International Journal of Market Research - summaries of articles from current issue

2008 volume 50 issue 5

Researching a confessional society, David Beer (York St. John University, United Kingdom)

So what is Web 2.0 really all about; what is the sub-text lurking within the concept of a social network; what does it mean for researchers – whether in the social or market sectors? These are some of the issues addressed in the first formal paper in which the author explores the value of web 2.0 as a research tool or archival database. On the one hand, we are shocked and concerned whenever the latest lose of personal data, or identity fraud case, is reported in the media – internationally isn’t there an increasing amount of data privacy legislation to try and protect our interests as citizens and consumers? On the other hand, millions of people world-wide seem to be totally relaxed about exposing their detailed profiles and opinions on social network sites, as the author quotes from Bauman: ‘…..making it a public virtue and obligation to publicly expose the private….’ Beer contends that the real ‘products’ in the web 2.0 world are those joining these sites - seeking attention, trying to create ‘demand’ and ‘customers’ for themselves in the ‘socialising’ market. He points out the social penalties for those unwilling to join this market, or deciding to no longer participate. The result, however, presents challenges for the researcher trying to make sense of the content. It is unstructured and inconsistent, and is often a ‘celebration of the mundane’, revolving around the ordinary and the routine, a consequence of people ‘living their lives online’. The author reminds us that unlike in traditional research or the content of customer databases, we (researchers) are not the intended audience of these participants. He advises researchers to think carefully about the implications of people marketing themselves when developing strategies for conducting research in this medium, for example not to take the confessions of this confessional society at face value, and, to remember that members are unlikely to provide a representation of society as a whole. The author also refers to the views of Savage and Burrows, summarised in their Viewpoint published earlier this year in IJMR Vol. 50 Issue 3, and expresses surprise to learn that the market research industry has similar concerns to those of social researchers about the future of sample based research. This perhaps underlines the parallel, but often unconnected, lives of social and market researchers, the need for more communication about, and collaboration on, developing solutions to address the common challenges facing both communities.

Squatting at the digital campfire: Reflections on researching the Open Source Software community, Mike Ewing & John Cromie (Monash University, Australia)

The second paper looks at the world of web 2.0 from two perspectives. The authors describe in detail a netnography based study conducted amongst the Open Source Software (OSS) community, the world-wide community who are primarily responsible for the products used in web 2.0, and many other, applications. The authors describe the development and importance of the OSS community. They describe how it has rapidly become a very influential and important community, responsible for the majority of new software developments, with OSS products running 60% of all internet servers worldwide. The largest project repository holds 150,000 projects, valued at US$200bn, and with 1.6m. participants worldwide, however the authors believe the total global market could be double these figures. Ewing and Cromie describe in detail the challenges of conducting research amongst a community that has is new, has no structure, central controlling body or rules and undertakes no marketing. Yet, the OSS community competes successfully against established software companies and has had a major impact on these businesses. The authors describe in detail the development of their netnographic approach, why this methodology was used and provide some of the findings to illustrate the issues faced in conducting the project. They also provide readers with a discussion of the challenges that need to be considered in conducting netnography based research, and the valuable lessons learnt from the project. In addition, the paper also provides readers with useful background information on open source software. For an introduction to conducting netnographic research projects see the paper by Puri, ‘The web of insights: the art and practice of webnography’ published in IJMR Vol.49 Issue 3 (2007).

Join the research: Participant led open ended questions, Annelies Verhaeghe, Niels Schillewaert, Tom De Ruyck (InSites Consulting)

In the third paper the authors describe a methodology they have developed for enhancing the responses in open-ended questions in online surveys. They discuss the issues surrounding responses to this type of question in traditional research – a single view captured at one moment in time, and often left uncompleted by many respondents – and the possibilities offered by applying the concepts of shared intelligence, peer judgements and the wisdom of crowds using the opportunities offered in the web 2.0 environment. The authors describe the three stage process they have developed covering Creation (researcher requests the initial open end response), Contextualisation (participants add meaning, relevance, interpretation to their initial content via tagging and coding their responses into their own defined categories) and Propagation (content, and coding, shared with other participants for refining and gaining deeper understanding), together with the software developed to manage the process. The application of the methodology is illustrated with two case studies, one a User Created Brainstorm discussing the future of television and the second exploring the impact of giving participants the opportunity to analyse their own open ended views on a new coffee concept. In both cases the project was based on data collected via an opt-in internet panel. In the first example, the authors describe the categories of conceptual output gained from the process to aid decision making and in the second they compare the responses gained through Used Open Ended Coding with those using traditional manual coding and text mining software. The authors conclude with a discussion of their results, how the methodology relates to the wisdom of crowds theory and the implications for the research process.

Online research communities – a user guide, Pete Comley (Virtual Surveys)

In the final formal paper the author discusses how the experiences of managing online communities to date within the market research industry provide a practical basis for developing some best practice guidelines. The author argues that researchers need to pay closer attention to how web 2.0 is developing and ensure the lessons are learnt and applied within market research projects. Comley describes the concept of the online research community and provides a detailed comparison between their characteristics and those of natural communities, pointing out that the former are often closed communities where interaction is in response to an agenda set by the researcher. All key stages in the process of developing and managing an online community are described in detail, including recruitment of members, types of member, moderation, incentivising, moderation, analysis, client involvement, conditioning of members and multi-national/multi-modal issues. The author concludes with some thoughts on the current and future role of these communities as a market research tool.

Forum

Participation cycles and emergent cultures in an online community, Tom Ewing (Research International)

Whilst Comley bases his recommended blueprint for running an online research community on the experiences across the industry, Ewing describes his own personal experiences of setting up and running an online community, ‘I love music’ and its evolution into ILX, over a five year period. The paper therefore contains a very practical perspective that provides answers to such questions as: what’s it like to set up and run a community, what types of participants can you expect to take part, what role should the researcher play, how might you build a case to justify investing in this new form of research? Ewing discusses the reasons behind the success of the community and what motivates continuing participation. He describes the lifecycle of a typical participant from lurker, to newbie, regular, elder and finally legacy membership, and, the disruptive role played by hostile outsides, the trolls. Practical advice includes how a moderator can stimulate ‘Talkability’ – maximising the level of insight generated by the community. The author concludes with six key lessons learned from the experience, and how a return on investment case might be made for developing a community for research purposes.

How does web 2.0 stretch traditional influencing patterns? Derek Eccleston & Lucia Griseri (Harris Interactive)

Recent years have seen an increasing interest in understanding, and exploiting, the impact of ‘word of mouth’(WOM) on purchase decisions. As the authors describe in the second Forum article, Malcolm Gladwell in his seminal book ‘The Tipping Point’ expounds the idea that the step change that moves products or values from niche to mass appeal is a virus like process creating interest of epidemic proportions. This process is underpinned by different influencers, classified by Gladwell as Connectors, Mavens and Salespeople. The authors contend that marketers struggle to apply WOM in the online world as there is little practical advice available to help them target their engagement strategies. To held address this knowledge gap, the authors conducted a quantitative study in the UK, the questionnaire including content to test out Gladwell’s classification of influencers in online and offline situations. The paper contains a description of the research methodology and the detailed findings, including the impact in ‘old’ internet media (e.g. e mail) and the web 2.0 applications. The findings support Gladwell’s classification of influencers – the three groups were readily identifiable in the research – and this could be applied in both the online and offline worlds. However, the authors demonstrate from their findings that marketers need to think very carefully about their strategies for web 2.0 media – it requires rather more than simply a single web 2.0 strategy as different applications in this media create different responses amongst influencers. To be successful, the authors advocate an integrated communications strategy covering ‘old’ and ‘new’ internet channels, and cover offline in addition to online, for the reasons described in their conclusions. The authors also underline the importance of fully understanding the needs of influencers as a first step in the development of a successful strategy that leaves consumers being motivated to share their brand experiences with others.

Back to IJMR page

What's New - Membership - Company Partner Service - Members' Area - Code/Guidelines - Qualifications - Training - Awards
Events - Networking - Publications - Media Info - Market Research - Search - Site Map - A-Z Directory - Contact Us - Home