This creates in us a sense of urgency and we want to point out how these futures are already happening (in a small way) today.

In this regard, Leonard Murphy at the GreenBook Market Research Blog does us all a favor with his piece titled:

The Future Is… Now

Here Murphy outlines how many of the things Ian Lewis (research in 2020) and I are thinking about as future trends already can be found in small efforts, experiments, and new tech ventures today. For example, I believe that “serious gaming” will become a serious research tool, and Murphy points out how BrainJuicer is already experimenting with serious games for MR — today.

The challenge that we all have in thinking about the futures is that while we see the weak and strong signals for a future today, we are often at the lowest phase of the S curve looking up. As many have pointed out, the S curve appears to be a dominant pattern in all kinds of physical phenomena, including changed states and this applies especially so to technology adoption. At the beginning, adoption is slow and increases at an almost arithmetic rate, then it hits a critical mass and the adoption of that technology increases at a lightning pace. Once adoption hits near ubiquity, it levels off. Our challenge today is that in analyzing the futures of market research, we are looking at weak and strong signals for the future in the very early stages of the S curve. We expect change to come quickly, but the futures may keep us waiting longer than we would like.

Murphy does us all a favor in identifying the weak and strong signals today that will lead to change tomorrow. His piece gives us concrete examples of how the things we are talking about are not as far-fetched as they sound, and he helps us better understand where we are on the S curve.

Ideally, it should be read in tandem with his January Quirk’s piece titled “Ten keys to increasing the impact of research” and with his comments on this website.

Although I highly recommend that you read (and re-read) Ian’s piece in Research World and draw your own conclusions, there are several things that I think are worth amplifying.

1. His concept of a “management contract” for MR is new to me and seems challenging, but novel.
2. Ian’s emphasis on “future-focused knowledge” that is “above the brand” makes two points simultaneously. First, that MR needs to inhabit a more strategic space with fewer “validation” surveys and second, that MR will naturally over time begin to blend with strategic foresight.
3. His thinking around future leadership in MR is dead on. Until recently mastery of MR meant mastery of a process that yielded reltaively scarce data. Data is now abundant. The process is being automated and simplified. Creativity is the scarce item, not data.
4. His listing of mindsets and skills is useful for anyone in MR tasked with hiring and managing. It’s an excellent shortlist.

“High Impact Research” is an exellent piece, and I highly recommend it.

For those interested in prediction markets I strongly recommend David Rothschild’s article in this month’s Public Opinion Quarterly (AAPOR’s publication).

Although Rothschild’s article focuses on “comparing prediction markets, polls and their biases”, the implications of his article stretch well beyond the political world. In fact, from one vantage point, elections are just a useful space to study these markets since they happen at frequent and predictable intervals. But any future event with these similar parameters would do.

One critique of market research is that it is a snapshot of the present and is rooted in present attitudes and behaviors.

This is why I believe strategic foresight and market research will merge (or at least cross-pollinate) in the near future.

Prediction markets are just one example of an area in which this cross-pollination will occur.

BrainJuicer already appears to be experimenting with prediction markets.

Some possible (as opposed to probable or preferable) futures:

1. The commoditized part of the business is called “market research” and it loses talent and ages dramatically. The non-commoditized part of the business is called “strategic foresight” (see BCG report), “data-driven consulting”, or “customer community.” The industry becomes fragmented, but many of those working in the industry evolve with society and technology into new roles.

For some more thinking on this:

http://www.futureofinsight.com/2010/01/strategic-foresight/

http://www.futureofinsight.com/2009/12/professional-line-blurring/

2. Google and Facebook become massive market research suppliers/panel managers.

http://www.futureofinsight.com/2010/01/new-entrants/

3. Millennials working in a number of other fields reinvent the industry, but it isn’t called “market research.”

http://www.futureofinsight.com/2010/01/mr-millennials/

4. Participant engagement drops to the point where survey research is simply undoable. Researchers turn their attention to simulations (games) that participants enjoy playing. These games replace traditional survey-based research.

http://www.futureofinsight.com/2010/01/lightening-the-respondent-burden-making-research-fun/

5. Online and community research coupled with the decline of the landline kills off traditional phone-based research. But, the brave new world of online surveys hits a big speedbump as (1) the data isn’t projectable and (2) privacy concerns and legislation increase the cost. The industry then goes “back to the future”, interviewing people face-to-face. Walmart and Starbucks become (through a JV) a participant intercept network that everyone tries to leverage.

A new Boston Consulting Group report supports this thesis.

You can read it all here.

But, I highly recommend the grids in the appendix on pages 27 and 28. Here BCG charts what it sees as the evolution of the MR function:

1. Traditional MR Function
2. Business Contribution Team
3. Strategic Insight Organization
4. Strategic Foresight Organization (see also page 12)

Unfortunately, BCG posits that “almost 90% of companies are in stages 1 and 2″.

In my opinion, this means that over time there will be a much stronger demand for data-driven foresight tools (like Delphi panels and futures markets – possibly loaded into MROCs) in the United States. And this demand won’t be limited to the government and large institutions, as it has in the past.

Why will we see this demand?

Because corporations will come to the conclusion that the only way to jump ahead of competitors (BCG refers to “leapfrogging”) is to (1) study the possible, probable and preferred futures, (2) build plans and future business lines around this futuring, and (3) contingency plan for wildcards – those low probability, high impact events that bring change quickly.

In fact, I believe that at some point in the future most corporations will have small wild card futuring teams responsible for (a) identifying potential wildcards and (b) building contingency plans around them with the focus on turning wildcard events into significant business-building opportunities.

For a taste of what I mean by wildcards, click here.

First, it’s simply interesting. The author has been building game theory based prediction markets for the US government and private industry clients for years, and his learnings in this field (especially, multi-player nation state relations modeling) are fascinating.

Interestingly, the author writes about something closely related to Admiral John Poindexter’s somewhat controversial Policy Analysis Market (PAM).

From a market research point of view, The Predictioneer’s Game is one look into the future. It’s no secret that Delphi Panels (first invented by RAND after WWII), are the historical beginning point for many futurist efforts. But, the simultaneous advent of hosted online communities and prediction markets means that at some point (probably very soon) market research will combine the two in a way that creates a step change in the field. And, this combination is ultimately going to look like much of what the author of The Predictioneer’s Game has been doing for the US government for many, many years.

How will it work? First, market researchers will create an online community that has the features (either in background, skills or purchase interest) that they desire. Then, this group will be given a series of questions. Each question will ask what the likely range of consumer/business/voter responses might be. Then, a prediction market or exchange will be created for this range of outcomes. Trading will commence. If the literature is correct, the outcome of this trading will likely mirror (or approximate) the outcome in the real world. Most interesting to me is that this process is now being tinkered with to design new products and product features.

In the world of public affairs, a common research approach is to poll a random sample of policy elites and use this data to understand how future scenarios might sort out. StrategyOne used this approach with its Beltway Barometer to better understand what might happen with the initial bailout bills in the fall of 2008. In fact, we found support for the first bailout slipping quickly and this is exactly what happened. But, a more powerful complement to this survey based approach will be the creation of exchange driven communities of policy elites or influencers. This may just be the next “killer app” in the public affairs space.

RPM

Is it market research? Is it management consulting? Is it digital strategy? Is it strategic foresight?

The first, and probably greatest, area we can expect significant line blurring is between traditional market research and management consulting. Management consulting tends to gain its strength from industry experience, the gravitas of its strategic consultants, and the individual consultant’s ability to synthesize many data points into a compelling narrative (story telling). But, management consulting often lacks the kind of hard data that market research can provide. I expect management consultancies to purchase and or build internally the basic market research capacity that they need. I also expect market research to increasingly attempt to go “up market” into the consulting space.

The next likely scenario is a significant blurring between the digital strategy function and market research. This blurring will be driven by technology (online communities like MROCs, LinkedIn surveys, etc.) and social adoption of multiple digital tools and afinity communities. On one hand, this development may dramatically shorten the customer feedback loop. But, the danger is that the “research” conducted via these communities may not be terribly projectable.

Finally, strategic foresight (Futures Consulting) can be expected to leverage traditional opinion and market research in its analysis of trends and identification of possible futures, probable futures and preferred futures. In fact, market research should pay close attention to strategic foresight as this field focuses on an area in which market research is sometimes criticized – the difficulty of extrapolating “a snapshot in time” survey forward into the future.