowledge that they have CATI-like capabilities. • More dynamic applications create a new set of expectations for engaging people in research. • The Xbox generation who will be participating in our research in the future will expect surveys, etc. that go beyond the typical emulation of the paper-based version. • There are opportunities to make the experience more engaging and enjoyable. • Helps address response rate issue. • In some cases, the technology can improve the quality of data.

18. Using Technology to Improve Methods:Personalized, Dynamic Survey Experience • Utilizes AJAX (Asyncronous JavaScript and XML). • e.g. Used in Google Maps • Can improve engagement, quality through such techniques as… • overlaying of objects on the same page to avoid scrolling, long lists; and • advancing rows of scaled questions. • Generate greater insight through new techniques. • Pop-up, follow-on questions within the same screen. • Enable respondents to access background information to make informed decisions. • Use drag and drop methods that permit new types of analysis.

19. Using Technology to Improve Methods:Personalized, Dynamic Survey Experience On a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 means strongly disagree and 5 means strongly agree, to what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements The presenter used effective teaching aids and methods. Strongly disagree Strongly agree 1 2 3 4 5 

20. Using Technology to Improve Methods:Online Diaries • Online diaries enable participants to record their experience as they move through a process. • e.g. applying for a passport, taking out a mortgage, etc. • Simulates the traditional diary methods used in research. • Can be more or less structured in nature, depending on requirements. • Applications enable participants to: • describe what happens on a daily or weekly basis as they migrate through the process; • answer pre-posted questions (e.g. result expected, what worked well, what did not work well, suggested improvements) for each interaction; • engage in dialogue with an observing moderator (e.g. to clarify issues that emerge); • participate in follow-up interviews or discussions; and • record their experience online or using a mobile device. • Compared to traditional methods… • permits moderator intervention during the process; and • facilitates involvement, better addresses recall bias.

21. Research 2.0: Listening in on Conversations • Blogs, video sharing, and public communities enable us to observe and track water cooler discussions on the Internet. • It involves less intervention and more observation. • Observation has traditionally been underutilized as a technique because of the expense. • It requires a level of comfort with honest feedback, water-cooler conversations. • A listening culture.

22. Listening in on Conversations:Observation • "It's fantastic from a consumer research standpoint. You can type in a search for 'shopping' and then see (videos) of people showing their shopping habits. It's almost like a global focus group." - Barry Lowenthal, President, Media Kitchen, discussing the benefits of YouTube in a USA Today article. • Shopping Habits

23. Listening in on Conversations:Blog Tracking • Various services have emerged to track trends, “buzz” generated on the “blogsphere”. • It’s a method to track and listen in on unsolicited opinion. • Can be used to… • track the “buzz” created by a new product launch or initiative; • identify the issues that affect sentiment related to your product or initiative; and • identify key influences.

24. Other Implications for Marketing Research • The current approach that we use for web metrics needs to be reviewed. • e.g. If using an AJAX-supported web application, how do we measure usage when they are being served up content within the same page.

25. Some Parting Thoughts • As an industry, we need to think about the inherent value of what we do… • Are we in the business of delivering traditional “qualitative” and “quantitative” research? • Or, are we in the business of delivering marketing insights, utilizing techniques that are best suited to the times? • We need to recognize that the relationship between organizations and the audiences they serve is changing. • People expect to influence decisions, be involved. • Be prepared to give up some control. • We should appreciate the power and value of collaborative communications. • “The successful organization is not the one with the most brains, but the most brains acting in concert.” – Peter Drucker

26. Some Parting Thoughts • Going forward, consider new approaches that enable you to dig deeper, leverage the power of collaboration. • Be creative – understand the possibilities of Web 2.0 technologies. • Learn the rules and play within them.

27. Questions? Doug Church Partner Phase 5 (613) 241-7555 ext. 101 dougc@phase-5.com