Qualitative Research: A Win-Win-Win Situation

At the YMCA this morning, a staff member asked me how my workout was.

I said something like, “Good; but consistency is the key. If one great workout could get us in shape, we’d all be super fit. But it takes a long-term commitment, and that’s what I need to focus on.”

The staffer replied: “That’s right- you get out of it what you put into it.”

And bingo! He provided the missing theme for the post I’ve been working on (thanks, Sammy!).

You get out of it what you put into it.

Why is quantitative research so popular? Because it’s quick, cheap, has broad reach, and provides metrics.

Why do I prefer qualitative research?

• It’s more fulfilling for the researcher
• It’s more rewarding for the participant
• It’s more enlightening for the client

Brief justifications:

1. More fulfilling for the researcher

Qualitative work is more demanding and requires a larger skill set. Researchers must adapt to changing circumstances on the fly and excel at thinking on the run. They need to notice subtle body language, ask intuitive probing questions, and learn to discriminate reasons from rationalizations.

In short, it’s difficult. And that’s what makes it so much more gratifying.

Compare that to a typical quantitative survey, where a minimum-wage employee calls down a list, robotically asks a few questions, and mechanically processes respondents as quickly as possible so as to hit quota and maximize profits. There’s a reason why work-release inmates and high school kids are often hired for these jobs- it requires little expertise.

2. More rewarding for the participant

People hate robotic, closed-ended, scripted surveys.

But they love sincere, open-ended, personalized interviews.

So what do you want to ask your audience to endure…something they love or something they hate?

When interviews are conducted with respect, patience, and personality, the respondents are almost always grateful for the chance to provide feedback.

Indeed, as Jeffrey Henning of Vovici recently discussed, research suggests that simply being asked for feedback improves customer loyalty.

But even better than the enhanced gratitude or loyalty generated in respondents is the deeper, richer information they provide because of the more meaningful conversation. (See Katie Harris’ great discussion of motivations and context.)

Which brings us to the most important advantage of qualitative research…

3. More enlightening for the client

The open-ended and engaging format of qualitative research provides the space for innovation, learning, and dreaming that quantitative work can never offer.

Through longer conversations and interactions, qualitative researchers can uncover deeper customer perceptions, understand the genesis of these perceptions, and explore the deeper needs and drives of respondents.

And clients love the results. As Research Rockstar recently noted: “There is nothing like hearing—and seeing—people  talk ad lib to really get a sense of their attitudes and values.”

Compare/Contrast

Sure, qualitative work takes more time, costs more money, and –consequently– reaches fewer audience members.

And sure, there are fair methodological concerns about qualitative work.

But as Annie at Conversition recently challenged: “Make a list of all of the research methods that are error-free, risk-free and always give valid and reliable results.” 

[Hint: There aren’t any!]

* * * * * * *

So why do I prefer qualitative work?

Because you get out of research what you put into it.

When you put in more time, more money, and more love, you get better information.

And it creates a win-win-win situation for the researcher, the participants, and –most importantly– the client.

Viral Soap? (Part 2)

I recently discussed the viral complaints springing from a change in soap at Louisville’s Downtown YMCA. So why the change to a new soap after all these years?

If the Y is anything like our company, vendors are bombarding them with offers to help them cut their costs.

We have sales people vying to shrink our phone bills, trim our bookkeeping budget, and prewfreed are bloog poasts four les monies.

Times are tough and everyone is looking to save money. The YMCA does so much to help our community that I can easily envision them thinking, “Well, if we can save some money on soap, that’s ten more children we can subsidize for summer camp.”

My guess is that the Y saw an opportunity to lower costs by using a cheaper soap, and they took it.

We all make such decisions from time to time (I recently made the poor decision to cut my kids’ hair myself…big mistake).

But all too often, cheaper doesn’t just mean inferior; it means more expensive.

I repeat:

Cheaper things usually end up being more expensive.

As I mentioned in my previous entry, the new soap was inferior in quality. It just didn’t lather.

Whereas the old soap required 2 pumps to wash my hair (yeah, it’s pretty darn thin these days), the new soap required about 10 pumps.

So I needed to use 5 times more soap for the same lather, which I suspect not only negated any “per ounce” cost savings, but probably ended up costing the Y more money due to the need to buy five times more soap in terms of overall volume.

Then factor in shipping costs on the additional soap, plus the staff time to fill the soap dispensers more often, and all in all, it’s a bad deal.

Cheaper things usually end up being more expensive.

We’ve all made the mistake of thinking that we were getting a deal only to realize that the sacrifice in quality creates hidden costs that make the “deal” a truly bad proposition.

In this instance, the YMCA ultimately dropped the new soap and went back to the old soap, and I haven't heard a single complaint since.

So when sales reps start saying, “Hey, I can do that for half of what you’re paying now,” make sure to consider the quality of what they’re selling, lest their bargain basement prices end up costing you more money. 

Viral Soap?

These days, even soap can go viral. I’ve been a member of Louisville’s Downtown YMCA for several years, and a recent change in soap temporarily sent member satisfaction right down the drain. 

[Don’t boo; it’s a hard joke to resist.]

I can testify that the new soap was a definite step backwards in quality and that members were not simply resisting change.

The old soap lathered. The new soap didn’t.

It was impossible not to notice the difference, and in the days after the new soap was introduced, complaints about it were literally never-ending in the men’s locker room.

It was incredibly viral, as the cyclical, coming-and-going nature of locker rooms meant that newly arriving members were immediately infected with the topic by members who had just showered.

And once infected, those members would complain about the soap after their showers, thus infecting the next wave of arrivals.

And on and on and on.

[Insert your own joke about “slippery slopes.”]

I heard members openly complain to staffers about it, and after a few days, the YMCA even posted a sign outside the locker room to let members know that they were aware of the issue. 

Oddly, their sign asked for patience while they explored “other soap options.” I can’t be the only one who thought, “How about the old soap!”

How did the YMCA resolve this issue and what might have caused them to change soaps in the first place?

More soon.

Update: Part 2 now available; click here!