Reading Jane Mount’s recent (Feb. 2010) article in the MRA’s Alert! Magazine, I have to say that she distills the value proposition into the best several pages I have read on this (relatively) new technology.
For those in MR who have been under a rock for the past few years and are not fully aware of this qualitative research tool, her three page piece is an excellent primer. I also think it is a good primer for MR buyers/users who may legitimately not be very aware of this tool.
Three points on Mount’s article:
1. She addresses the issue of MROCs as closed social community for research purposes (walled garden) vs. open social networks used largely for product evangelism. This is an important distinction that I fear may be getting lost.
2. She addresses the distinction between MROCs and online panels (convenience samples). Just the other day I heard a peer in the industry liken MROCs to online panels. There are large and fairly obvious differences.
3. I didn’t see anything about the potential pitfalls of MROCs in her piece. This is fine. They’re a wonderful new tool. But, two weaknesses spring to mind. The first is that MROCs require an ongoing commitment that other, project based, research methods do not. MROCs can die of neglect. Unless the participants are being engaged regularly, the community dwindles and dies. The skill of a community manager (a position that I envision many current “project directors” transitioning to) is critical. The second is that MROCs can offer a far too easy substitute for more robust, quantitative research, even when the quantitative research is needed. This is why I believe in-house MR leaders need to push back when-if internal clients push for the easy way out (throw a poll question on the MROC) instead of investing in quantitative data.
Mount’s article is a must read and may be a solid educational tool for MR leaders to use with their non-researcher clients.
As a founder of Communispace, the leading provider of private insight communities, I can’t help but be pleased that you’re promoting Jane Mount’s very clear and practical introduction to MROC’s
But more importantly, I think you raise some great distinctions in your point number 3 above. You’re absolutely right that these types of communities require active, ongoing facilitation, fresh content, and a company that’s willing to acknowledge and “close the loop” on what it’s hearing from the community members who are investing their time and energy. And you’re also right that for certain types of questions and needs (such as awareness testing or market-sizing), a small, long-term market research community is no replacement for larger scale, more episodic quantitative research methods. For more on this whole question of how and why to achieve the optimal mix of methods (e.g. social networks, panels, communities, etc.), allow me to shamelessly promote the June issue of Alert, which will include an article on this very topic.
Thank you Julie.
Look forward to the article.
Sorry for late in responding. I love your point #3, and agree that we need to be clear with the pitfalls as well. One other item to think about with regard to MROCs – shared purpose. When community members have a strong sense of purpose for the community, you will engaged them more deeply and over a longer period of time. With MROCs you are creating consumer ‘partner’s’ who are engaging in this field of discovery with you. Bring them in – and you will be glad you did.