InSites Blog

Innovations come about in several ways. The innovation process is often powered by technology. In other cases, marketers have sufficient knowledge and intuition to independently create new products. Occasionally, a good innovation is created by accident. Today’s active and empowered consumer is however prepared to innovate in cooperation with brands. Co-creation is the joint creation of innovations by customer and producer with the goal of better meeting customer needs. This is why co-creation is a very valuable, even necessary, supplement within the innovation process.

My Starbucks Idea is a good example of how co-creation based on consumer conversations can support the innovation process of a brand. The platform allows consumers to help think about new products. The ideas are shared with others who can vote for, and discuss, them. Platforms like these provide an open and honest opinion by the target group and demonstrate that the company values the opinions of customers. They do however remain marketing tools. The platform is open to anyone (as far as confidentiality permits) and it remains difficult to assess whether all suggestions should be examined. Companies also often underestimate the workload of such an initiative. Some consumers expect that precisely their idea will enter the market, and do not understand why they get no response, sometimes becoming quite upset. Support is needed in situations like these and this requires resources. The question, therefore, is how to apply ‘reverse engineering’ on My Starbucks Idea and translate it into a systematic and objective market research process of co-creation for innovation. This requires a specific approach with regard to target group and market research process.

Target group
Not every consumer is suitable for co-creation. This is nothing new in itself. Eric von Hippel already formulated the idea of leading edge users back in the 80s. Lead users have the same needs as the rest of the market, but much earlier than anyone else. These users are very interested in finding a solution to their needs. For innovation research, we can best approach consumers who are among the first within a specific product category to try new products and are willing to take a risk doing so. Based on theories from social psychology, the co-creation process of InSites Consulting adds a dimension to the innovation process: social independence versus interpersonal influence. We therefore approach two target groups:

• The socially independent innovators. These customers form their own opinion about an innovation based on their own personal experience, regardless of what is popular in their social context. In evaluating an innovation these consumers mainly consider the functional operation of a product; the social impact they achieve with it is secondary.
• The social influencers (influentials). This group of consumers view innovations from their immediate social environment. Influentials are regarded by their environment as a form of creative experts who easily see the benefits of innovations. Consequently, they are often asked for their opinion about certain innovations and the mainstream market follows them in terms of adoption behaviour. They enjoy being creative with products, they find it important that others approve the innovations they use and proactively talk about innovations. They are more concerned with the concrete benefits of an innovation than the technical features.

Process/method
In terms of research method, co-creation requires a different approach than traditional research. The methods must meet the intrinsic motivation and interest of consumers in a contemporary way. They include tools that allow participants to design and adapt ideas in a concrete manner.

To begin with, the right profiles are recruited: only innovators and influencers are considered. The first group are given access to a closed online platform where they generate ideas on an individual basis. All participants are regarded as “innovation-developers” here. The objective is to search for innovation in a targeted manner with a small group based on previously validated insights.

The second phase is one of cross-pollination. Innovators can evaluate the concept ideas of others, comment on them and in turn be inspired further.
During the third phase, the influentials discuss the ideas generated from a social point of view. They refine the concepts with the purpose of making the innovative concepts relevant, memorable and interesting. The influentials are instructed to adapt the ideas in such a way as to be memorable: they must be simple, credible, unexpected and concrete and contain sufficient emotion for people to talk about them with others. Concepts are also proposed as an endpoint from the perspective of the customer and innovators and influentials have tools available to adapt or tag concepts, or load audio-visual material.

Traditional qualitative techniques are intertwined with ethnographic observation methods and creative exercises throughout all phases to provide context and inspiration. All participants are given a clear briefing on what is and what is not sought as well as insights into previous research. It is of great importance that the end customer actively participates in the research conversation and provides feedback. This increases the involvement of participants and gives a face to the initiators. Our experience shows that such an approach truly works. Recognition is more important to consumers than a financial reward: managing the conversation for innovation is what keeps them going.

Results
Based on the methodology described, InSites Consulting has conducted extensive co-creation projects for Heinz, Kraft and Friesland Campina. That experience has led to the following conclusions:

1. Innovators and influentials are easy to identify for different product categories.
2. Both groups generate more and richer innovative ideas than the average consumer.
3. Besides a reality check, innovators generate other ideas than those developed using other methods (e.g. internally in the company).
4. The ideas developed by innovators are more relevant for the market after they have been reviewed and adapted by influentials.
5. The influentials assess innovations differently and identify innovations that are not recognised by the average consumer, but which do in fact have potential in the market.

Want to find out more about co-creation? Contact one of our experts: Tom De Ruyck, Tom Goderis or Prof. Dr. Niels Schillewaert

This article is also available in Marketing Driven (attachment of Pub Magazine – edition 24/06/10)

Mid-September ESOMAR organizes their general Congress in Greece, Athens. The Congress theme is fully focused on the changing landscape in market research ‘Odyssey 2010 – the changing face of market research‘. The face of market research is changing and with it so are many of the approaches and methodologies we employ.

The R&D department at InSites Consulting continuously works on co-creating research solutions together with clients, suppliers, academics, consumers, and professional organizations. Probably one of the reasons we’ll be well-presented at this year’s general Congress.

First up are Annelies Verhaeghe and Niels Schillewaert on 13 September: User Generated Content and Research. While consumers participate less in traditional surveys, they generate more information than ever before. Consumers cache their lives online and are ubiquitously available via mobile devices. As researchers we have the chance now more than ever to fuse methods and generate more insights without actually asking questions. By observing consumers’ actions, becoming friends online, scraping publically available content and text-analyzing it, getting physiological measures like reaction times and mouse clicks we can come to a more full understanding of consumers through these neo-observational research.

On 14 September Tom De Ruyck and Annelies Verhaeghe will co-present ‘Exploring the world of water‘ with Michel Rogeaux of Danone Global R&D. A case on fusing contemporary research methods.

Joeri Van den Bergh will also attend the Congress, hopefully the collect an award for his paper on authenticity. And finally on 15 September Niels Schillewaert is one the chairmen.

Interested to attend the Congress? Sign up online!

Every year ESOMAR gives high-potential students the opportunity to attend ESOMAR global conferences. A great way for them to connect with real practitioners in market research and to build their professional networks.

In 2009, Elias Veris (Research Consultant at InSites Consulting) was regarded one of the high-potential students of 2009 by ESOMAR. Last year ESOMAR invited him to attend the General Conference and also feature in the ESOMAR newsletter. Read the full interview online (page 6). It’s Elias story on how he got interested in market research and how he joined InSites Consulting.

On 23 June, InSites Consulting organized a Smartees workshop on research communities.

Tom De Ruyck, Senior R&D Manager introduced the wonderful world of research communities. The results of the Meet the Joneses are clear: 2 out of 3 marketers claim to know what their customers want, but only 33% actually knows their customers when confronted with the test. Research communities are a good way to sense the life of your customers and get really connected with them.

After the introduction on the InSites philosophy, we let our customer talk. Because who can tell you better how it feels to be connected than our clients, who are actually running a research community with InSites Consulting. Therefore, Martijn van Kesteren (Ben & Jerry’s – Unilever) and Barbera van der Wal (ING) shared their experiences on how they’ve gained insights into their target group by means of a research community.

Engagement is important. Not only engagement from the community participant, but also from the internal project team. Running a research community is an ongoing project, the community is 24/7 accessible and you must have an open mind. Once the moderator signals posts that need a reply from your side, you must be willing to do so in an open and honest way. The key is to give something back to the participants. They provide you with a lot of (personal) information and are willing to cooperate, but you have to give them something in return. Let them know what you’ve learned, which new ideas the community brought you and which actions you will take.

A research community is a very effective way for gaining insights because it gives you answers to questions you didn’t ask!

The InSites’ Health Study 2010 has arrived! Want to learn how to engage in the conversation with empowered patients? Visit the InSites health report and find out how European patients differ from their Chinese, American, Russian… fellow-patients.

Some key facts: more than 80% of internet users looks for health related information online. For the connected patient, Dr. Google is the first entrance (95% of users) and Wikipedia is the primary content source (followed by government sites, medical portals and pharmaceutical websites). Information on websites from the industry is considered equally trustworthy as content on Wikipedia.

Patients are mainly interested in (looking for / sharing information about) treatments (existing and new), side-effects of medication, symptoms of the disorders they suffer from, and the impact of their quality of life.

50% of all patients discuss their health and conditions with other people (friends, family, physicians…). 30% has already shared health information online. Overall, Asians discuss more on health online. Conversations by American (USA) patients are more likely to deal with prices and reimbursement.

6 in 10 online patients are member of a social network (up to 80% in Brazil!) and 3 in 10 participate on disease communities (up to 60% in China!) such as PatientsLikeMe. The popular social network Facebook is also the most dominant one when health is concerned.

And what about the future? 1 in 2 digital patients is interested in consulting a doctor online! 1 in 3 patients would consider buying medication in an online pharmacy. 1 in 5 would be interested in automatic text reminders on their mobile phone not to forget their medication intake.

MTV Networks and InSites Consulting have looked into the coolness of brands and the impact on the purchasing decisions and brand loyalty among young people for several years now. These cool brands are awarded annually at the Cool Brands Award (initiative of MTV Networks).

Over the past years it has been demonstrated that young people buy twice as many cool brands as non-cool brands and that there is a strong positive correlation between brand loyalty and coolness. For the fifth edition of the Cool Brand Awards, we went a step further. The Coolness study was expanded with two new parameters: emotion and conversation.

The emotion that a particular brand evokes among young people is directly related to the purchase intent. Thus, young people will choose brands that make them happy or give them a good feeling. These brands linger in their memory. The happier a brand makes young people, the more tempted they will be to buy this brand again.

The second parameter focused on is conversation. It turns out that up to 2.4 brand names are cited per conversation between young people. Clichés are seemingly confirmed here, as women talk significantly more than men about chocolate and salty snacks during these conversations, while more men than women talk about mobile phones, mobile phone operators, beer and spirits. The brands that both men and women most frequently discussed during these conversations are Proximus, Nivea and Red Bull – three brands that were running advertising campaigns at the time of the study.

Brands that want to score with the young target group better make sure that their brand is part of the conversations between young people. The coolness of the brand is the decisive factor here as the cooler the brand, the greater the chance that young people will discuss it. Coolness also increases brand loyalty and has a positive impact on the purchase of the brand.

Contrary to popular belief, young people do not solely communicate by way of social media. In fact, 86% of their communication takes place via face-to-face conversations and only 9% takes place online. The importance of these conversations is demonstrated by the fact that a change of opinion takes place in 60% of these cases.

These are the results of the Cool Brand Awards – 2010 edition

• Coolest Mobile (Smart) Phone: iPhone/Apple
• Coolest Mobile Phone Operator: Generation MTV
• Coolest Beer Brand: Jupiler
• Coolest Spirits Brand: Bacardi Mojito
• Coolest Soft Drinks: Coca-Cola
• Coolest Energy Drink: Red Bull
• Coolest Chewing Gum Brand: Mentos
• Coolest Chocolate Brand: M&M′s
• Coolest Mints Brand: Tic Tac
• Coolest Bank: Mine (BNP Paribas Fortis)
• Coolest Female Beauty Care Brand: Nivea
• Coolest Male Beauty Care Brand: Axe
• Coolest Male Razor Brand: Gillette Fusion
• Coolest Female Razor Brand: Gillette Venus
• Coolest Salty Snacks Brand: Lay′s
• Overall Coolest Brand: Coca-Cola

Joeri Van den Bergh (Youth Expert and Managing Partner at InSites Consulting) was awarded Coolest Research Expert at this 2010 edition, a special edition Award for his contribution to the MTV Cool Research. Congratulations Joeri!

In April 2010, Nickelodeon (in cooperation with InSites Consulting) interviewed 400 parents and 400 children between 6 and 12 years. The aim of “Great conversations with small people” was to examine how conversations between children and their parents determine the contents of the shopping list.

Specifically, it aimed to explore how children and their parents communicate with each other in the purchase of products and brands. The decision-making process was mapped out for over thirty different product categories. This yielded interesting insights. It appears that conversations between parents and children are the basis for purchases. Children are increasingly acquiring an advisory role in the purchasing process of the family. Parents do not only encourage this interactivity but also take advantage of it. Children in turn want nothing more than to assist their mom or dad in making the right choice. The end of the Pester Power era – or the negative image of nagging children in the supermarket – therefore seems to be in sight.

Whether or not a brand is frequently seen on television strongly determines the brand choice of children (in 55 % of cases). The “coolness” of a brand (36 %) and the appreciation by parents (30 %) are ranked second and third place when it comes to brand choice of the children. Parents also have a clear preference for certain brands when buying for their children. This preference is mainly determined by own use (55 %) and the fact that their son or daughter has asked for a brand (49 %). Finally, nostalgia towards their own childhood plays a major role (40 %).

In three out of four cases it is the children themselves who initiate conversations. The conversations usually involve asking parents to continue buying the same brands or products (in 75 % of cases). In contrast, in 16 % of the conversations, children convince their parents to try out a brand or product for the first time. It is important here that children articulate their message in a positive manner. Children also discuss brands among themselves. Game consoles are a favorite topic, followed by theme parks, toys and mobile phones. The positive nature of the conversations is striking here as well. According to the survey, this makes children very efficient ‘brand ambassadors’. Along with affluence, the conversations between parents and children have reinforced the participation of children in the purchasing process.

For traditional categories such as toys, shoes, clothing and gaming consoles, parents indicate that children help choose in nine out of ten cases. The influence of children on the purchasing process in less traditional categories was examined as well. For instance, parents indicate that eight out of ten times, children have a say in the holiday destination and that three out of ten kids help decide on a new car. The age of the children appears to play a significant role. For example, slightly older children – from nine to twelve – leave a much clearer mark when it comes to deciding on the brand choice of a computer, stereo, car, bank account or a subscription for digital television than younger children – from six to eight years.

On average, children come along on one in every two shopping trips. Only 2 % of children never come along. For parents, shopping together has primarily a social function: the children themselves enjoy it, it’s more fun than shopping alone or it’s a chance to spend time together. Practical reasons, including lack of a babysitter, also occasionally determine whether parents and children shop together. Such a joint shopping trip is especially useful for parents to immediately gauge the opinions of, and obtain confirmation by, their children during the shopping trip. Children also love assisting their mom and dad in making the right choice. It is therefore unsurprising that, when out shopping, children codetermine which products end up in the shopping trolley. One in two parents ask their children what products they prefer. Half of the parents also indicate that they spend more time in the shop when they are accompanied by their children and therefore make more purchases than originally planned. Half of the surveyed parents tend to buy more expensive brands when asked to do so by their children.

As an InSites employee & new joiner of the InSites Health team, I was very curious to see our Health knowledge & experience summarized in the InSites Health Smartees.

‘Never skip breakfast’ is one of the basic health commandments, so we started the workshop with a sumptuous breakfast! The other guests and I were fully ready for the start of a highly efficient workshop!

• The patient can no longer be ignored – 43% of patients look for online health info every month

There’s a lot of movement in the world of Health. Some evolutions are less impactful from a market research perspective, but others are ‘incontournables’. One of them is the way in which patients are stepping forward and are engaging a lot more in conversations about their health (offline & online), which is a true revolution in the Health sector and is deeply changing the relations between the HCP, the patient & the pharmaceutical company.
The first way to anticipate this new situation is to monitor and to know ‘your tools’ as a Health Conversation Manager. My colleague Magali Geens, InSites Consulting Health Director, gave us a view on the 2010 Health Study: Social Media Use in Health. The audience, renowned people in (European) health care marketing, was especially excited about the results because this year the data were extended from Europe to the rest of the world.

• Do not fear – but learn from patient conversations & act!

Health marketers learned how they should engage in the conversation with the empowered patient: track search behavior on Google, find out whether competitors already use ‘sponsored links’ (e.g. no pharma company has yet bought a ‘link’ for the Dutch term ‘hoofdpijn’ (‘headache’ in English)), read conversations about treatments, side effects etc. between patients on communities, social networks…
I think the most important thing I learned was that pharma companies do not need to be afraid of online patient conversations – on the contrary, it is an opportunity for them to learn from these conversations and think of ways to optimize the HCP-patient-pharmacy relation within the given context.
Some more arguments: conversations are more often positive than negative; patients are very open to be activated online by the HCP & the broader industry (e.g. 48% is interested in a doctor who can be consulted online!)

• The answer is out there… Tapping into the conversations of connected patients and caregivers

After a refreshing break, Prof. Dr. Niels Schillewaert taught us how to answer health-related questions without asking questions to patients… You could literally ‘sense’ the enthusiasm of the audience upon encountering the added value of social media nethnography on the basis of two cases in Health Research. The presentation clearly inspired people as there were a lot of questions about how to do it in practice and for which business goals it is relevant (e.g. brand analysis, online marketing, evaluating ad impacts…)
One slide of the presentation highly enlightened me: the summary of the advantages of social media nethnography. In short: there is a reduced interview bias (no single question is asked to patients), really new insights (new questions pop up based on answers found), the answers are surrounded by a ‘rich’ context (patient language, spontaneous answers in the ‘heat of the moment’), emotions are measured and you can go back in time…

• How to forecast prescription behavior of HCPs

Within the continuously innovating market research industry, we may not forget that as a research agency, we still massively conduct ‘traditional’ online quantitative research.
Sarah Mertens from AstraZeneca presented us the research design and learnings of a pan-European Physician study. The goal was to quantify current prescription behavior and future switch intention among specialists of a product x and to understand drivers & barriers to switch from current treatments to product a.
I learned here that close cooperation between the client & the research agency was very important for the success of the study. In order to have a 100% solid & valid design, some smart elements were built-in (e.g. reliability of measurement was double checked: self-reported prescription behavior was almost an exact match of the up-to-date available prescription data).

At the reception afterwards, all attendees were fully engaged in conversations about patient conversations and I … I was really proud to be part of the Health Team of InSites Consulting!

Interested in the presentations?

Every report confirms the trend: Marketers are shifting advertising budget away from traditional media and into online media.

But not all channels are equal. So what’s a quick and easy way to work out which outlets can serve up your target audiences and where should you be placing your advertising?

To answer that question for Belgian marketers, we launched a free online tool called eScape at the end of 2009. eScape shows the socio-demographic profile of visitors to participating sites, data about site satisfaction, and consumer habits and intentions in sectors that often use online advertising such as FMCG, automotive, finance, mobile and travel.

Since launching, we’ve added extra features and new outlets have joined. Hi-Media, Corelio Connect, Pebblemedia, Paratel, De Persgroep, Roularta Media and Trustmedia were the first participants. They’ve been joined by the blogging network Skynet and Microsoft MSN.

eScape’s features include complex analyses in real time, benchmarking against other sites within an industry sector and a handy portfolio planner. Exporting the data is easy, and you can set the language during data collection to more than a dozen local options.

Publishers, ad networks and agencies are all getting better data thanks to eScape. Why not sign up yourself and find out how this free tool can improve your targeting?

Over the month of April 2010, Flemish parents and Flemish children were questioned about the playing frequency within the overall leisure activities of 8-12 year olds, and about the purchase and use of toys. Karrewiet of Ketnet, Radio 2 and the Toy Museum endeavored to find answers to these questions in cooperation with InSites Consulting.

We will share some 2010 playing trends with you:

• Flemish 8-12 year olds spend more than 3 hours per day behind a screen. This is not surprising, since approximately 30% have a game console in their own room, 25% an own television and 20% a computer.
• Game consoles and particularly Nintendo DS are the most popular toys. Online games are also seeing strong growth.
• Digital play is therefore most popular, though classics such as LEGO (mainly popular among boys) and handicrafts (mainly popular among girls) are also a mainstay. Our children are not passive, for cycling and trampolining are also very popular.
• 25% of children usually play alone. One in three children feel their parents should make more time to play with them.
• Traditional games such as tag and football rule at the playground. If children could choose, they would like to have a trampoline at school. The new craze for trading games such as Bakugan is banned in half of Flemish schools.
• Annually, parents spend on average € 245.00 per child on toys and are primarily guided in their choice by ‘the joy of the child ‘. Their own best memories are of LEGO.
• Parents mainly want their children to move and be creative. Learning to cooperate is the most important to them when their child plays with others. The competitive spirit – which clearly exists among children – is not at all emphasized by parents. Parents generally prefer playing UNO, Monopoly or a puzzle with their children.

Toys that 8-12 year olds play with most often

1. Nintendo DS/Dsi/DsiXL
2. Bicycles/tricycles/scooters
3. Computer/PC games
4. Painting and drawing
5. Nintendo Wii
6. Trampoline
7. LEGO
8. Online games/surfing
9. Balls
10. Sony PlayStation
11. Roller skates, inline skating, skateboard
12. UNO
13. Miniature figures and animals
14. Monopoly
15. Swimming pool