Editor’s note: Amy J. Yoffie is president of Research Connections, an on-line marketing research firm in Westfield, N.J.
Those who criticize and question the value of on-line marketing research may be missing an essential point. For some studies, Web-based research is, in fact, the better way to gather data. It has become a tool that enriches the researcher’s efforts and provides a new way of learning what the customer wants. Thus, we need to consider the fact that rather than trying to replicate traditional research on the Web, on-line research can stand on its own merits. And, it has the capability to provide us with information that is more revealing than what we can gather off-line.
This perspective attracted a recent client, who was particularly interested in conducting on-line focus groups to learn about the relationship between its product and GenXers. I cannot reveal the company or its product, so let’s say we were conducting the research for a company called Motor Madness, a manufacturer of motorcycles. Since GenXers are on-line in great numbers, the client thought the Web would be a particularly good place to meet and talk to them. Of course, to hedge its bets, the client also conducted traditional groups.
Typically, when Motor Madness conducts qualitative research, it does so in order to understand the psychographics of its target market groups. For traditional groups it has accomplished this in a variety of ways, by:
1) obtaining lifestyles information via a screener;
2) asking each person to make a collage of items that are important to them to bring to the group; and
3) requesting that they bring objects with them that best represent their relationship to motorcycles. They also ask each participant to bring a buddy, the idea being that they will feel more comfortable revealing themselves if they have a friend in the group.
Three key items were clear to us about conducting this research on-line. First, we couldn’t have people bring things to the group, so we needed to find other ways of self-expression. Second, the anonymity of the Web makes people feel more comfortable talking about themselves, so we did not need participants to bring a buddy. Third, the telephone screener used for in-person groups was too long to use during our recruit, which was conducted by e-mail. Respondents who were between the ages of 20-30 were recruited from members of the Research Connections Internet Panel.
To handle the screener length problem, the e-mail invitation asked for basic demographics - age, gender, and employment/education status - as well as ownership of a motorcycle, and who paid for the motorcycle. There also were screens for past participation and security. Finally, because we needed them to take pictures, we screened them for ownership of or access to a 35mm camera.
Once we qualified people, we sent them a roll of film and the rest of the screener used for the in-person study. We also asked them to take photographs of their lifestyles and their motorcycle. And we asked them for the URLs (Web addresses) of their favorite Web site and five sites that reflected their relationship with their motorcycle. They were instructed to send the film to a company we had selected that would develop it as digital images.
As we received each person’s photographs, we created for them and put on the Web a personal "photo album." Each participant’s album (set of photos) was in a different location and they were given the URL to go to, so that they could view their pictures, select 10 to 12 of their favorites and write captions for them.
Completed the tasks
By the time we were ready to hold the groups, 35 out of 90 recruits had completed all of the tasks - filling out the screener, taking the photographs, selecting their favorite pictures and adding captions to them, and advising us of their favorite and motorcycle-related sites. We were impressed that so many people stuck with us.
As is typical of on-line groups, there was a 50 percent drop-off in the first two groups when it actually came time to participate; thus for the first two groups, we had six people. The last group had 11 people.
We met on-line at the Research Connections Virtual Focus Facility. This is a password-protected area, divided into "rooms" where we can hold on-line groups. Participants got there by typing the URL we provided, and by entering their user name and password when the site came on their screen. Each group had its own URL and unique user names and passwords to ensure that participants attended only the group to which they were assigned. The password security also prevented just anyone from wandering into the room.
The clients also were given user names and passwords so that they could attend and observe each group while it was in progress. They were instructed on how to communicate with us privately, in case they wanted to add questions or probe an unexpected response.
Each room has a split screen, so that instructions and visual items can be shown on the top half of the screen, while we "talk" on the bottom. Initially, participants saw a set of guidelines at the top of the screen, which were developed to enhance their experience. In particular, they were told that the moderator’s comments would appear in capital letters, while theirs would be lowercased, to make it clear who was asking the questions.
They also learned how to send us a private message if they had questions during the group, so as not to impede the flow of the discussion. They were encouraged to use "emotions" in the discussion (e.g., laughs, grins, LOL [laughs out loud]), and we told them that "Spelling duzn’t count" to encourage free expression. It turns out that we didn’t have to be concerned on that score!
Lively and candid
The groups were lively, and the respondents quite candid. This was due, in part, to the anonymity of the participants. In addition to anonymous screen names, group members were able to open-up comfortably from the security of their own familiar surroundings. No one had to bring a buddy to feel at ease. In fact, we think that not having a buddy worked to our advantage because, by not knowing anyone else in the group, participants could speak their minds.
Participants could respond at any time, with comments as long as desired. In fact, they could all "talk" at once. In a traditional group, people have to wait to give their thoughts and, by the time they can do so, they often have forgotten what they want to say or their comments have become irrelevant. On-line participants can respond at any time and with comments of any length.
So how did the groups work? After a general conversation, we began to show, one at a time, the on-line photo albums of each participant, by "taking" everyone to see each album. RCI staff controlled whose album was displayed by typing in the unique URL for that album. Participants did not have to do anything to access the album; it simply appeared to everyone on the top of the facility’s split-screen. They typed their comments on the bottom half of the screen.
Even though only one person at a time could talk about his/her photos, others were brought into the conversation to reflect how someone else’s lifestyle compared to their own. Common lifestyle topics included pets, computers, geography, road trips with their motorcycles, life as a student or worker, and concerns about their ability to achieve the kind of financial success their parents had.
Since we wanted an understanding both of their relationship to motorcycles and how this generation perceives itself, we delved into the topic of what it’s like being 20 to 30 years old: what is the best thing, what is most frustrating, and what is the greatest misperception about their generation.
Go where I want to go
For the most part, respondents valued freedom and independence above all else and resented things that took it away - like a lack of money and time. One participant defined independence as not having to tell people when he will be home or ask if he can go somewhere. Another said, "Freedom is going where I want to when I want to, minus traffic." Many wanted to clear up the misperception that Generation Xers are dumb and uncaring, which they believe is their image among older people.
Respondents also were asked to compare themselves to their baby boomer parents. Most believed that they probably have the same problems and worries their parents had when their parents were in this age group.
When asked about who and what influences their purchasing decisions, the participants cited their own experience and research (homework and word-of-mouth). While they may read advertising or talk to salespeople, they rarely believe what is said, unless there is some other source of confirmation.
When we reached the part of the discussion that focused on the Web sites they had chosen, again we were able to show each site at the top of the participants’ screen, without their having to type anything to view it. We found that using a Web site as a means of self-expression proved to be very revealing.
For example, one participant cited a Web site which contained an image of the Rock of Gibraltar. She explained that this image was representative of her motorcycle because it was reliable and "solid, like a rock." Another participant pointed out a Web site that featured a wind surfer whooshing through the waves, describing her motorcycle as a "freedom/wind-through-your-hair kinda thing."
After sending the group to the USA Today Money Market Web site, a member said that since he owed so much money on his motorcycle he thought the site was an appropriate image. Yet another likened his motorcycle to yahoo.com (an on-line directory) because they both give him choices and make things available to him.
Diverse and personalized
Being able to go anywhere on the Web and having thousands of Web sites from which to choose resulted in a diverse and highly personalized expression of participants’ relationships to our client’s product. Given the Web’s reach, they had free reign to choose sites that "defined" them. The sites linked their values, lifestyles and perceptions of motorcycles to the motorcycle buying behavior of GenXers.
On-line focus groups enabled us to assemble for our client groups of people who were geographically dispersed. This resulted in a more diverse population than was possible in the traditional groups. In fact, there was an important difference between the two groups. The traditional groups favored a certain style of motorcycle, while the on-line groups did not. Why? Because the cities selected for the traditional groups had a higher penetration of this product. By using a national sample, we found that this style is actually less popular nationally than our client expected.
What’s more, the on-line participants were more committed to the project. The tasks we gave them required greater effort and thought. They had to spend time taking pictures, viewing them on-line and labeling them, and also had to surf the Web to find just the right sites that would mirror their lifestyles and their relationship to their motorcycles. Ultimately being on-line provided the opportunity for data collection that was highly personalized and expressive.
Finally, we think the Web could be utilized even more for lifestyle studies, by having respondents design their own Web page. Talk about self-expression! As part of this task, we would require that participants build their page on one of the sites that simulates a city - like Talk City or GeoCities - because one of the first steps to building a site is to pick the "neighborhood" (theatre, sports, etc.) and the "street" where you want to live. This process could be most revealing of all.
Has the Web replaced traditional research? No, and it never will. But, as this study demonstrates, we market researchers are obligated to study and understand the medium, so that we can offer our clients a research tool that, for some studies, truly is a better way to collect data.