Traditional vs Digital Research Methods; Cut Through the Myths to Learn More

The advent of digital media has inspired many new forms of customer research which businesses are embracing with a passion.  We have also witnessed marketers foregoing more traditional research approaches, primarily to save money and time. However, there are lots of myths and misconceptions regarding digital methods. As one mobile phone marketer commented “let’s say we don’t wholly buy into the claims being made about online”. So what are the facts and considerations when choosing between traditional vs digital research methods? New doesn’t necessarily mean better …. or does it?

Traditional research methods

More traditional research forms involve either face-to-face contact or verbal conversations in real-time such as;

• Qualitative focus groups or group discussions; enable topic discussion, exploration and idea generation, building and challenging. For example, recruiting respondents with differing views to ‘conflict groups’ in order to challenge beliefs and also understand and uncover ways to overcome possible prejudices.
• Depth interviews – face-to-face or telephone; enable in-depth understanding of people, who they are, their attitudes, beliefs and also motivations. Also suited to more confidential and sensitive topics e.g. healthcare, business-to-business.
• Accompanied shops – in a real-life shopping environment to understand real-life shopping motivations and behaviour.
• Ethnography – observing people in specific settings or environments. For example, a professional in their work place; useful to see true context, influences and behaviour, that may be unconscious and not reported.
• Intercepts – stopping people in the street or other ‘out of home locations’; useful for gaining high-level/fast insights, to understand motivations and quantify preferences, such as, assessing reaction to products or brands in ‘out-of-home’ eating experiences.

Traditional research pros and cons

Traditional face-to-face or telephone approaches enable the moderator to go with the natural flow of the discussion, and thus better understand what’s important to interviewees. Also to flex the discussion, intervene, probe or challenge at any time.

In addition, findings or interpretations are based on respondent comments and non-verbal indicators such as facial expressions, body language, behaviour and voice intonation. Albert H. Mehrabian found that body language accounts for 55%, tone of voice (38%) while words only just 7% of received communication (1). This non-verbal communication therefore provides extra richness and texture to information and gives deeper insight. What is not said is often as revealing as what is said.

However traditional research approaches take up more time and cost. Sometimes they also need more time to set up. For example recruiting a very specific sample, such as frequent rail and air travellers with experience of mobile applications could easily take a couple of weeks.

New digital research methods

The massive growth in general internet and social media, enables marketers and researchers to communicate with their consumers digitally, and also better understand the changing digital world.  New digital functionality such as wikis, video filming and uploading and messaging also provides researchers with a new means of customer communication, and new means of capturing information. This therefore helps researchers and customers work together and co-create ideas.

New digital technology allows new digital research encounters

• Skype, Microsoft Teams, Whats App, Facetime, Google Meet and now Zoom – provide new remote video interviewing possibilities. Thus allowing the moderator to hear and see the interviewee, while ‘social distancing’.
• Wearables – like Google glasses provide real-time or recorded/edited insights through the eyes of consumers.

New online research methods

• Online surveys – respondents are posed a series of questions online. Typically having followed or been emailed a link. These are now well established in high internet penetration Western markets. This therefore enables rapid, cost-effective, multi-country research.
• Online focus groups – real-time online discussions over a set period e.g. 2 hours (so-called synchronous research); useful to reach remote/difficult to find respondents.
• Online communities – respondents join a community and are set topics to discuss and questions to answer, interacting with each other and the moderator.  Useful for gauging reactions to communications and products, building ideas, and also ‘pressure testing’ plans.
• Bulletin boards – password protected forum, accessed via a browser, where respondents login at any time and respond to moderator led discussion. These usually last 3 to 6 days (so-called asynchronous research);  useful for product placement, assessing first and later impressions/experiences. Also engaging the digitally savvy and exploring the digital world, and developing ideas.
• Insight platforms – there are a growing range of multi-function platforms; at our last count, over 700. Some include focus group hosting with inbuilt transcription functions, plus software to ask questions, and upload and assess images, video and other files. With several websites dedicated to listing such software provides a glimpse into the burgeoning nature of the industry.
• AI – there are a growing range of tools that help researchers to devise questions, summarise information and use Internet know-how to postulate lists of needs, and potential customer segments. However, AI also does not have innate contextual knowledge like researchers do and is unable to design research that is fair, objective and empowering. Further, the nature of the underlying data limits the revelation of quantitative substance and ‘new’ insights.

New social media functions

• Social media sites e.g. Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Instagram – useful for online and offline recruitment, dipstick research. Also to gain anecdotes, perhaps at the start of a new product development process.
• Social media analytics or social media listening software – such as to assess national sentiments, for example, via ‘big data’ analysis of tweets etc. It also possible to analyse emotional response from emojis. In November 2016, social media analytics correctly predicted the outcome of the US Presidential election in contrast to the national polls.

Digital technology also spurs new analysis methods

• Facial recognition – uses software that’s more discerning than the human eye to determine emotional engagement (such as happiness, fear, surprise) with tv advertising, TV programmes or films. Enables better film editing and story-telling.

Digital research pros and cons

Some groups have particular affinity with the digital world and are thus easier to engage e.g. kids/youth market. The anonymity of the online world also encourages participation and openness.  Early technology adopters are particularly useful to pressure-test new ideas and anticipate the future.

Some digital media offer an almost ‘instant’ sample. For example, polls on Facebook, Twitter or blogs. However, a high-number of engaged followers are needed to generate fast and cost-effective insights.

The growing range and extent of online communication, for example via smartphones, make it easier to reach a wide geographic target. Thus avoiding travel and sometimes communication costs. In-built cameras also make it easier to collect audio and visual insights.

More complex technology, such as that involved in online qualitative research is a little more difficult to master. So allow time for set-up, to help respondents, as well as to conduct and analyse research. This means it is sometimes more costly than face-to-face discussions.

Online moderation is also more difficult. The process is often more linear and mechanical limiting ability to pursue all avenues of exploration. There are also visual limitations. Zoomed in head shots or screen size room views, make it difficult to see the big picture, and thus non-verbal responses. Qualitative responses also vary between the superficial and detailed. Initial superficial responses require more probing. Conversely, unduly verbose responses, especially if written, take time to follow and interpret.

Summary of traditional vs digital research pros and cons

Conclusions

Digital methods complement traditional methods and vice versa. Digital tools also help automate research activities, for example, making some activities, such as recruitment, and quantitative fieldwork, cheaper and quicker.  In particular, online is a fast and cost-effective way to recruit respondents for traditional qualitative research. It ensures broader reach, and helps mitigate against serial groupies.

However, there will always be a need for a moderator, to ease the journey of discovery and dig into the detail. Online moderation is just more difficult. Witness any radio let alone text discussion.

Online preplanning also needs to be more exacting to make sure respondents are capable of accessing and using systems. And this has a time-cost.

Technology can also fail. As a result, some online qualitative approaches advocate running research with two people. One to manage the IT systems, and another to moderate the discussion.

Whichever method is used there is a need for human management and analysis. Particularly for qualitative, where online costs can be higher than face-to-face.

The nature of the social media, also means there is more and more data available for analysis.  Analysis of social media big data has shown more accurate insights than conventional polls, such as on the outcomes of election results.

New hybrids that cross the lines of traditional and digital media offer the advantages of both worlds. For example, Skype and Zoom are a boon for conducting remote face-to-face interviews and thus see and hear respondents.

Marketing Inspiration

1. Digital media is a welcome addition to the market research tool-box.  It creates new ways to conduct research. So rather than see traditional vs digital research methods as competitive view them as complementary. However, remember the merits of face-to-face research. Those with long memories may recall the hype surrounding internet businesses in the late 1990s, and belief that these required a new way of thinking. They didn’t. Those that failed simply forgot basic marketing principles. As Simon Carter said recently, “Marketers are becoming lazy by over-using social media and ignoring the skills and disciplines traditionally learned by marketers” (2).
2. The start-points for choosing any research method are your objectives and needs. Then shop around and fully assess the pros and cons of each option to decide the best.
3. Best practice marketing requires a true understanding of customers and not technology. As Daryl Fielding, European Marketing Chief , Kraft Foods said recently,  “Marketers must remember they are talking to people”(3). There is a danger of technology getting in the way of understanding. Also, and perhaps ironically to digital advocates, ethnography helps understand how consumers use digital media!
4. Yet, try experimenting. If you don’t test new things out, you won’t learn. So just make sure it is not at the cost of, or detriment to, achieving your aims.

If you have or are aware of any new digital research methods or arguments to sway the traditional vs digital research debate please let us know.

References

(1)      Mehrabian Albert H, ‘Silent Messages; Implicit Communication of  Emotions and Attitudes’ 2^nd edition 1981

(2)      Carter Simon, Managing Director, Fujitsu ‘Back to basics’ Marketing Week & Research Live April 2011

(3)      O’Reilly Lara ‘A blinkered digital vision makes marketers forget the customer’ Marketing Week 21 Oct 2011