|
| |
|
 |
| |
|
Researching the Researchers
The role of video transmission of focus groups in qualitative research today
Since being introduced in 1990, live video transmission of focus groups has become an important and frequently used tool in the qualitative research toolbox. With over 400 focus facilities installed with the technology worldwide, market researchers can have their projects transmitted live via videoconferencing or video streaming over the Internet to distant viewers. The result for researchers and their colleagues is that now not everyone has to travel to every focus group every time to participate in this important part of the strategic planning process.
But how is this important capability really being used by researchers? Are they getting more people involved in their research or merely replacing their own travel? Is the time saved eliminating travel the thing driving usage? What makes a successful transmission in the eyes of users? Why do some not use the technology at all? Will usage increase or decrease in the future?
In February, 2006. industry leader FocusVision Worldwide undertook a market survey to answer these questions and more. The purpose of the survey was to determine usage and perceptions of video transmission services for focus groups and other qualitative research within the market research industry. The study was designed, fielded, and reported by online research company, insightexpress.
A quota sample of 655 respondents was used, all of whom utilize or conduct qualitative research. 421 were end client researchers who use video transmission and 117 non users of the technology. 152 were providers of research services who moderate and conduct qualitative research.
Before turning to survey results, it is important to note some of the changes that have influenced qualitative research interviewing since video transmission was introduced 16 years ago. A more conservative business climate with reduced staffing and more cost control has certainly evolved over that time. Events of September 11 further reduced corporate travel. Video transmission technology has improved dramatically and has seen a migration from videoconferencing to video streaming over the Internet.
Focus groups and qualitative research have also increased in status, no longer considered "quick and dirty" methodology. Top corporate management calls for marketing personnel to have intimate knowledge, personal exposure, and insight about customers and prospects. Qualitative research fits these goals. The title of Research Director is giving way to Director of Consumer Insights. Almost every marketing research budget includes qualitative programs. As a result there were an estimated 239,000 focus groups or IDIs conducted in U.S. in 2005 and just over half a million (501,000) when the remainder of the world is added.
So where does video transmission stand today? Here are the survey results:
"End Client" researchers in the study are comprised primarily of department heads and research project managers commissioning qualitative research for end client organizations. "Research Providers" include mainly moderators, but also project account managers and field coordinators with qualitative supplier organizations. The sample represents a wide range of usage frequency and a significant group of heavy users.
| Days of Qualitative Research Conducted in Last 12 Months |
| |
Client End Users |
Research Providers |
| Greater than 75 days |
10% |
39% |
| Between 26 - 75 days |
32 |
26 |
| Between 11 - 25 days |
38 |
28 |
| Less than 10 days |
20 |
7 |
| Total |
100% |
100% |
There is also a wide range of frequency of using video transmission for projects, including a number who use the technology for over 50% of their projects and some who never use.
| Percent of Projects for Which Video Transmission is Used |
| |
Client End Users |
Research Providers |
| Greater than 75 % |
22% |
5% |
| Between 51% to 75% |
10 |
5 |
| Between 26% to 50% |
12 |
13 |
| Between 10% - 25% |
14 |
20 |
| Less than 10% |
21 |
39 |
| Never use |
21 |
18 |
| Total |
100% |
100% |
Why users use: Among End Client researchers who use video transmission, the primary reasons are to increase exposure to the live sessions so more interested parties can participate over all, or when some team members can’t or do not want to travel. Only 10% appear to be using video transmission primarily to replace their own travel. This indicates that research personnel often feel they must, or prefer to, attend groups in person, but offer the option of video transmission to team members for convenience and to optimize the value of the qualitative project. These account for 73% of primary reasons for usage. Other reasons such as save money, save time are 10% or below.
| Primary Reasons End Client Researchers Use Video Transmission |
| Use when someone else can’t or does not want to travel |
38% |
| Use to increase exposure to and participation to project |
35 |
| Use when I personally can’t or do not want to travel |
10 |
| Use to save money |
10 |
| Use to save time |
3 |
| Other |
3 |
And why some do not use: Non users of video transmission seem reasonably open minded about possible future use. They do not appear to have negative perceptions or serious concerns about the technology...more a lack of information.
Perceived high price is a stumbling block for some, but most just don’t know about price. Verbatims reveal that there is some apprehension that distant viewers may get distracted or not be fully attentive. Some researchers feel "it is just not the same as being there". And because all viewers are not together under the watchful eye of the research leader, some may jump to premature, unwarranted conclusions.
What users want: The most important attributes that users insist on are very straight forward - audio and video quality, and reliability. 80% of "extremely important" responses are for these. And users seem well satisfied with delivery of video transmission on important attributes. 72% to 92% rated their experience on attributes from the midpoint 3 to 5 excellent, with few negative. As a summary measure, 67% rated the overall experience excellent/good , 20% neutral, and only 13% fair/poor. Here is the detail.
Importance and Satisfaction with Attribute
Rating: 5 Excellent, 1 Poor |
| Attribute |
Extremely Important |
Excellent / Good 5-4 |
Midpoint (3) |
Fair /
Poor (1-2) |
| 72% |
Audio & Video Quality |
44% |
37% |
19% |
| 83% |
Reliability |
58% |
40% |
11% |
| 34% |
Customer service |
49% |
57% |
8% |
| 53% |
Tech support |
53% |
37% |
10% |
| 30% |
Price |
26% |
47% |
27% |
| NA |
Overall experience |
67% |
20% |
13% |
What users think of price: In direct questioning about perceptions of price, there is a dichotomy. While 46% consider the price for video transmission reasonable, 42% think it expensive.
| Perception of Price Among End Client Researchers |
| Reasonable |
46% |
| Expensive |
42% |
| Don't Know |
12% |
| Total |
100% |
Future Usage - Increasing or Decreasing?: The future looks good for video transmission. When asked about future use expectations present users and non users of video transmission responded, respectively, as follows:
| User Expectations for Future Usage |
| Will increase usage |
34% |
| Stay about the same |
63% |
| Will decrease usage |
3% |
| Total |
100% |
| Non User Expectations for Future Usage |
| Will increase usage |
20% |
| Stay about the same |
56% |
| Will decrease usage |
24% |
| Total |
100% |
Moderators, of course, need to be at the focus facility in order to conduct the sessions. However, the study showed that Research Provider experience has been generally satisfactory when clients use video transmission, so if the client wants it, it is OK with them. And many expect their involvement with video transmission will increase in the future.
| Research Providers Expectations for Future Usage |
| Expect usage to increase |
37% |
| Stay about the same |
63% |
| Expect usage to decrease |
-- |
| Total |
100% |
Summary and Comment
Video transmission has clearly found a place in many corporate qualitative research programs. End Clients, not Research Poviders, overwhelmingly drive usage of video transmission on projects and clearly see the benefit of involving more people in their research. Research managers find it a useful option to offer to non-research team members to avoid travel, and as a way to increase first hand participation in focus groups and qualitative projects. They also use video transmission to make sure their whole research team can participate even if they can not or do not want to travel.
The most important attributes required are reliability and quality of video and audio for transmissions. Users are well satisfied with their experience on these attributes. They also rate their over all experience with video transmission very positively and many expect to increase usage in the future.
Non users are open-minded. They have no serious concerns, but admit to being uniformed. Most are open to consideration for future use.
Even though there are expectations for increasing use in the future, a significant group feel that pricing is on the expensive side.
Moderators and qualitative providers have had satisfactory experience when clients have used the service on their projects, and many expect usage to increase in the future.
In summary, as with many areas in marketing research today, there is recognition and acceptance that video transmission technology can enhance qualitative research by making the live events more accessible for research and marketing personnel who use the information.
|
|
|
