Posts Tagged ‘Research’

Side-Lining Semiotics

Published on May 3rd, 2011 by Northstar UK

Why Is Semiotics Still On the Side-lines Of Research?

When semiotics is understood in a commercial rather than academic context, its value for brands seems non-negotiable. Yet, it remains at the edge of the insight playing field, still struggling to shake off its academic typecast and a reputation for being awkward. At Research 2011, semiotics was singled out as a highly undervalued tool – so is this the year for semiotics?

The Right Perspective

Contrary to traditional research practices, semiotics champions an outside-in approach – consumers don’t necessary have all the answers – shock horror! By taking an approach that acknowledges not all commercial insight is born from interacting with the consumer, you can start to see how semiotics comes into its own.

Traditional research goes straight to the consumer – what do people think and want? Whereas semiotics goes straight to culture – what is creating these thoughts and desires in the first place?

It’s often this different line of attack that I believe can be an initial hurdle for the traditional researcher, who is understandably accustomed to going straight to the consumer front line.

So What’s It All About?

It’s all about culture. The complex, intangible bubble of language, art, belief and attitude.  I particularly like this quote to describe the essence of culture, “Culture is a little like dropping an Alka-Seltzer into a glass – you don’t see it, but somehow it does something” Hans Magnus Enzensberger.

Commercial semiotics in my mind is about making sense of the fluid, implicit and unspoken nature of culture and systematically structuring it to create a valuable resource for new insights and future trends.

What Does It Actually Involve?

Semiotics word for word is the ‘study of signals’. Signals can be anything that creates or communicates meaning. Commercial semiotics looks for signals in two main areas:

The Brand In Question and Its Overall Category Mapping category signs and symbols

We look at: Products, packaging, colours, graphics, language, tone,  advertising, jingles, communications, stories, archetypes, physical  brand spaces

We ask: Is the brand coherent across all manifestations? Is the brand distinctive within its category?

Popular Culture Identifying dominant and emergent cultural codes

We look at: TV, magazines, newspapers, film, books, music, blogs, social media,  comedy, art & design, people, public spaces, fashion

We ask: Is the brand relevant within this?

After delving into these two areas, the relevant themes are identified and brought together by looking at the key signifiers, attitudes, concepts and narratives that bring these themes to life. We look at how brands, the category and popular culture all interact and relate to each other within these themes. From here, the insight drawn from the themes can be turned into specific ways forward for a brand or concept.

Semiotics can start with a brand and work outwards to wider culture, or start with a concept such as ‘health’ or ‘femininity’ in popular culture and filter down to relevant brands.

So Where Does Semiotics Fit In?

Why is all this fluffy, cultural stuff important you say? Can’t we just do a focus group and ask people what they want? Yes you could, but supplementing the close-up psychological view gleaned from qual with a wider cultural view, can only make a strategy stronger.

In a globalised and digital world where cultural considerations are paramount – it is becoming increasingly valuable to look at the cultural codes which underpin how consumers behave. This is particularly important where global or cross-cultural harmonisation of brands and communications is an issue.

Semiotics allows us to identify pertinent and emergent themes that can be harnessed or progressed by a brand and which directions their competitors are taking. It provides a good starting point to build new perspectives and positions that are relevant or better still, ahead of the curve.

Culture is often one step ahead of consumers so tapping into it means brands have an opportunity to be the leaders, not the followers, and drive consumer imagination rather than lead it.

The Role of Statistical Integrity in the “Web 2.0” Era

Published on Oct 20th, 2010 by Jack

One of the core statistical values to be promoted as part of the forthcoming World Statistics Day is integrity. The recent rise of user generated content and DIY internet research (all elements of what is known as “Web 2.0”) means that awareness of this particular value is especially important.

Traditionally, it has generally been the case that organisations such as governments and universities are the outlets which drop statistical bombshells. Now quite literally anyone has access to the tools to do this.

In recent years it has become possible for anyone with basic IT knowledge (and often limited statistical ability) to either host an internet survey or place a poll on a website. Users of such research tools (most of the time) do not show the same integrity statistics professionals a) emit themselves or b) would like to see within their profession. Gone are robust sampling methods, as anyone can partake in “Web 2.0” research exercises, killing notions of representativeness and non-probability sampling. Additionally, there are no mechanisms to stop people omitting their opinion on numerous occasions, causing data sets to be filled with duplicated information. However, and most importantly, those utilising such research tools do not treat the information they gather in a manner which is forthright. Often the data generated by such research will be presented with no regard for statistical reporting protocols. Furthermore, and most worryingly, despite its (often) unrobust nature, the information gathered by such methods may feed into the decision making process.

So what does this all mean? It means that when we promote the integrity of statistics, we must also seek to make “Web 2.0” DIY researchers aware that increasing their statistical integrity will not only improve their work, but also the reputation of all statistical investigations as well. Additionally, it also means we must raise awareness of these methods amongst the untrained  readers of statistics, so as to avoid true, integrity driven statistical research being tarnished with any brush which may criticise “statistics 2.0”.

Teaching an Old Dog Old Tricks

Published on Oct 4th, 2010 by Jack

Teaching Old Dogs Old Tricks

Social media research has planted a sense of fear within traditional researchers. These worries are centred around the question; how do we study this new wave of information? Well, for all the “old dog”, traditional researchers out there, fear not. Many of the traditional principals of research as we have historically known them are applicable, and indeed necessary, when conducting social media research.

Sampling

The underlying purpose of sampling is to gain an insight into the views of a large population by looking at a portion of it, as to research an entire population is practically impossible. Similarly, to investigate all on-line conversations is equally unpractical. Therefore, the answer to this social media research dilemma is to sample. Yes, sample, as researchers have been doing since the dawn of research time. However, whereas before we would quota sample by (for example) brand ownership, in social media research we must sample by source of conversation. Furthermore, in traditional research a sample size may be n=300. In social media research n will still equal 300, but 300 conversations not 300 respondents.

Data Quality

Clean data is a fundamental part of any researcher’s investigative diet. Why should this change just because we are moving from studying conversations in a focus group to conversations on the web? Answer – it shouldn’t. In fact, as the data in social media research is user generated we have to be even more careful about its quality. Whereas in traditional quantitative research we have to be careful of straight liners, in social media research we have to be wary of re-tweeters and spammers to avoid analysing duplicated and irrelevant web chat. Add to this the unproven nature of social media research and the clientside scepticism about it, and the need for clean data in social media research is obvious.

Relevant Analysis

Despite its web based origin, there is no reason for researchers to look at the analysis of social media data in too much of a separate light to standardised analytical practices. At the crux of social media data analysis is the idea that researchers need to filter through conversations, extracting relevant insights and content in order to meet the research goal – does this process sound familiar? At this stage I would expect qualitative researchers to reminisce about a process they have undertaken on hundreds of occasions.

Obviously, the finer points of conducting traditional and social media research do differ. However, broadly speaking, traditional researchers need not worry. Researching social media does not require an entire new outlook on the research process. As shown above, at a high level the old, rugged and proven research principals will suffice. That said, with the speed at which social media research is growing this statement may only be applicable for the immediate future. Researchers watch this space…

Save Our Census Part Two – Census 2.0

Published on Jul 29th, 2010 by Jack

Having put forward the case as to why the research industry should try to preserve the UK census, it would only be fair to put forward a case suggesting how this could be possible. The modern census has, methodologically speaking, progressed significantly since its inception in 1801, advancing from using headcounts to postal questionnaires. Bearing in mind the study’s ability to advance methodologically and the furore made about its cost, surely it is now time to consider utilising the modern, cost efficient data collection abilities of the internet, thus spawning Census 2.0.

70%* of UK households now have access to the internet. This means that potentially 70% of households can be reached at a vastly decreased cost. This decrease in cost vs. the cost of postal questionnaires comes from cutting the expense(s) of producing the paper questionnaire(s), delivering the document, entry of the paper based data and through saving money on all of these areas, a reduced spend on human resources. Critics of internet research will argue that on-line data collection will not capture the information of the entire population. Whilst this is true, collecting census data would be far more cost efficient if 70% of households could provide their details via on-line means, resulting in only having to administer 7 million postal (or perhaps telephone?) questionnaires vs. 23 million**.

In addition to being cost efficient it is also worth noting the time efficient nature of internet data collection. It currently takes approximately one year to publish census data. However, the use of the internet would dramatically speed this process up due to the way on-line methods can instantly capture data without having to go through a drawn out data entry process.

The second key criticism of the current census is that the information it collates has limited longevity. The ONS could learn from the use of on-line communities which have recently experienced an upsurge in popularity within the world of market research. Having collected data for the entire population, would it not be possible to create on-line communities for all the UK counties/regions? The members of these communities could then be charged with updating their census information on an annual or bi-annual basis. This would, in theory, provide far more up-to-date information on the population, albeit based on a sample. That said, one can argue it would be more beneficial to have up-to-date information based on a sample than it would be to have outdated information derived from the entire population. Yes, collecting data more frequently would place added financial weight onto an already stretched census budget. However, the use of the internet in creating Census 2.0 would make it far more cost efficient than the current census, allowing for the funds saved on data collection to be utilised in ways such as this.

At a glance, taking the above into account, embracing on-line data collection and elements of Research 2.0 within the census can eradicate its two current major criticisms – cost and the longevity of the data set collected, whilst making the publication of the information collected a speedier process. The real challenge will lie in convincing critics of the census and on-line research that this is a worthwhile step to take. This challenge, as I commented on previously is, in part, up to “us” – researchers.

*Based on ONS report 2009, 70% of UK households had internet access

**Based on government estimates of the UK having 23 million households in 2010

Save Our Census – Part One

Published on Jul 20th, 2010 by Jack

Francis Maude recently declared that 2011 may be the last time the UK census is carried out. This is mostly due to the large cost of the survey (the 2011 census is estimated to be costing £482 million). To the normal respondent in the census who claims to be of a Jedi religious denomination, the end of the census would be a relatively meaningless event. However, to the respondent in the census who is a quantitative researcher by day, the end of the census could be seen as a monumental event, to the extent that perhaps as researchers it is up to us to save the census. I can already hear non researchers (and a few Cabinet Office ministers) asking “why?” and “how”? Well for now we will concentrate on the former, with a follow up on the latter next week.

Heritage

The first census was conducted in 1801. This pre-empted even the classic, seminal research studies of the Victorian period conducted by the likes of Engles and Booth. As such, the census can be seen as a true turning point for the world of research. Never before had British society felt a need to research its population in such a way, until Thomas Malthus roused concerns about the country not being able to support its population. Conducting research to ascertain future demand – a concept familiar to all market researchers I am sure. Had society never felt the need to investigate itself, where would the world of research be today? Furthermore, the census has been conducted every 10 years (with the exception of 1941) since 1801 to allow the demographics of the country to be monitored and tracked. The birth of tracking studies? You could certainly argue so. Given its place in research history, is the census not something researchers should be thankful for and wish to preserve?

19th Century Methods for 21st Century Sampling

When the RFP arrives in your inbox requesting a sample to be representative to demographic proportions, where do you go? Most researchers immediately view the data of the last census to find out the demographic proportions required to meet the sampling criteria. Furthermore, census data provides an instant and accessible overview of the UK population at the click of a few buttons, giving a view into demographic and economic insights along the way, something researchers would not want to sacrifice.

15 Minutes of Fame

Every industry has its moment in the limelight. Every 10 years the census displays to the UK that research is a great industry, collecting information for the better good of those it is investigating. It also highlights the importance of research to society as a whole, as census data is used by an abundance of different professions, hopefully resulting in an appreciation for the labours of the research industry. The removal of the census would thus deprive our industry of its spotlight moment in front of a national audience.

Having now shown why, as researchers, we should want to preserve the life of the census, next week will ascertain how the offerings of the market research industry can make the census a more viable study.