Resource Type: Article

  • Judith Wardle Talks to Qualitative Recruiter Lynne Chapman

    Judith Wardle Talks to Qualitative Recruiter Lynne Chapman

    Article initially published by the AMSR. Interview by Judith Wardle.

     

     

     

     

    When Lynne went along to her local hotel a few years ago to hostess a group for the magazine Woman’s Realm, no-one was more surprised than her to see the fake wall hiding a camera crew. When the group was finishing, the crew burst through the wall and invited all the respondents to star in a TV ad. It could never happen today, with the strictures of GDPR but they were delighted. Then there was the hide constructed by a recruiter’s porch hiding Danny Baker, also bursting into the room to invite respondents to star in a Daz commercial. You may have seen it!  Only two of many memorable events in Lynne’s career as a qualitative recruiter.

    A recruiter’s life was nothing if not varied: one day private health insurance, next day fishermen. My interview with Lynne in her sunny yellow kitchen in Nottingham recalled the ups and downs of qualitative life but also reminded me of how our industry treated these women (and they were nearly all women) so poorly. Lynne was not alone in finding life as a qualitative recruiter frustrating and difficult.

    She was persuaded to take up the job by a neighbour in Mill Hill, alongside nine other jobs! Her motivation was keeping the family afloat and she knew little about research. An initial training course at QRS led to a lucky meeting with Marilyn, and the two of them got together to tackle the jobs that came their way. She puts down the longevity of their careers in research – over 45 years – to that partnership. Recruitment is a lonely job and having someone to share the burdens and successes made all the difference.

    Of all the jobs in qual research, as a moderator myself, I have long since believed that the job of the recruiter is the most difficult but having heard from Lynne, I am doubly certain. Think of the qualities and skills they need: resilience and perseverance to keep going when potential respondents say ‘no, thank you’, warmth and charm to reassure, intelligence and ingenuity to work out how to find those ‘needles in haystacks’. They were the bedrock of the industry; without them, there would be no respondents and no research and yet they were the first people to be criticised. Remember all the talk of ‘cheats’ back in the day? Remember those knee-jerk complaints from clients who didn’t like the findings? Clearly we weren’t talking to the ‘right’ people and whose fault is that?

    As an industry, we did not support our most important people, our recruiters. We failed to listen to them, when quotas were difficult; we paid them as little as we could get away with and we blamed them when things went wrong. In the power triangle, clients had the power and the recruiters at the bottom of the triangle too little.  The advertising agencies, also Lynne and Marilyn’s clients, got it right. They rewarded them fairly, they entertained them lavishly and they felt valued.

    Lynne was taught that the only correct way to recruit respondents was on the street, stopping people who could have fitted the quota. Well – that method didn’t last long. Even with the relatively simple quotas of the 80s, it was difficult to find people who fitted and once found, even more difficult to persuade them to spend an evening in a stranger’s house. Lynne and Marilyn quickly resorted to a card index system (she trained as a librarian!), bearing the details of individuals, when they had been interviewed and other relevant information. They relied on snowballing, not just them but respondents too were willing to help.

    So it was, and is, a lonely job, with sleepless nights worrying about how they were going to find those ‘needles’, whether they were going to turn up and even if they were going to be ‘good’ respondents, ie chatty and informative. (Not the recruiter’s job – Ed.) Then there was the disruption to the family, eating their evening meal before the respondents arrived and then shooed out of the TV room. The stains on the carpet, the respondent who wee-ed on the sofa, the imperious moderators moving the furniture and forbidding crisps (too noisy for the tape) all added to the acute anxiety of an evening of groups at home.

    Having said all that, recruitment definitely had its joys. Lynne has enjoyed having a role in her local community; she knows lots of her neighbours and they know her.

    The incentives play their part! When things went well, evenings ended on a high. She has always been hugely enthusiastic about the research process generally and the chance it gives for people to have a say. On one memorable occasion, she was chatting to a young Asian woman who was waiting in her kitchen when the woman burst into tears. She said it had been the only time she had been asked for her opinion; her father, brother and husband always spoke for her. ‘I have never been asked what I think’, she said. ‘That’s the power of research’, responded Lynne.

    How things have changed; Lynne puts the sudden change down to the pandemic. All of a sudden people were not able to meet in person and the advent of Zoom opened up new possibilities and cheaper ways of gathering respondents. Things have just got more difficult since. Recruitment has moved from being a community task to one that is done online and much of the joy has gone, too. Algorithms have replaced ingenuity and judgement; location as a factor in recruitment and analysis is disappearing as groups comprise individuals from all over the country. Lynne bemoans the changes but soldiers on, accommodating the changes, and took time to comment that some face-to-face work has come back.

    What a superstar!

     

    Lynne Chapman is an ICG member. 

     

  • Who’s Afraid of the Wolf?

    Who’s Afraid of the Wolf?

    Article by ICG member Viviana Codemo_ Marea Research Qualitative Thinking_ ITALY

     

     

     

     

    Some good news! We can give AI a run for its money with our creativity and the unimaginable resources of our unconscious.

    A few years ago, I enjoyed writing an abstract that I then sent to the Esomar Call for Contribution, and to my great surprise and excitement, it was accepted as a speech at the Esomar Qualitative Congress,. The topic was very fascinating to me: how to use fairy tale archetypes to imagine a qualitative research tool to be used in focus  groups.

    The inspiration came from Bruno Bettelheim’s magnificent book, The Uses of Enchantment: The Meaning and Importance of Fairy Tales. What was new, and exciting, was the warmth, humane and urgent, with which Bettelheim expounded fairy tales as aids to the child’s growth, which he understand as growth through
    conflicts, the chief conflict being Oedipal. The wicked stepmothers and fairy godmothers he translated as, all, Mother, and the kings and hunters as, simply, Father. It is the essence of the fairy tale to objectify differing facets of the child’s emotional experience; by showing the underlying identity of polarized and duplicated symbolizations, Bettelheim’s readings make sense of much that seems nonsensical, and relieve the tales of much of the cruelty that has turned many parents and educators to tamer, but thinner, narratives for children.
    An adult, in telling a story, though encouraged to yield, like the countless tellers before him, to “his conscious and unconscious feelings for the story,”is strictly admonished never to “explain” the meaning. Bettelheim’s explications of two dozen or so best-known tales convince us, indeed, that we may not know the meaning, or that the child of four or five knows it better. That the child does not “catch”all the symbolization Is the opposite of an objection; these tales’ merit is that the little listener takes what he can, responding to the unspoken significances unconsciously, mastering anxieties bodied forth for him by these venerable fantasies, being led through Oedipal and sibling conflicts toward an eventual happy union with an “agecorrect” partner.

    What struck me when analysing Bettelheim’s theories was the universality that could be found in their meaning: those archetypes of the maternal and the paternal, of hunger that devours from within (expressed by the wolf) spanned entire generations, remaining unchanged and continuing to “speak” to our unconscious. Therefore, I started from a premise that seemed almost obvious: each of us was once a child (yes, it’s true!) and each of us came into contact with fairy tale characters (the fairy, the king, the wolf) during our childhood, at least until classic fairy tales became part of our imagination. We may soon have to update these reflections if we realise that today’s children have been deprived of this precious emotional treasure chest, leaving them alone in front of a screen.

    Returning to methodology, I discovered that I could use fairy tale archetypes to work with both adults and teenagers on the relationship they establish with a certain product or brand, and monitor its evolution over time.
    For example, through the transition from the “good fairy” to the King, it emerged that the more distinctly maternal nature of some brands had gradually become institutionalised, losing that intimate role of mothering and shifting towards the normative and authoritative system typically associated with fatherhood and
    represented by the King. None of this had been mentioned by the interviewees, so it had not been brought
    to a conscious level, but it was clearly evident from the cards they had chosen and the imagery suggested by those choices. Moreover, after collecting interviews, diaries or narratives, you can:

    • Analyse the stories by looking for archetypal structures (e.g. a participant who
    describes themselves as “travelling”, “struggling”, “guided by someone” →
    hero’s journey).
    • Interpret the transformative passages in the stories according to fairy tale
    models (crisis → trial → rebirth).

    When I presented my paper to the Esomar delegates, I invited colleagues from cultures other than Western ones (I am thinking of the African continent, but also India, China, etc.) to look for characters in their traditional fairy tales that could represent the same archetypes identified by Bettelheim. I do not know if anyone did so. Yet it would be an interesting challenge (which AI has not yet imagined!!), because everyone, wherever they come from, has their own inner child, which guides their emotional world.

    Useful references
    § B. Bettelheim – The Uses of Enchantment: The Meaning and Importance of
    Fairy Tales
    § J. Campbell – The Hero with a Thousand Faces
    § C. G. Jung – Man and His Symbols
    § V. Propp – Morphology of the Folktale

     

    Viviana Codemo | LinkedIn

  • Why Hungry Ghosts Make Excellent Focus Groups: What Death Festivals Reveal about Consumer Behaviour

    Why Hungry Ghosts Make Excellent Focus Groups: What Death Festivals Reveal about Consumer Behaviour

    Article by ICG member Felicia Schwartz, China Insight.

    With China’s Hungry Ghost Festival concluded in September, Halloween around the corner, and Mexico’s Día de los Muertos following closely, it struck me how differently the returning dead behave across cultures. What began as seasonal musings turned dead-serious (pun intended)—these festivals reveal fundamental differences in consumer psychology.

    China’s Hungry Ghost Festival honours spirits released during the seventh lunar month: beloved ancestors but also wandering “hungry ghosts” without descendants. Halloween, from Celtic Samhain, was coopted by Christians and evolved into playful fear divorced from reverence. Mexico’s Día de los Muertos, rooted in Aztec beliefs about death as transition, merged with Catholic tradition into a joyful family reunion with elaborate altars. and processions.

    In short: Chinese ghosts are high-maintenance and need constant offerings. Western ghosts just want to party. Mexican ghosts are beloved relatives dropping by for dinner.

    These different behaviours and attitudes really translate into three different cultural operating systems for decision-making that go well beyond the holidays.

    China: Obligation
    Chinese families burn offerings because they must—driven by filial duty and protective caution. This extends year-round: health products (“must protect family”), insurance (“must secure future”), luxury goods (“must show status”). Chinese consumers respond to products positioned as necessary duties.

    West: Choice
    Halloween operates on pure desire—transformation, self-expression, temporary escape. Participation triggers are FOMO and identity play, not duty. Western consumers seek choices that express individual identity: “what does this say about me?”

    Latin America: Joyful Honor
    Día de los Muertos transforms obligation into joy, duty into art. Spending is joy-driven—beautiful altars, colorful skeleton parades reminding us “death is just part of life.” Latin American consumers skew toward purchases that strengthen relationships through celebration.

    Of culture evolves and there is a contemporary twist to this framework

    China: Obligation meets efficiency
    Young urban Chinese remain selective about which traditions deserve their duty impulse. Authorities now promote “Cloud Offerings” via WeChat, replacing burned paper. Brands can modernize the form if they preserve the purpose: protection, family security, respect.

    West: Identity expression amplified
    The $3+ billion Halloween costume market reveals consumers want meaningful choices expressing individual identity. Social media amplifies this but doesn’t change the core driver: “this is who I am.”

    Latin America: Authenticity under pressure
    As Día de los Muertos goes global (the “Coco effect”), Mexican consumers face tension between modernizing presentation and defending cultural meaning. Authentic craftsmanship and cultural integrity are non-negotiable. Brands must prove they understand the why, not just the aesthetic.

    The Pattern

    Modern consumers globally are more selective about which traditions to embrace, but when they commit, they demand deeper authenticity and meaning. The opportunity for brands lies in honouring tradition while feeling contemporary, being efficient while meaningful, innovative while respectful.

    After all, how you honour the dead says everything about how you live—and what you buy.

    (1) Felicia Schwartz | LinkedIn

    Felicia Schwartz, Author at The ICG

  • Want to Make Your Advertising More Effective? Here’s How Research Can Help

    Want to Make Your Advertising More Effective? Here’s How Research Can Help

    Article written by ICG member Graham Booth, Movement. 

  • Why Investment in Your Firm’s Brand Is an Important Part of Your Growth Strategy

    Why Investment in Your Firm’s Brand Is an Important Part of Your Growth Strategy

    Article by ICG member Paul Griffiths for QRCA Views. 

    Insight industry growth expert Paul Griffiths explores the most cost-effective and easily executed ways to grow your research partner brand. Regardless of whether you are a qualitative solopreneur, part of a small qualitative shop, or the leader in a large agency, there are ways you can build brand salience and make sales activity more impactful that don’t require big marketing budgets

     

    One of the challenges I experience all the time working with clients, especially from the owners and leaders of smaller qualitative research firms, is this:

    “Why, Paul, should I invest in my firm’s brand? I’ve done a bit of marketing, here and there over the years, and it is expensive, and it doesn’t ever seem to create any positive commercial impact or sales.”

    My succinct and probably quite frustrating response is this:

    “If you want to grow your firm in the medium to long term, you need to build the profile of your brand. That cannot be a one-off or occasional marketing activity. You need a focused marketing plan to be consistently invested in and executed in the medium term.”

    The response from my client or prospective client, I’m sorry to say, is generally a groan, a raising of the eyebrows, and a shrug of the shoulders. Then, a slightly more constructive conversation takes place six to nine months later, when the realization lands that changing nothing but expecting a different outcome is not really a strategy that leads to growth.

    But why is this? Why, as an industry, are we not that focused or invested in trying to make our brands famous?

    As owners or leaders in very small qualitative businesses, why do we think that building a brand profile is not as applicable to us and how we grow and ensure our firms are successful?

    There are many smaller shops and solopreneurs that do an excellent job of building their brands so that they are well-known and well-considered by clients. I know as I’m lucky enough to work with some of them. As a solo consultant myself, the success of my own business, over more than a decade, is predicated on the principles of building a brand that I espouse. I am literally a man in a shed, yet much of what I suggest, I also do myself—a qualitative research business and a consultant have very similar pressures in terms of time and budget.

    Especially in a highly competitive market, where client budgets are under pressure, and technology disruption has never been greater, why do we not invest in brand and growth? In the current market, I am confident in making the assertion that if you are not building your brand, you are likely going to suffer from declining sales and profits.

    What I am interested in exploring is how we can raise our brand game as an industry—how research and insight agencies can operate at a higher level of marketing savviness, punch above their weight with limited resources and budgets, and grow their brands.

    Seminal Brand Thinkers

    As a starting point for thinking about how you can grow your qualitative firm’s brand, I refer you to the most seminal brand thinking of the last 10 years (or, at least, I think it is!). I’m referring to the work of Byron Sharp and his colleagues at the Ehrenberg-Bass Institute.

    As brand experts and marketing scientists, they have looked at empirical evidence for how investing in brand building and growth relate to each other. What causes brands to grow? Their analysis and conclusions are compelling, especially in the B2B marketing world that we inhabit as leaders and owners of qualitative research agencies.

    The evidence and argument that they present (and I’m very much summarizing) is that for your brand to grow relative to your competition, you need to make sure that at the moment of purchase, your brand is the one that comes to mind—that your brand has what Sharp calls “mental availability” or “brand salience.” If you want to go into detail, I’d heartily recommend Byron Sharp’s book, How Brands Grow, and the sequel, How Brands Grow, Part 2.

    Just so we are clear, high mental availability is when a person has high awareness of the brand and knows what it does and what it stands for and wants to purchase it. It is not just awareness—in the sense of “I am aware of the brand”—it is a deeper sense of acceptance that this is a brand you are willing to buy. For example, if you ask me what car brands I know (awareness), this is different from the car brands I would actually purchase (based on my knowledge of the brands, what sort of cars they are, why they suit my needs, and what I might need to pay to purchase them). Personally, Ford might have high brand awareness, but Skoda has the highest mental availability for me.

    Now we know, when we are selling qualitative market research and insight services and products, that it is a potentially complex customer journey. There may not be a single point of decision for the purchase, and much of the time, you are in a competitive bid or pitch process. In the more drawn-out pitch process, there are vital instances where the power of your firm’s brand can have an influence.

    For example, initially, you need your firm to be in the pitch process. That means you need to have good brand salience when the client is putting the pitch list together. This is true of small firms and solopreneurs as well as bigger firms.

    When it comes to the decision about which firm to commission, if you have invested in brand building and mental availability, all that rich and compelling positive sentiment you have built up in the minds of the purchasers and stakeholders helps influence and makes the rationale for choosing your firm more powerful and likely to succeed, even in the most rational procurement process.

    I would also add that investing in and building your qualitative firm’s brand will help you win work from your existing and current clients, as well as support the acquisition of new clients. Brand building adds as much value to existing client growth and maintenance as it does for new business development. So, even if new client acquisition is not a priority right now for your firm, brand building will help your firm win more revenue from your existing relationships.

    Stages in the Purchasing Journey

    So, how can you go about building your qualitative firm’s brand?

    I think it is helpful to think about the different stages that your client must go through in their decision-making process and how these stages can be positively influenced by your brand-building activities. This is how you create, build, and keep your brand salience for your qualitative firm. These are as applicable to all qualitative firms, both big and small.

    The purchase journey stages, as I think of them, are as follows:

    1. Awareness Creation
    2. Engagement and Nurturing
    3. Sales Activation
    4. Purchase Decision

    Taking each in turn, if done well and consistently, brand building should achieve the following with your target clients:

    • Make them aware of your brand
    • Help them be aware of a business problem that they have
    • Make them understand that you have a solution to solve that problem

    Stage 1: Awareness Creation

    Brand-building activities that you can use at this stage include your website, social media such as LinkedIn, advertising, self-created PR, interviews in publications or journals or on podcasts, etc. I have seen small and micro qualitative firms use these activities to build their awareness. You may not need to execute all of them at once, but most can be done with lesser amounts of time or investment.

    For example, here in the U.K., there are regular webinars delivered to client-side networks and to industry bodies by solopreneurs and small qualitative firms. This is because the owners or leaders of these small firms have made a conscious decision to submit papers or ideas for presentation to these organizations. They are willing to invest time (not necessarily money!) in these activities. Often, the successful smaller qualitative firms are better at persuading clients to cowrite or present these webinars and papers than the bigger firms, where there is less of a personal relationship.

    Membership in one of the research industry associations (like QRCA) can be a great and relatively inexpensive way to build your industry profile, network, and learn from others. Certainly, here in the U.K., these associations are increasingly focused on attending conferences and building bridges to the client side. These are useful channels to explore to build your firm’s brand.

    Stage 2: Engagement and Nurturing

    Turning next to engagement, once a target client is aware of your brand, you need to take them through a nurturing or engagement process. Your brand-building activity for this stage should be about proving relevance, helping potential clients evaluate your offer and value proposition, and making sure you are top-of-mind.

    Crucially, this is also where you can start to use your brand building to gather and qualify leads. So, here, your brand-­building activity might include webinars, gated case studies and white papers, and newsletters—any activity that means there is a value exchange between you and the possible client—so they get the benefit of your wisdom and experience, and you get their email and contact details.

    Again, the necessary investment to do these sorts of activities can be small. There are free versions of customer relationship management (CRM) systems that small qualitative firms and solopreneurs use to generate and send out newsletters and email content. Let me reiterate; this is perfectly possible for the smallest of firms. It requires time and effort but virtually no money to use a CRM to create and disseminate a monthly newsletter.

    LinkedIn is an obvious platform to share and disseminate content you have created for free. Remember, the white paper you write, say, on how qualitative research and AI can combine to create deeper insights, can also be a series of LinkedIn posts, a blog on your website, and even a video thought piece you film on your phone when you are out walking the dog.

    Related to other non-written content, there are podcasting platforms that are free, which have very straightforward editing and publishing capabilities. Several individuals and small qualitative firms I’m aware of are starting to experiment with this as an engagement tool.

    Another engagement activity that small firms and solopreneurs can use is awards submissions. Making an award submission with a client is a terrific way to generate materials for your website and circulate them to prospective clients. If you are a member of the Insights Consultants Group, for example, you can submit for an award that is presented at the Market Research Society Awards on an annual basis.

    Obviously, this ability to contact a potential client is key when we move further down the purchase path to sales activation. When you are actively communicating with potential clients to see if they would be willing to meet with you, your brand building plays an important role in reinforcing this—it gives you content to use in outreach campaigns; it provides context and credibility. Sales activation without brand building, without that investment in awareness and engagement, is far less effective and efficient.

    Stage 3: Sales Activation

    With sales activation, you might wish to do this yourself. I have seen small qualitative firms (including one-person firms) very successfully use LinkedIn as a sales activation tool. Again, it is an investment of time by the owner of the firm or the solopreneur, but it does not necessarily need to cost money. As already mentioned, a free CRM platform can enable you to send out email campaigns. Equally, I have small agency clients that invest in sales using a fractional business development agency, say once or twice a year; they use partners or individuals who are specialists in the research and insights world.

    Stage 4: Purchase Decision

    Finally, brand building has a crucial role to play in the purchase decision process. The business insight consultancy Gartner (www.gartner.com/en) talks about “decision confidence,” which is your client’s desire to believe and affirm that they are making the best decision about whom to work with. Having decision confidence not only increases the likelihood of securing the sale in a competitive pitch, but it can increase the value of the sale. Your brand building, if done well, will contribute to decision confidence and can help you get over the line and secure that valuable commission.

    Some smaller firms ensure they are reinforcing this “decision confidence” and continue to build their brand salience through attendance at events (virtual or in-person), offers to present proposals in person (or at least online), and sending relevant content and articles to their prospective clients during the pitch process and afterward, even if they have been unsuccessful.

    Call to Action

    To summarize and suggest a call to action: how ironic is it that, as an industry, we have clients that spend considerable sums of money with us, as qualitative research firms, to help them grow their brand equity and salience? At the same time, most of us practice so little of what is savvy brand building. Yet, the path to sustainable and long-term growth, based on empirical evidence, as well as good marketing and sales sense (I would argue), is about creating and investing in your firm’s brand.

    It is not easy. It does require planning, investment of time (definitely) and money (maybe), and good execution capabilities. But in this market and the conditions we work in, as the leader or owner of a qualitative research firm, building your firm’s brand salience with existing clients and potential new ones is the key to achieving growth and commercial success, in the medium- to long-term.

    Home – QRCA
  • Insights That Make an Impact: How Researchers Can Provide More Value to Clients

    Insights That Make an Impact: How Researchers Can Provide More Value to Clients

    Article by ICG member Jay Zaltzman

     

     

     

     

    I’m excited to announce the launch of my video series “From Insight to Impact” – conversations with leaders in marketing, strategy, and research on how to ensure research delivers meaningful business value to client companies.

    My first guest was James Forr, Head of Insights at Olson Zaltman, the firm founded by Dr. Gerald Zaltman (Harvard Business School) and Dr. Jerry Olson (Penn State University). I asked James how we can provide more value to clients, especially in the age of AI. Two of his points stood out:

    • Ask clients better questions
    • Ask research participants better questions

    On the client side, James said “it’s our job many times to try to help clients think about their problems a little bit more deeply. Sometimes the question that you as a client want to answer is not necessarily the question that you should ask.”

    He gave an example where a client was looking to reverse a decline in sales of their breakfast cereal. They originally wanted to conduct research to understand their brand better, but James and his team suggested learning more about the context in which the brand plays, specifically, breakfast. The client knew that breakfast was an important bonding time for mother and child, so they designed research to learn more about that relationship. They found there were developmental steps children go through, and moms frequently would discover the child went to the next step (e.g., made a friend independently) over breakfast. Those insights helped the client create highly effective marketing.

    Beyond reframing client questions, James also emphasized listening more deeply to participants. He gave an example of a project where a couple consumers said that it’s important to eat healthy “these days.” While it would be easy to skip over the mention of “these days,” James thought there was something behind that. Subsequent probing found that people had concerns about “big food” and “big pharma” – concerns that were shaping consumer behavior in new ways.

    AI can process vast amounts of data, but it doesn’t catch those subtle moments. Human researchers add value when we slow down, notice unexpected comments, and follow up. I’m reminded of an experience I had facilitating a board strategy session. One board member said something that made everyone else laugh uncomfortably. I continued on, because I had a lot to cover. But then I caught it and circled back. That issue turned out to be the crux of the problem of how the organization saw itself and the basis for how it would move forward. It can be difficult to note these kinds of statements because we tend to have packed discussion guides. But it’s worth making that extra effort!

    You can view the full interview with James here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tIEF546tAE

     

     

  • How Digital Conversation Analysis is Transforming Social Listening: A Methodological Revolution

    How Digital Conversation Analysis is Transforming Social Listening: A Methodological Revolution

    Article by ICG member John Habershon PhD

     

     

     

    Social listening has always promised brands deep insight into what consumers really think. But in reality we’ve been stuck with an uncomfortable choice: either use automated sentiment analysis that barely scratches the surface, or manually analyse samples so small they can’t possibly capture the full richness of what people are actually saying online. Over the past year, I’ve developed and refined an approach I call Digital Conversation Analysis (DCA) – a methodology that fundamentally changes what’s possible with social listening data. Using advanced AI tools, including Claude from Anthropic, DCA lets me analyse tens of thousands of social media conversations with the same interpretive depth I’d bring to a traditional qualitative study. Most social listening projects give you either shallow automated metrics or deep analysis of small, potentially unrepresentative samples. Neither approach really captures what consumers are saying. DCA bridges this gap by combining the scale of automated analysis with the interpretive sophistication I’d normally bring to qualitative research. This isn’t automated sentiment scoring. DCA involves my active direction throughout the analytical process. I design the inquiry, interrogate emerging patterns, test hypotheses, and exercise judgment at every stage. Claude handles the processing scale while I navigate the research questions.

    Answering the ‘Why’ Questions

    Traditional social listening tells you what is happening – sentiment is declining, mentions are increasing, certain topics are trending. But understanding why consumers feel a certain way, why they choose one brand over another, or why particular issues matter to them? That’s typically required direct qualitative inquiry with relatively small samples. DCA changes this. Because I can analyse conversational data at real depth, it reveals the reasoning, motivations, and contextual factors that consumers articulate in their own words – at scale.

    Implications for the Research Industry

    For research buyers, this represents an opportunity to extract significantly more value from social data. Questions you’d previously have answered with limited samples or superficial metrics can now be explored with both depth and breadth.

    Looking Ahead

    Digital Conversation Analysis represents my response to a fundamental challenge in social listening: how to analyse online conversations at scale without sacrificing the interpretive depth that makes qualitative research valuable.

    Here is a link to the longer version on LinkedIn

  • Taste of Two Worlds: Food as a Bridge Between Heritage and Home: How Migrants Use Food to Navigate Dual Identities

    Taste of Two Worlds: Food as a Bridge Between Heritage and Home: How Migrants Use Food to Navigate Dual Identities

    Article by ICG member Aakanksha Haran

     

     

     

     

    In the quiet warmth of British kitchens, where rain softly taps windowpanes and the kettle’s
    whistle breaks the morning silence, a deeper story simmers alongside the aroma of spices, pots
    of dal, and masala chai. For South Asians in the UK- Indians, Pakistanis, Bangladeshis food is
    more than sustenance. It is a memory machine and a cultural anchor. Each fragrant dish evokes
    bustling markets back home, family mealtimes around steel thalis, and the laughter of festivals
    under monsoon skies. As detailed in the 2025 Smart Move Ventures research, new settlers often
    find themselves overwhelmed not just by logistics, but by longing: calling mothers for recipes,
    craving smells of home. In these kitchens, food is memory stirred into motion, spooned gently
    over rice, steeped in tea, and sizzled in mustard oil. The clatter of pans becomes a language of
    connection, of holding on, of quietly saying, ‘I haven’t let go.’

    The first waves of South Asian immigrants arrived post-Windrush, during the 1950s and 60s,
    amid Britain’s call for post-war labour. These pioneers came with grit, resilience and spice tins
    tucked tightly in luggage. The UK Home Office acknowledges that over half a million people from
    the Indian subcontinent settled in the UK between 1950 and 1980. At that time, British high
    streets offered little beyond bland canned goods. Familiar ingredients like ajwain or curry leaves
    were rare finds. Today, however, the contrast is striking. Back home, buying spices was often a
    visit to a bustling bazaar; a dance of voices, colours, scoops of turmeric and Kashmiri chilli
    weighed by hand. In the UK, South Asians now make weekly pilgrimages to Asian supermarkets
    and local stores like Soho Road’s spice shops or use online platforms stocked with brands like
    MDH, Rajah, or Shan. What was once hand-packed in cloth sacks is now clicked into digital
    baskets. Yet, the search is still sacred. Each spice bought is a thread in the fabric of cultural
    preservation.

    Over time, South Asian food in the UK evolved from survival fare to shared celebration. Across
    temples, mosques, and gurdwaras, flavours once confined to separate states and sects began
    mingling. A Tamil sambhar might now sit beside Punjabi chole at community potlucks. The SMV
    study found that while Bangladeshis missed fish curries and Pakistanis longed for biryani, all
    turned to food during festivals to feel whole. In these kitchens, identity is not static; it simmers,
    blends, and binds. And this isn’t a one-way street. Increasingly, British families are embracing
    this culinary heritage. Chicken tikka masala, once dubbed Britain’s national dish, now shares
    space with regional delicacies in high-street supermarkets. From tea lattes to biryani meal kits,
    South Asian flavours are being folded into the British palate, and with it, a deeper appreciation
    for the stories behind the food.

    For the children and grandchildren of migrants, the kitchen has become a bridge between two
    worlds. These generations, raised with roti in lunchboxes and shepherd’s pie at school dinners,
    are not merely inheriting recipes but they are remixing them. The SMV report spotlights dishes
    like “masala mac and cheese,” “cardamom-infused Victoria sponge cakes,” and “samosa
    burgers” as acts of cultural creativity. One participant recall, “I FaceTime my mum while making
    dal, and then finish it off with a fried egg of my version.” These mashups are not signs of dilution,
    but declarations of ownership. The younger generation plates are palimpsests, layered with
    memory, innovation, and identity. The act of cooking is no longer just remembrance, it is
    Yet amid all this innovation, the emotional pull of heritage food remains unshaken. In the SMV
    research, homesickness was most profoundly tied to taste. The scent of ghee, the snap of cumin
    seeds in hot oil are not mere ingredients, they are portals. Government initiatives like the UK’s
    Community Integration Grants have recognized this, funding kitchens and food festivals that
    bring people together across differences. In multicultural hubs like Birmingham or Leicester,
    where according to the 2021 Census, over 40% of the population identifies as Asian, and food
    has become a shared language, not just within the diaspora but across communities. In these
    places, South Asian food no longer whispers from the margins, but it speaks proudly from street
    corners, school canteens, and Sunday markets.

    Food’s emotional charge extends beyond nostalgia, it nourishes selfhood. In a world rushing
    toward convenience, slow-cooked dal is rebellion. According to SMV data, even highly
    assimilated professionals like doctors, engineers, researchers cling to culinary rituals passed
    down generations. Lunchboxes are packed with care, and recipes are kept in WhatsApp
    messages and memory. With the rise of home-based businesses, many South Asian migrants
    have turned cooking into livelihood: over 12,000 South Asian food businesses are now registered
    in the UK (UK Business Statistics, 2023). These ventures include catering services, spice sellers,
    sweet makers who are both economic engines and cultural beacons. They tell a simple truth that
    food sustains more than bodies, it sustains legacies.

    And so, in every lovingly packed tiffin, in every chai brewed at dusk, a story is being retold- a
    story of departure, longing, reinvention, and quiet pride. The British kitchen has become a stage
    for memory and imagination, where naan meets Nutella, and curry simmers beside casseroles.
    It is here, in the stir of a ladle or the soft press of dough, that migrants reconcile heritage with
    home. As one participant said, “Cooking makes me feel I’m still me, even here.” It’s a reminder
    that home is not always a place; it can be a smell, a taste, a ritual. And in a land where the rain
    through every lovingly cooked meal.

    Sources:

    SMV 2025 research report
    https://old.causewaycoastandglens.gov.uk/
    https://www.ons.gov.uk/
    https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/

     

    (2) Aakanksha Haran | LinkedIn

  • LWhen AI Writes the Report: What’s Left for Us?

    LWhen AI Writes the Report: What’s Left for Us?

    Article by ICG member Arthur Fletcher

     

     

     

     

    Imagine this:  You have conducted a short online research community and you have a lot of comment to analyse and report on (20 participants, 30,000 words in all).  You have been offered the use of AI to assist with your analysis and reporting.

    The AI supplier has told you:

    • The AI takes everything into account, all comments from all participants.
    • The AI down-weights the comments from moderators. The moderator probably comments more than any single participant in the community and their words are often important to understand the context of some participant replies (but their peripheral comments will be ignored)
    • The AI is fully briefed on the project background and objectives – taken from your proposal – and anything else you choose to include. Each community task has its own specific objectives.  The AI can also reference specific, trusted websites for additional market/category/product/brand context
    • The AI can analyse by each task in your community as well as groups of tasks (as a combined topic) or analyse all tasks at once
    • The AI can provide summaries, highlight key topics, identify consumer segments and recommend key comments to incorporate into your report
    • The AI can be asked to write in a chosen style – scientific, contemporary, first person etc., you can also upload previous reports that you have written so that it mirrors your own style
    • The AI can also draw conclusions, identify insights and make recommendations based on the briefing
    • The AI can write your final report, providing links to the relevant source material

    So, you go for it (hand over some old reports/docs you have written) and you have the community report in your hands within an hour.

    Of course you are going to read the report and tune the language to your requirements.  You have done the moderation for the community so can review the content and do a memory sense check alongside any contemporaneous notes you’ve made.  You will also review the conclusions, insights and recommendations against the project objectives and see if you agree with them.

    But are you going to do any more checks?  If so, how?  Do you go back to the source material?  Do you review all the comments or just some?  If you read them all, what’s the point of using the AI if you have to go back through everything?  If the first report is good, would you still want to review every subsequent AI generated report in the same way?

    Is the AI report better than your own reporting?  The AI uses a large language model (LLM) which is trained to generate natural text in a style of your choosing, it has a large vocabulary and can take everything you upload into account.  You can also choose how long your report is going to be.  If reporting is a chore for you, is AI likely to do a better job than you?

    Would you tell your client?  What difference would it make to them if they knew your report was (primarily) AI generated?  Would they consider it better or worse?  Would (future) professional standards or legislation oblige you to tell your clients?

    Would you charge the same?  An AI report should use less of your time, so would you now have a 2 tier reporting charge – AI (cheaper) or Human (more expensive)?

    In the end I don’t think AI removes the need for us – it changes it.  Reporting becomes less about writing and more about curating, challenging and validating what the machine produces.  That may sound like less work, but in truth it asks us to be more thoughtful than ever. The question is: are we ready to step into that role or will we let the machine define the story for us?

  • The Great Digital Divide: How East and West Approach Technology Integration Differently

    The Great Digital Divide: How East and West Approach Technology Integration Differently

    Article by ICG member Felicia Schwartz 

     

     

     

     

     

    Insights from recent consumer research reveal fascinating cultural differences in how we welcome technology into our daily lives

    The “Extra Arms” Philosophy

    In a recent consumer test for an innovative audio product, we uncovered a striking difference in how Eastern and Western consumers view technology’s role in their lives. When Chinese participants described their ideal smart device experience, one phrase stood out: “It should feel like I have extra arms — when my hands are busy with chores, it can play the music I want without me needing to operate it.”

    This wasn’t just about convenience. It revealed a fundamental philosophy where technology becomes an extension of the human body and mind — seamlessly integrated, anticipatory, and almost invisible in its operation.

    Emotional Connection vs. Functional Reliability

    Chinese consumers spoke about technology with emotional language that suggested deep personal relationships. One participant described their ideal smart home setup as making them feel “quite connected to it… like there’s this thing that somehow understands my routines and emotions.” They expected devices not just to respond to commands, but to learn patterns, anticipate needs, and even provide emotional surprises.

    German consumers, while equally sophisticated in their technology adoption, approached it from a different angle. Their focus centered on reliability, craftsmanship, and long-term value. When discussing smart features, German participants consistently emphasized compatibility and longevity: “It all needs to work, it needs to be compatible, otherwise it won’t be useful for me.”

    The Innovation Paradox

    Interestingly, both markets showed appetite for innovation, but their definitions differed significantly. Chinese consumers eagerly embraced the concept of AI that could “anticipate needs instead of just responding” and showed enthusiasm for features that hadn’t been invented yet, asking questions like “Could there eventually be a platform for user-designed visuals?”

    German consumers, while appreciating innovation, filtered it through a lens of practical application and proven reliability. They wanted cutting-edge features, but with the assurance that “five years later the app didn’t really work as well anymore, then I wouldn’t really have much to do with the devices anymore.”

    The Ecosystem Expectation

    Perhaps the most telling difference emerged in how each market envisioned technology integration within their homes. Chinese participants naturally assumed any new device would become part of a broader ecosystem, connecting to existing smart home platforms and enhancing their current setup. They spoke fluently about voice assistants, multi-room audio, and coordinated lighting as baseline expectations.

    German consumers, while interested in smart home features, approached them more cautiously. They valued the option to use devices independently and appreciated having physical backup controls. The attitude seemed to be: “Smart features are welcome, but the core function must work perfectly without them.”

    What This Means for Global Brands

    These insights reveal that successful global technology products can’t simply be localized through language translation or regional pricing. The fundamental relationship between humans and technology varies significantly across cultures.

    Eastern markets appear more willing to let technology into intimate aspects of daily life — to learn personal patterns, make autonomous decisions, and even provide emotional support. Western markets, while embracing technological advancement, maintain stronger boundaries around autonomy and control.

    For product developers, this suggests the need for adaptive approaches: the same device might emphasize AI learning and predictive features in Eastern markets while highlighting user control and reliability in Western ones.

    The Future of Human-Technology Interaction

    What’s particularly fascinating is that neither approach is “more advanced” than the other. Chinese consumers’ willingness to integrate technology deeply into their lives enables rapid innovation and highly personalized experiences. German consumers’ emphasis on reliability and user control ensures robust, long-lasting solutions that truly enhance rather than complicate daily life.

    As technology continues to evolve, understanding these cultural differences becomes crucial for creating products that resonate authentically with global audiences. The future likely lies not in choosing one approach over another, but in designing systems flexible enough to adapt to different cultural relationships with technology.

    The question isn’t whether East or West has the “right” approach to technology integration — it’s how we can design products that honor both the desire for seamless AI assistance and the need for reliable human control.