16 Minutes 
Sago recently presented a webinar to highlight one of the most important trends in market research over the past decade: the shift away from separate quantitative/qualitative platforms and products towards hybrid tools that allow users to do both concurrently.
This webinar was hosted by Joanne Mallett, Senior Manager of Marketing at Sago. There were three experts joining us in the session, each of them members of Sago:
- Steve Mast – Executive VP of Market Innovation & Commercialization
- Chawntae Applegate – Executive VP of Client Solutions
- Joe Mulvaney – Senior Vice President of North American Qualitative
In the following webinar recap, you’ll discover why this shift in technology has occurred, and how companies and researchers are reaping the benefits of a hybrid quant/qual approach.
Two Sides of the Same Coin
Moderator Steve Mast kicked off the call with a brief overview of these two sides of the research coin: quantitative and qualitative. He pointed out that traditionally, quantitative and qualitative research were seen as two very different camps, conducted independently from each other. However, with the evolution of digital technologies, we are experiencing a shift toward tools that enable us to conduct quant and qual research in one fell swoop.
Pre-2012: Emergence of Research Tech
Steve began by reminding us of what research technology looked like a decade ago:
“If you look back 10 years ago, you had these different camps that were emerging. So you had very quantitative research technologies. And then you had very qualitative research technologies that were powering these two very different camps. So they’re remaining in their very equal discipline. Obviously, on the quantitative side of things, you saw a bit more of an increase in various different technologies that were coming on to the scene just due to the nature of research automation, and there were things going on there that sparked a lot of interest in that area. There were ways you could increase that bucket of platforms if you will. You saw these things more on what I refer to as the fringe, right? So they were on the extremes of both sides.”
2022: Quant + Qual = Rise of Hybrid Platforms
Steve then gave us an up-to-date picture of what research technology is starting to look like today:
“If you fast forward 10 more years, you see a plethora of new research technologies that are entering the marketplace and have established themselves as very significant products and platforms. And now, not just on the quantitative side of things but particularly on the qualitative side of things, you start to see an enormous amount of new technologies that are entering the marketplace. And what’s really interesting about this is that many of these technologies are starting to move toward what I would refer to as the center. So they’re moving away from the fringe and they’re starting to provide more hybrid-type solutions. So, in other words, this year alone we’ve seen many organizations on the quantitative side of things, starting to offer qualitative research features or capabilities, and we’ve even seen that on the qualitative side of things as well.”
He went on to elaborate:
“Many of the qualitative platforms and technologies over the years have offered quantitative capabilities, but they might have been light in nature. And I would say that’s equally the same on the quantitative side of things as well. But you’re definitely seeing more of these hybrid platforms that are starting to emerge and come together, which has created a tremendous amount of new advantages in terms of methodologies, ways of speaking to customers, just thinking differently about how we conduct research.”
And so this all begs the question: Where is this hybrid trend taking us? To this, there are three points to consider:
- Market research Marketplaces are here and will grow with more diverse solutions.
- Quant and Qual platforms will power these diverse solutions on a single platform.
- Researchers need a choice of flexible solutions.
These opening remarks set the context for our first question:
What is the demand for digital hybrid research?
Chawntae Applegate was the first to jump in:
“The demand has definitely increased over the past six to twelve months. We continue to see it with the types of requests we are receiving, and I think a lot of it really stems from the fact that you have this group of people–perhaps where they’re doing a quantitative study–you’ve identified that they have been your target market, your target audience that you’re looking for, and now people want to be able to take that and continue to dig deeper. And they’re realizing the benefit of it. In the long run, it’s saving lots of time for them…it’s allowing them to have that flexibility.”
She went on to clarify:
“[They are able] to go through the quantitative data that we know brings more of that statistical reliability to the table, and then [they can] pull up groups of people to understand the why behind it. And so you have them, they’re identified, let’s use them now in different ways. So we’re seeing them in things like concept testing, product testing, even in lots of longitudinal type research where we have participants who are working on a 12-month or so community with us. And so the demand and I think the understanding of what can happen when you have access to these respondents in this first-party way has really become very strong within the marketplace.”
Steve kept the ball rolling with his next question:
Go big or go small–is there a right way and a wrong way?
Chawntae, again, was the first to chime in:
“I don’t think there is a right way or a wrong way. I think it really depends on what your research objectives are, and what you’re trying to get out of that particular study, and what is your starting point. I think there have been lots of examples where we’ve even started smaller qualitative and from that decided that we really needed to bring in a larger quantitative approach because of what we were seeing within the “whys”. So, no right or wrong way. I think it’s really important to identify what your objective is and make sure that you’re being very clear on that.”
Following Chantae’s excellent remarks, Steve shifted the discussion with a new question:
Is qualitative research seeing an increase in scalability?
Joe was eager to give his take on this one:
“Absolutely. And I think it goes back to the growth and number of platforms and the technology over the last couple of years. Today, we have the ability to answer the what and the why on one platform, where we didn’t have that ability even a few years ago. The platforms have improved in such a way that we can easily build a quantitative survey into a platform and then when we’re done, pull a couple of people apart with the click of a button and pull them into a qualitative interview. That was unheard of years ago. We were working with “how do we set up this side of the research?” and then two or three weeks later, sometimes months later, let’s move into the qualitative or vice versa. So our ability to scale that has vastly improved and we’re seeing it quicker and more often now than we have in the past.”
Quantitative used to have the advantage of speed and time to market, but are you seeing that with qualitative now as well because these new platforms and products exist?
Joe was happy to continue his train of thought:
“Absolutely. We have access to consumers or respondents faster than what we had in the past through different panels or social media and how we’re recruiting folks–that has increased from a speed standpoint over recent years. And then at the same time, just being able to meet that respondent where they are, working around their calendars, their schedules, and getting them online when it works for both them and the research team; it’s the perfect combination and that’s really what has kind of changed the game over the last couple of years.”
What are the benefits of a digital hybrid research approach?
Chawntae took the mic back for this one:
“The first thing I think of is, it’s really just producing what I call a richer and more comprehensive view to answer their business question. So you can look at it from the standpoint: You have the quant, right, which is giving you that statistical reliability, you have the numbers game, so that’s allowing you to have that validation. So think about it more as: You can analyze the numbers and then on the qual side, when you move into that piece of it, it’s really answering the why, and understanding things like “likes and dislikes.” And then you’re taking that analysis from the numbers into the analysis really of the people, and so for me, it’s just this holistic view of being able to look at a problem and really have the proof or the evidence of what you’re trying to answer.”
Joe then jumped in to piggyback on Chawntae’s comments:
“I feel that when you put yourself in the client’s shoes, and you’re the researcher, it helps from just a scheduling standpoint as well, and a planning perspective. We were able to plan these pieces together now, and have it as one holistic project versus where it used to be steps in the past, or there were a lot of iterations between the two. Now, those things are coming together. That helps timeliness, calendars, costs, and just allowing that research team to continue moving forward, and that’s what we want to do is just help our clients continue to push forward, and keep them on the right path. And so I think that’s what this does.”
What should companies be keeping in mind if they want to adopt a more hybrid research approach?
Joe responded quickly with:
“I think it’s just having a plan. And we’re (Sago) willing to work with you on that plan. What are the questions you’re looking for? What are the objectives? What do you want? What do you need help finding out? And then what’s the best way to get those (answers). Whereas, before, it used to be an either or question of do I do qual or do I do quant. Now, it’s “Why not do both?” But that starts again with the research objectives. Having those laid out and coming prepared with those, then our team can work with you and can help devise a plan to answer those questions. It’s really just understanding where we want to go, who we want to talk with, and what insights do we want to pull out?”
Chawntae had her own take on it:
“To me, it’s the importance of knowing what you’re trying to answer and why we’re trying to answer that and what do you want to get out of that? I also just want to make sure that we have everything as set up as we can in the beginning, and know what your objectives are. I think what’s beautiful about the hybrid approach is really allowing researchers and marketers and people who are using this data, this information, to either be able to look at things in real time and to see what they’re seeing within their data, and to make adjustments in adding qualitative, and make sure they’re understanding that but then you can also come back later.”
Before launching into the caller Q&A, Steve wanted to point out what to him was the quote of the session, a comment made by Joe Mulvaney: “It’s no longer either or…”
Audience Q&A
Joanne Mallett took over to present several questions submitted by the audience:
Can you elaborate on what types of qual you are seeing, such as more in-person qual or more AI capabilities, that replace the in-person moderator role?
Steve: “I think it’s still the very early days (for AI tools). There’s a lot of advancements going on in chat-based technologies, which are really kind of the ultimate in hybrid, right? So you’ve got these chat technologies that can lead you down a very quantitative type of study, but then it can pause and stop and open up more of a qualitative discussion. if you start doing any sort of mobile type ethnographic research, I think it’s a very powerful tool where you have the best of both worlds. Many of the qualitative–even our (Sago’s) products–have these quantitative capabilities or features built into them, beyond just even polling. At Sago, we have this really great advantage where we have both sides of the fence narrowed down.”
What criteria does a qualitative platform need to have in order to make the claim that they are a qual/quant hybrid platform, and does this go beyond quant question types?
Joe: “The key is being able to have some sort of survey tool so you can see those quantitative responses come through. The qualitative platforms traditionally have been very much like this, like a live meeting type of platform, but being able to incorporate a quantitative survey and seeing those results in real time or after they’ve been answered, but then interact with that respondent–that’s where you bridge the two.”
Chawntae: “I think another big piece of this is the respondent, and having access to those respondents who are willing to do both the quantitative and qualitative type of exercise. Because not all panels are set up to allow that very easily because of the type of information and things that are being collected. So I think that accessibility to the type of panelists who are willing to do that is also a really big key to this.”
Other than identifying the target audience, can you speak to the cost efficiency of a hybrid approach versus independent quant and qual initiatives?
Chawntae: “Once you have them identified and you’ve done all your screener questions, you already have [that part] done, so you don’t have to go back out and refine those individuals. So, there is efficiency from a cost-per-complete piece of it. You’re still going to have to pay them their incentive for doing that part of the qualitative phase, but the identification of them is also a big savings as well in terms of time, which is hard to put a price on.”
Joe: “At times, depending on the audience, you could find efficiencies in the incentives as well. Instead of paying for two separate incentives, you can budget for a one-and-a-half with that respondent, knowing that the time that they’re putting into it, you’re still compensating them for that, but it tends to be cheaper in the long run.”
Steve: “Depending on the type of organization, one of the challenges we face from sort of an abundance of research technology offerings in the marketplaces, is that often our clients’ procurement departments or finance departments are coming back to us and saying, ‘Why do we have 15 different products? Why do we have so many different organizations we’re trying to work with?’ This is related to hybrid because you can find an organization that has these things that are related, working together–there are going to be efficiencies just in the savings of working with one organization”
Are you seeing any traditional qual moderators offering more traditional quant projects, such as ANU studies, or is it more just adding quant questions to qual boards?
Joe: “Absolutely, and I think part of this is driven just by where we’ve come over the past couple of years and moving more into this digital realm. For a traditional qual moderator, quantitative was more of a hands off approach, or at least at arm’s length. They knew what it was, but they never really dipped their feet in or really participated in it. As we’ve seen, these platforms come together and we’ve seen more capabilities being shared, we’ve run into each other more–and that’s a good thing. And so qual moderators are learning more about quant and how to conduct those types of studies, and it’s an additional opportunity area for them. Can you do a quantitative type survey on a qual board or a qual platform? Absolutely. And we’re seeing that. But at the same time, we’re also seeing qual moderators being able to go out and sell or pitch or conduct those quantitative surveys as well, because when you get down to it, the usability is pretty similar between the two. And setting them up is intuitive. It’s not as scary and as difficult as we once thought it was.”
So with all this information and data available today, how do you mitigate analysis paralysis as the amount of information you gather grows on either side of the data collection process–both quant and qual.
Chawntae: “I think this is probably one of those areas where we see it all the time. We work with lots of different types of clients and companies and different channels. One of the things that is very consistent is there are lots of questions put in because somebody thinks that they need to have that question in there, or it’s always been in there, but I think a lot of this goes back to really redefining what your objective is for that study, and making sure that you have the questions that answer that.”
Steve: I think we used to be trying to get everything perfect and ask the 45 questions, but now we’re moving toward “Is it good enough [for our purposes]?”
Summary
We hope you enjoyed reading about this webinar on digital hybrid research.
Quantitative and qualitative no longer belong to the extreme fringe as two separate camps. They are today what they have actually always been: two sides of the same coin–before, in theory; today, in practice.
Companies and researchers using these hybrid tools can speed up their initiatives, save on costs, and dig deeper than ever into their research.
At Sago, we’ve enjoyed being a part of this shift through the evolution of our own tools and practices. To learn more about how we do hybrid right, and what that can mean for you, please book a consultation by contacting us at [email protected].
