Archive for the ‘quality control’ tag
uSamp’s CEO, Matt Dusig recently shared his entrepreneurial path with Sramana Mitra, founder of the One Million by One Million global initiative aimed at helping a million entrepreneurs to reach a million dollars each in annual revenue and beyond by 2020.
The case study can be accessed in its seven-part entirety on Sramana’s blog.
Fall 2011 marked uSamp’s foray into the market research blogosphere. The Greenbook Blog, Next Gen Market Research, Innovation Evolved, Research Access, Love Stats, Forrester, MRGA’s Social Advisory…you’ve certainly inspired and set the industry standards high! We wanted engage in the dialogue that is central to our field of work. We wanted to join in on the debates around DIY, gamification, privacy, sample quality, and consumer insight. It has been our objective to add value to a space already a-buzz with information.
uSamp is comprised of thought-leaders both wizened MR folks, and young innovative minds. We will continue tapping the intel we have inside in hopes that we can provide a feisty debate, a helpful take-away, a peek into how we work, even just a chuckle or two. We pride ourselves on transparency, and will continue to develop our blog to foster an open, intelligent and colorful community. We hope that you have enjoyed uSamp’s perspective thus far, as we will continue ramping it up in the new year.
To close out 2011, we decide to bring back some of the greatest hits from our freshman album. Without further ado, we invite you to revisit the following posts:
- The envelope pusher, cheekily titled: Does Size Matter?
- The European perspective, courtesy of London’s own Ben Leet: 2012 EU Forecast
- The standard seeker: Online Sample Quality
- The panel-whisperer: Sensitivity to Sample
As always, we encourage your feedback and live for your ideas. Thanks for a terrific 2011, and here’s to lots of discussion and insight in the new year!
by Scott Weinberg, Director, Enterprise Hosted Technology, uSamp
Scott resides in Minneapolis, MN and joined uSamp in February 2011. Scott is active with the Market Research Association (MRA) and is the President-Elect of the MN / Upper Midwest MRA chapter. He has spent the majority of his career in the Market Research industry, starting as a project manager on the supplier side, eventually moving into turnkey project design, before spending the last several years focused on online panels and in particular emerging panel management technologies. Scott earned an M.S. in Industrial/Organizational Psychology from the University of Wisconsin and is on Twitter @ScottWeinberg and LinkedIn.
Over the past 15 years in the Market Research industry, I’ve had the opportunity to work with companies to develop and implement strategies for organizing their customer feedback efforts. During this time, I’ve noticed two prevailing technology acquisition themes:
The first acquisition theme is the approach that results in a fragmented, piece-meal process that relies on a ‘blended’ supplier approach. On first blush, the blended approach seems reasonable, and financially sound. Specifically, in this scenario, different supporting technologies (i.e. survey program, reporting program, analytical application, panel management program) are each vetted and acquired independently.
by Matt Dusig, co-founder & CEO
We, as consumers, are in an age of unlimited exposure. For efficiency’s sake, we agree to terms and conditions without bothering to scroll through 53 pages of stipulations. We volunteer credit-card information and secret passwords without second thought. We are at a crossroads where data mining can be beneficial or detrimental. The more information we give up about ourselves, the better our browsing experience. But at the same time, we often forget about the digital footprint left behind that can be manipulated if it falls into the wrong hands.
I am often reluctant to give 100% accurate information when registering for a website. When prompted to fill out my date of birth on non-legal sites, I’ll state the proper year but a different month and day so that I don’t compromise my privacy. It’s a scary world with all of the data leaks of major corporations, and I am hesitant to trust an unknown source with personal details. I can’t be the only person who feels this way, can I?
by Matt Dusig, co-founder & CEO
I recently attended a session on online panel quality at the ESOMAR Congress in Amsterdam. The discussion, led by a panel of experts, digressed from quality to privacy, and I found myself wondering why price, a critical factor that affects online panel quality, was omitted from the debate.
In my previous blog post on sample quality, I emphasized the importance of viewing sample frames as groups of real people. I also suggested that the pricing model for sample should shift from strictly cost-per-complete-based pricing to cost-per-finish pricing.. This model would allow invited respondents to always be rewarded for their time spent attempting or completing surveys.
Why am I so passionate about price point? I believe the MR industry is in danger of putting a tourniquet around the supply side of our business. Many market research companies are being continuously pressured to provide the highest quality service at lower prices. Consequently, as pricing pressure occurs, it squeezes the cost that sample suppliers can charge, and creates bidding scenarios where the lowest price wins. The challenge: Most research firms want attentive, thoughtful answers (quality sample), but many internal research teams ordering sample are rewarded for obtaining the lowest-cost sample.
SampleMarket™ 2.0: Enhancements to our Self-service Platform Offer Full Transparency
Fleitas is the Director of Hosted Research Technology, is responsible for all business aspects of uSamp’s suite of technology offerings as well as helping to shape the product developments for both existing and future products. He joined uSamp in early 2009 and has a background in sales, project management and business development with online panels. Clif holds a B.S. from the University of Texas and resides in Colorado.
We live in a world of on-demand. eCommerce platforms are reshaping transactions to be more direct, and raising expectations to the “one-click” standard. Amazon gave us the recommendation engine, a way to automatically filter the chaos and predict needs based on preference and purchasing history. Smart businesses from airlines to local shops have borrowed from this model, and have simplified marketing and sales by catering directly to the consumer. Bottom line: we have become accustomed to getting what we want, when we want it. Some might call this impatient, but I call it efficiency. We, in the market research industry, must start integrating these efficiencies into our own platforms.
Despite the advancements, the online sample industry does not operate to its full potential. Clients jump through hoops to communicate with sample companies in order to find qualified panelists. We often trade dozens of emails back-and-forth to get feasibility and pricing on projects, and then wait on project managers to be assigned to setup, test and launch studies. There is little transparency and efficiency in the process, and we lose touch with the various stages of the projects. These tedious processes are thwarting our ability to generate valuable research.
Too often, sample companies are reluctant to show “what the man behind the curtain” is doing. Some panel companies won’t disclose if they are using panel vs. river, or when they are using their own panel alone or working with sample aggregators. We, as consumers, demand to know how our food is prepared and products are made — is it any wonder our research clients want to know how their surveys are being filled?