Grab the accompanying presentation to get the definitions.

Source: Online Education

I was perusing the web and reading the Hall and Partners site when their “Fresh Meet” blog link caught my eye. And I’m glad it did. Not simply because they’ve used the same design template for their blog – although it’s a sign of great taste, for sure! No – they had a pecha kucha night, used the term “how meta” and plenty more – just in one of their posts! And there’s plenty more to read on there.

Go here to see the full line up of speakers from that pecha kucha night, but just in case you’re too lazy for a full helping, absolutely watch this talk from Paul Barton (of Brooklyn Brothers). In this, he talks about the need to really define the business task before getting all twisted up in looking at your proposition. And that’s simple, smart thinking we should all listen to. Far too often, we all leap into the task of solving the brief, rather than worrying about what the problem was in the first place and finding a truly disruptive way of tackling it, reframing it or simply interrogating it properly before we begin.

I’ll boldly assert this now: You cannot lose by spending time really understanding what it is you’re trying to achieve. At the very least, whatever comes next will have genuine purpose. More likely than not, though, you’ll actually give yourself the thrust to find something far better in your strategy.

1 in 5 of all UK adults agree that they prefer surfing the Internet to watching TV. According to TGI Net Q109 (Oct 07 – Sept 08), Q1 2009.

This stat (and many more) is tucked away in a new tool from Google. Check it out – a planners dream!

(Image from www.cartoonstock.com via Google Images of course)

I was asked last week for some tips on running a good focus group by a fellow planner. And wrote these…

1.      It’s your room – nobody can talk or do anything unless you allow it. Never forget that otherwise you’ll lose control.

2.      Don’t be afraid of silence – they have to answer your questions – always wait them out even when it’s getting awkward – they’ll break before you.

3.      Listen to people – it doesn’t matter if you fumble to get to your next question because you didn’t have it prepared, but if they realise you don’t care what they’re saying, they’ll stop taking part.

4.      Don’t be afraid to shoot people down – if they’re off-topic or trying to lead the group, dress them down – it’s your room. Not theirs.

5.      If someone gets obsessed with a point that’s off-topic, write it on a flip chart and circle it, then tell them it’s parked – you’ll come back to it later, but it’s not time to talk about that now.

6.      It’s OK for it to be fun. Joke with them or cajole them – keeping it lively will keep them engaged in what they’re doing.

7.      Watch out for silent partners – you want to involve everyone, so you have to make sure you’re pulling people into the discussion.

8.      Whenever people start an aside, tell them it’s “one discussion” – if you can’t hear what they’re saying, you’re missing out on valuable stuff – shut them up.

9.      Try to vary the way you get them to talk to you – don’t circulate in order, but bounce around and change the questions as you go – ask whether they agree with what they’ve just heard, or prompt them to disagree and see how they react. In short, be varied in order and style – it’s OK to throw respondents off balance occasionally to find out how they react!

10.   Write everybody’s name down on a piece of paper at the beginning – it’s easy to forget names but you’ll never get it wrong when it’s in front of you.

What was missing (wisdom of afterthought, eh) was a comment on leading the witness, though – since I felt the person I originally wrote them for knew that for sure.

But I’d now add another point…

11.  Be incredibly careful not to lead the witness. Asking people “do you mean by that XXXX,” “don’t you think XXXX” or “can I sum that up as XXXX” is all bad, bad behaviour! You need to find ways to get them to tell you – you’re better off pretending you’re stupid and getting them to repeat it – even to the point where they start to talk down to you – rather than start putting your words in their mouths. There’s two reasons for this… Firstly, you won’t learn much – just what you thought before you started. But, secondly, because it’s the main thing that pisses off your viewers – they spot it quickly, be they colleagues or clients – making you look biased and unprofessional.

This is really interesting. And, I read it here at The Toad Stool first.

Arnold tested the ad “1984″ – that epic Apple ad that still gets mentioned in research groups and is one of the most famous ads of all time globally.
Except, they didn’t test it as an ad – they tested a re-created ‘animatic’ or ‘board-o-matic’ version.

Here’s the result, including the full animatic version (note how long they run – about 3 mins 30 secs to describe a 60″ commercial) AND the excerpts from the focus groups. Now, although the results are seriously shocking, bear in mind that the animatic they used was really good quality – they’re rarely that good. Also, it takes every bit of a finished film – which usually is better than the original script. So, to all intents and purposes, this is better than most stimulus produced for testing.

So, what does it really tell us?
That 1984, the commercial idea, is no longer relevant to consumers today?
That testing ads doesn’t work?
(both of which probably have a good degree of truth to them)

Or that we’re asking the wrong questions? Because, that for me is the right answer.

Ask people what they understand – dig for the message that is told. Then dig for the values – the softer associations and what they mean for this particular company. These are all questions that people can reasonably respond to. Without speculating or guessing at the answer.

But, DON’T ask people what they THINK of an ad. NOR what they would do to improve it. Don’t get them to list their likes and dislikes. And don’t ask them whether they felt it was clear who it was for. These are all questions that people can only guess at. Or that they’re not really qualified to answer.

We wouldn’t listen to our parents tell us how to edit/adapt/improve/change an ad developed by your best people, unless we heard the comment and said “Damnit, they’re right!” So why do we listen to consumers doing the same thing when we’ve asked them questions that are just as speculative?

Consumers can’t tell us the answers, but they can react to what they see and give us some indication of where we’re doing well and where we need to do some more thinking. Let’s not damn research for being useless if we don’t use it right – but let’s not blindly follow 20 people from the suburbs just because they’re “real people” either!

And, in case you forget the original ad, here it is…