Bill Hanifin always poses the interesting questions every marketer should be asking – but might not be. In a recent post, Bill asks, “How do we gain insight into the customer preferences that drive purchase decisions?”

That’s almost a rhetorical question, because there many marketing research techniques available; Bill skewers discusses them in his post. Bill’s really fascinating question is, “How can we re-engineer our methods of collecting attitudinal data from consumers?” Bill proposes some ways in which Social Media can be part of the answer, and I’d like to suggest some others.

Some very quick background: Researchers use both quantitative and qualitative measures to figure out what consumers want and what makes them buy. Quantitative tools, such as telephone surveys, use statistical principles to draw inferences about a large group from the responses of a random sample of that group. However, they are subject to all sorts of bias (usually unintentional) that can affect the validity of the data. Online surveys are particularly tricky, since their self-selected sampling can never be truly random, which means they aren’t as quantitative as they might appear.

Qualitative tools, such as focus groups, don’t provide the comfort of statistics, but instead are intended to produce insights by probing more deeply into the motivations of consumers. This can get marketers to think in new and different directions. Although our experience with focus groups and other qualitative tools was very successful, they can be compromised by the small number of participants, the group leader’s personality, bias and skill, and by personalities within the group. Whether quantitative or qualitative, however, the data never “speaks for itself.” It’s always subject to interpretation, and sometimes to wishful thinking and oversimplification.

Social Media opens up a world of possibilities for marketing researchers, agencies and marketers. Several characteristics of Social Media tools make them ideal for provoking creative thinking and producing insight:

1. Penetration. Although it is not equally dispersed across age, education and income cohorts, access to Social Media is extensive and growing, even among older consumers.
2. Speed. Social Media can be used quickly – almost in real time on mobile devices.
3. Opt-in. Social Media is inherently permission-based. This may not make it easier to find a random sample for an online survey, but it does make it easier to find consumers who will share their opinions, insights and experiences because they want to rather than because – as in the case of focus groups – they are being paid and fed.
4. Location-based. Social Media is increasingly being integrated with location-based applications. Location is a variable that does not exist for most focus groups, which usually take place in dedicated facilities.
5. Interactivity. Social Media is … social. The interactions among participants in a focus group frequently are the most valuable part of the group. Social Media facilitates similar interactions on a vast scale.

How could researchers leverage these attributes? Here are a couple of ideas, all of which are qualitative in nature:

• Discussions on Facebook pages. Marketers could start conversations on issues that range from very concrete questions, such as opinions on new packaging ideas, to strategic issues such as potential line extensions. Consumers also would be able to launch their own discussions, which the company could either moderate or simply monitor.
• Scheduled conversations on Twitter. Marketers could use Twitter as an extension of the conventional focus group. Many more voices could be heard over the same period of time than with a typical group.
• Location-based feedback. Suppose a large restaurant chain wanted a snapshot of server performance during the lunch rush, or a retailer wanted to evaluate restocking at every mall-based store. Consumers could check in at each location and provide real time feedback, including photos and video. This would provide data from a much larger, more varied and possibly more knowledgeable group than mystery shoppers, at a fraction of the cost.
• Consumer-generated video. Focus groups rarely depart from a conversational model. But it might be very useful for consumers to shoot videos in response to specific solicitations by the marketer. “Make your own commercial” campaigns are a start in this direction, although to be valuable the campaign should encourage consumers not to be constrained by the company’s current marketing.
• Meetups/Tweetups. Marketers could use Social Media as the nexus for live meetings with consumers. Moderators could ask questions of the group, which could be responded to with live Tweets.

I am sure that others can come up with further – and doubtless better – ideas. These techniques are likely to be low in cost, but they definitely have some kinks or at least raise some issues. For one thing, all research involving Social Media takes place in the open. This is not always a problem but if keeping the subject of the research away from competitors is a priority, the research is not a good candidate for Social Media. Second, there is no way to control – or even verify – the composition of the participants. A marketer who wants specific cohorts represented in a focus group will not be satisfied with Twitter-based groups. However, this lack of control doesn’t have to be a bad thing, if it’s dealt with creatively. For example, a marketer of adult diapers might be tempted to decide against using a Twitter-based focus group because Twitter users are too young; but men in their 20s may have valuable insights into a product that is marketed to women over 60. They have grandparents, after all, and their perspective on their grandparents’ experience with the product might be very valuable.

The discussion above involves using Social Media qualitatively. However, it may be possible to use Social Media for quantitative purposes. According to the Los Angeles Times, a team of researchers at HP Labs has developed a computational model that uses the volume of tweets about a movie and their overall sentiment about the film to predict its box office performance over its first two weeks of release better than any other standard measure. The rationale for this result is completely beyond me, but if the methodology stands up, and the results can be replicated in other areas, we may have to rethink what we mean when we say we are looking for statistically significant results.

The Zavee takeaway:

• Marketing research is both art and science, and it influences decisions that affect all of us.
• Social Media is expanding the range of marketing research techniques, usually while reducing costs.
• If you think marketing research might be right for your business but the expense has kept you away, try to find a research firm that uses Social Media. You might have to make some compromises on methodology, but you may learn a lot more than you expect.