Marketing Research’s Identity Crisis

Many seemed confused by market research these days. Crisis is a hype word and sometimes used to mean a potential problem, not a true calamity. Nevertheless, even veteran marketing researchers are now asking themselves what MR really is. I do not have the answer, but below have described what I sense are the most common ways MR is seen, from within and without.

What I would call the cynical vision essentially says that MR is mostly B2B sales. In this vision, the majority of marketing research buyers are unsophisticated researchers and often poor marketers as well. They can’t tell the good from the schlock and, therefore, will not pay for solid research because they are unable to recognize it.

Cynics also believe research isn’t actually used by decision makers, and all these factors, in addition to lack of certification requirements, contributes to a downward spiral of quality and cost. They tend to be enthusiastic about new MR methods and technology because it gives them something new to sell. Understandably, these viewpoints tend not to be revealed publicly.

Factory is a derogative sometimes used to describe marketing research agencies, and many MR agencies, large and small, do intentionally follow a manufacturing model. They sell marketing research-related products, which include standardized and semi-standardized methods, black box methods and software. Their offer may be highly specialized – just one niche product – or consist of a range of branded products, similar to a large financial services or FMCG company. 

This is an old model, and one that now dominates the MR landscape. Highly skilled marketing scientists and data scientists develop new products and refine existing ones. In the larger companies, management skills are also appreciated. Knowledge of traditional marketing research, however, is not valued beyond a very basic level. Customized research is eschewed, and sales and client management talent are what is mostly sought.   

The predictive analytics model is largely concerned with CRM, targeted ads and recommender systems, because this is how marketing (and marketing research) is seen by those working in these areas of MR. Branding and brand image are not considered, nor is new product development. Existing data is all that is needed according to this vision and primary research rarely conducted, in part because of lack of know-how but also because it is not thought to be necessary.

In this model, most of the data required are already “out there” and, properly mined, have the answers for us. Find the right people at the right time and hit them with the right ad is the predominant philosophy. Brands are seen as homogenous entities competing mainly on price. Many marketing researchers I know do not consider these activities part of MR and I’m on the fence in this debate myself.  

What I would call the customized model is often described as the “traditional” model of marketing research. In this vision, marketing researchers are researchers and nearly all research is tailored to a client’s specific needs at a point in time. Sales and client management skills are valued, as are general research skills and, in some agencies, statistical knowledge.

Management skills are of secondary concern, and big data is mostly thought to be of limited utility. This school of thought, to one degree or another, can be found in most agencies and in client organizations. Historically, many companies adhering to this model have been field and tab agencies which concentrated on obtaining the right survey data and summarizing it accurately. Survey data providers are still a vital part of MR, as are qualitative specialists, who merit an article of their own.

Consulting is a loaded term, but a few MR agencies offer, or claim to offer, marketing consulting beyond the usual Summary & Recommendations found in a typical marketing research report. Their consulting draws upon a variety of primary and secondary data sources, including qualitative, and may involve advanced analytics. In the interests of disclosure, I spend a lot of time in this corner of marketing research.

This summary is highly simplified, of course, given space limitations. These perspectives frequently overlap in the real world of marketing research, and there is surely much I’ve omitted or that other marketing researchers would disagree with. Nonetheless, I hope you’ve found it interesting and helpful!

Arrange a Conversation