There are quite a few ways that time and money get eaten unproductively in shopper research.
- More than one company researches the same thing
- Small-scale projects are inherently inefficient
- Too much project time spent re-inventing the wheel
We like to think at Shopper Intelligence we have made a significant step towards a more cost-efficient model that greatly lessens the “waste” in the packaged goods Industry. Here’s how:
More than one company researching the same thing
You need to understand your shopper. Manufacturers and retailers need to work together to give shoppers what they need and want to grow sales. But there are basic facts that everyone needs that get duplicated if everyone does separate research projects. How galling is it to take your expensive new data into your customer and find that they “already know that”?? Added to that the confusion retailer experiences because their suppliers do things differently so they can’t compare category A to category B or 2017 to 2016.
Small-scale projects are inefficient
A key cost in any research project is finding your target shopper. For the most part, fieldwork is about paying for the time it takes to find the respondent. Or conversely, how much time your fieldwork process wastes not finding the right respondent. Shopper Intelligence operates at huge scale and measures all categories in all retailers. That drives enormous efficiency of fieldwork. We can give you bigger samples, of better quality, for a lower cost as a result.
Time spent reinventing the wheel
For any project however big or small there are some “fixed” costs. Two key ones are the design of the methodology and design of the reporting. Whether you spend £30k or £200k this work is largely the same. If you are spending a small budget then far too much of your money is spent on just getting to first base – the first report. Our idea was to amortise the cost of a very sophisticated research project and an even more sophisticated reporting system (including automation and self-service) across multiple clients. So more of your money goes on the actual insights. Far less on the project management.
The value of uniqueness?
The key rationale to spend more money on unique one-off projects is that you uncover insights that no one else has discovered. Ones that you can leverage for competitive advantage. I totally agree, but in my experience, you can learn a very great deal, efficiently, and use imagination and your unique perspective to leverage data without having to over-invest in high-cost research projects. Maybe delay that other expensive project until you see how far you can go affordably without it?