​An overriding theme in market research innovation is getting closer to the way people actually think, feel, and behave. We’re seeing more techniques and approaches that allow us to observe and measure versus ask. The body of evidence for this shift is extremely compelling, especially when combined with the latest cognitive and behavioral science advances. One way to do this within a quantitative research context, is to focus on respondent choice as a measure, versus traditional scale-based responses.
 
At a recent market research industry conference, Dave Santee of True North Market Insights gave three compelling arguments against traditional Likert scales, saying: they are not comparative or in context, respondents dislike them and don’t make decisions that way, and different groups/cultures use scales differently.
 
Multiple expert sources agree that research approaches that ask respondents to make a selection from a relevant choice set are more predictive than research designs that ask respondents to rate or score those same options on a scale. We know that our brains love shortcuts—we operate in deselection mode when shopping, not rating each and every product before arriving at a decision. By the way, this approach also gets around the dreaded matrix question!
 
Here is a simple example that works within a traditional survey framework (truncated just to make the point):

There are trade-offs. If you’re used to getting a rating for every attribute for every brand, that won’t happen in this type of research design. But if the findings more accurately reflect the way that people feel and act, that seems like a good trade-off to make. The benefits will go to those who can convince their organization to throw away the old scorecards, dashboards, and databases. As an ex-corporate researcher, I understand that’s no easy feat!
 
In addition to restructuring questions for choice (versus scales) within a traditional survey framework, there are other, entirely choice-centric research methodologies, including MaxDiff, Conjoint, Prediction Markets, and Virtual Shelf/Store research. These rely exclusively on respondent choice for data collection (but can also be supplemented by direct questions within the broader study).
 
Virtual shelf tests are something I’ve personally been doing a lot more of recently. They are my preferred way of doing packaging testing, but I’ve also used them for planogram/shelf set design and even new product qualification (in lieu of a traditional concept test). Instead of asking purchase intent or other scale-response questions, respondents simply shop for their desired product(s) from a category shelf set, generating product/package selection and spending metrics.
 
This type of testing doesn’t have to be restricted to “shelves” if that’s not relevant for your category or brand. The key principle is to put the product (or service) in the context that consumers will actually evaluate and make the purchase decision. Other examples might include: mocked-up Amazon.com pages of products, restaurant menus, or website lists of services (don’t forget to include prices!).
 
-
 
I have very classical CPG market research background, so I cut my teeth on survey scales and grids and live for the thrill of a top quintile purchase intent score, but I also love learning about new methodologies and techniques that get us closer to predicting actual consumer behavior in a complex reality.
 
Choice-based research techniques can not only help us better reflect and predict reality, but they also have the benefits of being more engaging for respondents and more mobile-friendly, both of which lead to higher survey completion rates, more representative sample, and ultimately, better quality and more accurate data.

​This is the world we live in: ever-increasing complexity with an ever-increasing drive for speed. There has been an exponential increase in the types and sources of data, and decision-making is becoming more nuanced. 

Derek Franks, Global Director of Insights for EA, talked about Gregory Treverton's concept of puzzles versus mysteries, explaining that a puzzle has one clear right answer and is solved by collecting more data. Mysteries, on the other hand, can be hard to know if you've really solved, and they usually require making sense of the data you already have. We live in a world of mysteries!

Things are changing at CPG behemoth Procter & Gamble as well. Julie Setser, VP of Innovation Capability, talked about how they look at data and insights as a "body of evidence" now versus the historic approach of one magic number (e.g. a purchase intent score).

Consumer demand is driving faster innovation cycles, particularly in categories like technology, beauty, and fashion, and arguably across every consumer category to some extent. And in today's hyper-connected, social media savvy world, brands can't afford to miss an opportunity to react to customer feedback, both amplifying bright spots and fire-fighting when needed.

Potential Solutions

From a  data and insights perspective, AI (artificial intelligence) and machine learning can automate time-intensive tasks and processes. AI chatbots can conduct adaptive surveys and even qualitative probing. Machine learning tools, like text analytics and sentiment analysis, can help keep a pulse on consumer reviews, brand posts, and other customer (dis)satisfaction data.

For product development and innovation, many are embracing agile research approaches. Inspired by concepts like Lean Startup and Google's Design Sprints, this new breed of research is done in a compressed time period and is highly iterative. Instead of waiting for a near-final product and one big 'validation' test, agile research prioritizes the killer issues and tackles them in chunks, using an MVP (minimum viable product) approach or rough prototypes.

In college, I took a course called "Finance for Non-Finance Majors" (I think the department head lost out on his preferred "Finance for Dummies" title). It's a good principle though--we aren't all going to be accountants or marketers or designers, but it can be useful as a small business owner, solopreneur, or anyone who collaborates with these functions to have a working knowledge of some of the principles and tools of other disciplines. 
 
For me, working in consumer research and insights, graphic design is a key complementary discipline. I firmly believe that market research needs great graphic design like a cupcake needs frosting. Great design pulls in your audience, helps you clearly communicate the story and makes the content more engaging.
 
To that end, I often do work with professional graphic designers to help take my decks and reports to the next level. But I don’t always have the time or the budget to do that or frankly, sometimes I just need a deliverable that’s “good enough”. Over the years as an independent insights consultant, I’ve discovered a handful of resources that can make marketing my own business and creating proposals and reports for others more beautiful, more interesting and just overall, more professional-looking.
​

​Icons
Something I’ve picked up from working with actual designers is that a few, well-placed icons in a consistent style and color palette can really add that final level
of polish to a report or other deliverable. I use The Noun Project and find it valuable enough to have actually ponied up for a paid subscription (very          
reasonable at $40/year currently).
 
Sometimes icons are purely decorative, but they can work harder too. For example, if you use specific icons consistently throughout a report to represent particular consumer groups, those icons can stand in for text in complicated chart or graphics to make them easily readable.

​Stock photography
There is a lot of terrible stock photography out there. To avoid it, you basically have two choices. One, you can pay for a subscription to a high-quality stock image service like Adobe Stock or Shutterstock. That may be a good option if you need lots of images for commercial use, but it’s not cheap.
 
Alternately, if you just need images occasionally and they don’t have to be super-specific, there are a few great, free stock photo sources. Two that I frequently use are: Unsplash, which has a beautiful, searchable website, and Death to Stock which sends free unique photos out in themed packs via email. Be sure to credit the creators appropriately (each site has their own guidelines).

​Fonts
Here’s what I know about special fonts: not using them can make materials look generic, but using them inappropriately makes you look like a complete idiot. I prefer to risk erring on the generic side, especially since I’m typically dealing with client-facing deliverables (vs. creative marketing output). That said, if you’re feeling brave, you can find lots of free and unique fonts on Dafont.
 
Just remember that if you’re using a non-standard font, there’s a good chance it won’t look the same on someone else’s computer in a document (unless they have also downloaded the same font). When it doubt, send the document as a PDF to preserve fonts.

​Infographics
Here’s an area I would love to grow my own design expertise—creating infographics! There’s a reason information presented in this format gets shared so much online—if done right, it’s a fun and engaging way to communicate data.
 
If I decide I simply must create my own infographic, the best option I’ve found is Venngage. They have a basic selection of free infographic templates that you can play around with online to create a custom version. If you love it, there are also paid subscriptions that give access to all the premium templates as well ($19/month for an individual). If you’re interested in data visualization more broadly, I also suggest you check out Viz-Fest, which is a (free) webinar series on the topic.

Photo editing
If you are working with stock photography (or your own), you’ll likely need photo editing software at some point. If you don’t have the need level or expertise for an Adobe Creative Cloud subscription (e.g. Adobe Illustrator, Adobe Photoshop, etc.), you can stay in the Adobe family with Photoshop Elements (one-time purchase), which is a more basic and user-friendly version of Photoshop.
 
There are a few good, free online photo editing sites as well. I recommend Fotor or Pixlr (the latter also has links on its homepage to free vector editor, fonts, and graphics sites). One of my most common image editing needs is just to reduce the file size of an image, particularly for use in email. The interface could use a little design help itself, but this free Image Optimizer site has always done the trick for me.

​​If you work in market research (or marketing or any related disciplines), I highly recommend that you find an awesome freelance graphic designer or design firm to partner with, if you don’t work for a company with those resources in-house. Working with designers and seeing their creations is probably the best way to build your own eye for design. And for everything else, I hope these design tools and resources can help fill the gaps!