Stop Doing Your Market Research 'In-House'
Mehdi Boursin Bouhassoune
Signed Author | Learning Advocate | 100s of brands advised | Strategist | Senior Product Specialist at Euromonitor
It's costing you,
big time.
I've met countless companies and teams telling me they preferred doing their market research in-house.
Most often, this is has been for budget reasons.
They're hoping to save money by going DIY. They've seen other teams doing it, and keeping budgets for other projects.
The point they're missing?
It's actually making them lose money.
Humans & Market Research
Conducting your market research in-house can be a terrible idea. Why? Because that's where the humans are.
And humans have agendas, interests, and preferences.
I have personally sat in meetings with companies where the decisions was made prior to the research being conducted.
In one instance, we were debating the types of research to be done on a potential new product. I met with the New Product Team and sat with the Project Lead.
The Project Lead, let's call her Clara, had been working on this new product for 6 months. It was her little baby and she'd definitely put the work in.
Now was the time for the whole team to decide on which product to launch.
And who was to make this choice?
Clara.
Of course, Clara needed some evidence to decide on the new product. She couldn't just say "I worked on this 6 months, let's do it".
So Clara organised the market research. To save money, she conducted it "in-house" (that's where I lost the deal). She decided on the audience type, the sample size, she selected how to present the product and how to calculate the market potential.
And guess what?
Clara's product was chosen.
Do it again!
This problem is more common than you think.
In the example above, Clara was the decision-maker and the person conducting the research. A clear conflict of interest you'd say.
But imagine if she had been an intern conducting the research for the CEO's project.
Recommended by LinkedIn
Sometimes, internal market research is used to cut decisions between departments, and across hierarchical lines. The issue is that research conducted by junior members of the company might be disregarded by senior decision-makers.
Especially if it goes against their gut feelings.
You find yourself in a situation where market research is weaponized, and the whole process is undermined by office politics and pre-conceived ideas, navigating hierarchies in a meaningless debate.
Rule of Law
As with a court of law, in market research you want to be as objective as possible.
After all, you are looking for the 'truth' - the objective answer to your question. Is this person guilty? Is this investment a good one?
(Given, the 'truth' might not be as objective in market research.)
But the point is the same - how do you objectively reach your conclusion? How can you follow a process that is as scientific as possible?
As with law, medicine, or any science, you need to protect your process from human emotions and beliefs.
The Human Cost
At the beginning of this article, I mentioned that doing market research in-house was costing companies.
There are two reasons for this:
Of course, in-house market research CAN be conducted professionally and effectively. However I believe the risk of having contaminated research is simply too high (and I am obviously not influenced by my interest in selling market research).
Do it Right
If you're doing market research, do it right.
Don't do it to please your boss.
Don't do it to protect your back.
Don't do it to make a point.
Market research should be separated from you internal dynamics. You should be ready to accept the answers you don't want to hear, and take action accordingly.
If not, don't waste your time - and money.