Archive for the ‘best practices’ Category

By Robert Relihan, Senior Vice President

I noted recently that it is important to distinguish brand loyalists from simple brand users, even heavy brand users.  Loyalists have a special relationship with your brand and are key to understanding a brand’s identity.

But, how do you identify these loyalists?  Here are five behaviors that are worth developing in your customers because they are sheer signs of a heightened bond with your brand.  And they are qualities to look for when you want to investigate your brand’s essence with those most in touch with it.

So, you know you have a brand loyalist when…

• She talks about your brand and recommends it to friends.

This is the classic definition of a loyalist.  If you want to talk to a true partisan of your brand, ask her if she has recommended it to someone in the past month.

• She uses your brand in unique ways.

I recently read some questions on the web from women complaining they could not find a particular kind of Kraft cheese.  They seemed quite upset.  The cheese was essential to a number of recipes they made.  A true brand loyalist not only loves your brand for what it is; she also loves what she can do with it.  Consumers who have these alternate uses for your brand have integrated it much more deeply into their lives and identity.

• She really “knows” your brand.

A brand loyalist really knows your brand.  When I have wanted to talk with NBA fans, I made sure they watched a certain number of games every week.  But, I also asked them to name the two teams in last year’s finals and four teams in the Eastern Conference.  It was always amazing to me how many “fans” who watched a couple of games a week could not answer those questions.  True Rice Krispie loyalists would know the names of the three signature characters.  True Heinz ketchup loyalists would know in what colors other than red the product has been available.

• Your brand is part of her family’s rituals and traditions.

Does she set out milk and cookies for Santa on Christmas Eve or does she leave a bottle of Coca-Cola with a snack?  When a true loyalist describes a family event, she includes the brand name in her story.

• She “owns” your brand.

The true NBA fan wears apparel with the logo of his favorite team.  But it is possible to “own” many brands.  A true Kraft Singles loyalist brings them home from the grocery store and puts them in a blue “Red and Ned” Kraft Singles box in her refrigerator.  A true Starbuck’s fan drinks her favorite coffee from a Starbuck’s mug.

To be a loyalist is to take charge of the brand.  A true brand loyalist defines the brand and the experience as much as any sophisticated positioning effort.  Marketers have always developed “clubs” and the like to encourage an affinity with brands.  What is remarkable now is that social media is essential to this effort and makes it so much easier for the consumer to wrest control of the brand from the marketer.  It is truly the age of the loyalist.

At C+R, we are continually looking for new definitions of brand loyalty and ways for the marketer to find these true loyalists.  Let us find yours.

—-

I have been talking recently about metaphors and how better storytelling can make our insights more compelling.  I don’t believe that Kurt Vonnegut was ever in the position of presenting a segmentation analysis, but his advice is worth considering.  I think I always want “someone to root for,” whether I am reading a novel or an analysis of a series of ethnographies.  Or, at least I should.

By Robert Relihan, Senior Vice President

One of the most difficult experiences for a focus group moderator is to be in a room with eight people who are supposed to be “loyalists” of a particular brand and discover that most could care less.  The assumption, of course, was that anyone who was a heavy user had to have an affinity for the brand.  So, you made sure that everyone purchased the brand in the past month and had purchased the brand three times in the past six months; they were very heavy users.

But they stared at you blankly when you tried to discuss what the brand stood for or what it meant to them.  The fact is, to develop a meaningful understanding of a brand’s essence, you can’t simply talk to users; you have to talk to people who are passionate about the brand.

So, here are four things to remember when looking for your true (blue) customers

• Users are not always loyalists.

This is the most obvious point.  When you need to talk to or understand people who are passionate about you brand, don’t be coy.  Don’t create elaborate usage algorithms.  You need to be assured that they do use your brand, but it is more important to ask them, “Is this your favorite brand?”

And, a corollary might be the usage is not affinity.  Efforts to build loyalty, such as loyalty programs, can stimulate and reinforce usage, but they do not necessarily build affinity and engagement.

Finally, loyalty and affinity may be as much a feature of the category as it is of your brand.  Coke and Pepsi have spent years and fortunes building up the notion that it is important to be loyal to one or the other.  How could I not be a Coke or Pepsi loyalist?  In effect, you have to be passionate about soft drinks before you can be a Coke or Pepsi loyalist.

• Loyalty is a disposition.

Some consumers seem more disposed to being passionate about the brands they use.  They want to engage with them.  They derive satisfaction from the simple act of choosing a brand and feeling it is “theirs.”

• Loyalists bring as much to your brand as the brand gives to them.

As much as marketers like to see themselves as charting a brand’s essence, users have often been in the driver seat.  In the years of Honda’s rise as a major automotive brand in the US, it crafted an image as a solid, reliable car.  Yet, when I talked with Honda owners, I was always struck by how solid, reliable and careful they were.  How could a car not be reliable when it was driven by such owners?

• Look to their youth.

Loyalty to your brand does not come out of nowhere.  If it is deep, it has been there for a long time.  As a child I remember watching 20^th Century on CBS television. It was sponsored by Prudential Insurance.  The Rock of Gibraltar will always be in the back of my head when I think about my insurance.

If you are really looking to find your loyalists, you might well discover that they have had a relationship with your brand long before they actually purchased it.  A large number of Porsches are driven by people who have wanted to own one since they were twelve.  Ask the question, “What are your first memories of a brand?”  If they can’t go back into their past, they probably aren’t a true loyalist.

This all seems to point to the importance of social media in building a brand and engaging loyalists.  Social media give loyalists an arena to engage with brands, to define both themselves and the brand.  But, there is a trap in social media for marketers.  Recent research suggest that most individuals “friend” retailers on Facebook to get deals.  That is, social media encourages usage.  Does it create engagement and bonding; is it a two-way street?  That is what social media must do to encourage loyalty.

At C+R we are ready to help you understand your “loyal” customers and how to stimulate their engagement with you.

By Robert Relihan, Senior Vice President

Since my blog post on becoming better storytellers, I have been thinking quite a bit about metaphors. Having the ability to think metaphorically is crucial to our understanding consumers and brands. We ask consumers to talk about their experiences in metaphors because it enables them to give voice to feelings that might otherwise remain hidden. As marketers, metaphors enable us to encapsulate the many facets of a brand in a single image.

But I am not always certain that we understand metaphors and their power. Or, perhaps, what may be more the case is that we fear that power because it cannot always be controlled. So, it’s important for us to understand that power.

We all know that a metaphor is a comparison. In its traditional definition, a metaphor does not use like or as — that’s a simile. It’s also important to know that metaphors are figurative, not literal. We feel a metaphor; we sense the connection. It isn’t telegraphed to us.

A way to understanding metaphors is to consider two ways in which they are misused or underused.

• We, as researchers, often ask participants in focus groups to express their feelings about a brand or activity in terms of something else — to create a metaphor. We believe that this activity will force them to take a fresh perspective and unlock perceptions they had not considered. But that is not what happens. We ask a classic qualitative question: “If Brand X were a dog, what breed of dog would it be?” Here is where things begin to go wrong. The respondent thinks, “Well, I like Brand X, and it makes me feel good. Golden Retrievers are friendly and make me feel good. Therefore, a Golden Retriever feels like Brand X.” Rather than expand her vision of the brand, the respondent has simply expressed a single dimension in different words. There is no expansion of meaning. But here is also where we go wrong. In the press of time, we let that pat answer stand. What we need to do is engage the respondent in an extended discussion about Golden Retrievers. There may be a meaningful metaphor there after all. What were the individual’s first memories of Golden Retrievers? What is it like to walk with a Golden Retriever? To sit with one? All of these answers enrich the respondent’s vision of a Golden Retriever and, through the logic of the metaphor, enrich our understanding of the brand.

• As marketers, we often make the same mistake as we think about our brands. We want metaphors that capture the essence of a brand in a single, memorable image. That metaphor can energize and give focus to the brand team. So, after much research and brainstorming, we decide that our brand of ketchup or soup — or whatever — is a ‘hero.’ It rescues consumers from humdrum meals. It helps them conquer the adversity of routine meals. We use the metaphor in a limited, self-congratulatory way. It becomes static, but a metaphor is always active. Every time we return to it, it should enrich our understanding of the brand. This is possible only if the metaphor is specific. If our brand is a hero, is it Odysseus? Robin Hood? Jack Bauer? If we reflect on any one of these heroes, we might discover different qualities in our brand. That is the power of a metaphor. It does not express what we know; it illuminates what we do not.

That’s how to use metaphors. A good metaphor reveals insights, and it does so repeatedly. At C+R we are committed to helping you discover the metaphors that give life to the essence of your brands.

By Walt Dickie, Executive Vice President

The town I live in is about to have elections, and while walking my dog this weekend I noticed that yard signs were blooming with the early crocuses.  Here is what you’d see if you traveled around my neighborhood:

• Blue signs with the names of four people running for the village board on them, with the website of a local voters’ organization printed below.  There are a LOT of these signs.
• Orange signs with the name of one person who is running for a position on the high school board.  There are a lot of these, too, though maybe not quite as many as the blue signs with the four village board candidates.
• Red signs with the name of one person who is running for village treasurer.  Again, there are a lot of these; I can’t tell if there are more or less than the number of orange signs.
• Blue-and-red signs with the name of someone running for school trustee.  Not as many of these compared to the orange or red signs.
• White-and-blue signs with the name of someone running for village president.
• White signs with green lettering bearing the name of a voters’ organization different from the one on the blue signs.

How should we analyze these yard signs?  We could come up with a block-level sampling plan and count the frequencies of the various sign types. That would suggest certain kinds of findings – and some Presidential “polls” were conducted this way. We could also code what little text copy that appears on the signs, but that approach wouldn’t discriminate well, since what text is there is duplicated across many signs (for instance, the title or office the candidate is running for, or claims about “experience.”)

Those approaches wouldn’t tell us much about how the various signs relate to each other, and we need that answer to understand the political meanings reflected in the signs.  And, that’s the key; meaning is found in the relationships among objects.  We want to know how the signs go together with each other, not just how many of each kind there are. To find that, we need to know some correlations. (Because I didn’t have the time or resources to do an extensive count and statistical analysis, I took notes and made some qualitative observations instead.)

• Almost any sign can be on the same lawn as any other sign, but the blue signs never appear on the same lawn as the white signs or the white-and-blue signs.
• Orange signs and red signs often occur by themselves, without any other signs on the lawn.
• Blue-and-red signs are occasionally found alone, but most of them are with other signs, often orange ones. Frequently, there aren’t any signs for village board positions on these lawns.
• The village board signs (blue and white-and-blue) are often found alone, although the white-and-blue and white signs are together on many lawns that have no other signs.
• There generally seem to be more yard signs on lawns that had Obama signs in the previous election (2008), but there were so many of those in my immediate neighborhood that it’s hard to tell.

Here’s what I think the signs are telling me about politics in my village:

• The blue candidate for village president is part of a slate of candidates, which may represent a local political “party.”  There seems to be no strong relationship between this party and the national Democratic and Republican parties.
• The white-and-blue candidate running for village president is running against the presidential candidate of the blue slate for village board; that’s why the blue and white-and-blue signs are never on the same lawn.
• The blue-slate party is identified with a local voters’ group, according to its sign.  It’s likely that the white-sign voters’ group opposes the blue-slate group and backs the white-and-blue candidate, although no sign actually states this relationship.
• There are at least two political contests going on in the Village.  One is over seats on the Village Board and the other is over school issues.  Some households are involved in both, others in one or the other, but there is no apparent party alignment between school candidates and village board candidates.
• The orange and red candidates aren’t firmly allied with either of the local parties.  They’re apparently ambitious individual campaigners.
• The blue-and-red candidate and orange candidates for school positions may be allies.

How This Relates To Text Analysis:

Text analysis tools analyze texts the same way this example analyzes yard signs.

• A text is made up of words, which are like the names and voters’ organizations on the yard signs.
• Text analysis looks at how words co-occur the same way the example looked at what signs appeared together on lawns. Most tools represent this graphically as a network of associations of varying strength.
• From these relationships, the tool makes inferences about the meaning of these clusters, which we can think of as themes; in this case, the political parties, issues, and alignments.  The local “blue party” is a theme, as are the ideas of “school issues” and “village board issues.”  We can easily imagine these themes being represented as circles encompassing the varying concepts and demonstrating their logical relationships across the network of co-occurring yard signs.
• This is the same kind of inferences that humans make about relationships that are implied but never explicit. This sort of analysis is absolutely critical to understanding texts because normal language relies so heavily on the human ability to infer meaning.
• This approach is diametrically opposed to traditional marketing research coding. Coding imposes an external set of analytic categories on data – it would code all the signs claiming that a candidate was “experienced” together. Text analysis can produce this result, but it does so by finding that theme within the data. In this example, text analysis would discover the “experienced” theme, but it would not be useful for sorting the signs.

We could push this approach further by wandering into other neighborhoods to see if we could link the themes that emerge in my village with the themes in others, or maybe we could use the linkages between these village election signs to the broader themes that were expressed on yard signs for the recent national elections. We could probably take in other signage (to stay in the visual realm) as expressed on bumper stickers and lapel pins: correlations forming clusters, which themselves correlate with other clusters, revealing higher-level clusters.

By Robert Relihan, Senior Vice President

You are at a party, standing in the kitchen with a small circle of friends. Someone is relating the latest bit of gossip.  You listen with rapt attention.  You are at once surprised and knowing.  You are shocked and involved.  At the end, you feel changed and in possession of a new vision of your friend, the subject of the juicy…story.  Yes, you were listening to a story.  Now, compare your feeling from the kitchen experience to that of reading the typical research report or listening to the standard presentation.  Ugh!

We are being told to be storytellers.  In fact, storytelling is everywhere.  Storytelling has evolved into a model for how a brand relates with its potential consumers, even business consumers.  There is even a “theory” to storytelling.  But, when we sit in the trenches with a mound of data and are asked to be storytellers, we may shutter.  Sometimes it feels like we are just being told “don’t bore me.”  How do I become a storyteller and not just a mere presenter?

First you need to recognize that there are different stort types — mysteries, sagas, romances, etc.  Heroes overcome and triumph, sometimes by guile, sometimes by strength.  And then again, sometimes a story isn’t so much about a hero as it is about a group that comes together and forges a new identity — sometimes a family, sometimes a nation.

There may be different types of stories, but they all have beginnings, middles, and ends.  A presentation often feels like a collection of discrete arguments, each slide meant to prove a point.  But a story is like a river, connected at all times — through themes, through characters — to both the beginning and the end.  Storytelling is about discovery; storytelling is immersive.

For those of you who were not raised as storytellers, here are a few specific tips:

• Remember, whatever you say connects what came before with what comes next.  Telling stories is all about transitions.  In telling a story you are not making an argument; you are taking the audience on a journey of discovery.
• Stories have a focus, a main character with whom the audience can relate.  So, give your data a character that moves from the beginning to the final insight.  The audience should always be aware of this “character” and her place in the story.  Sometimes, this means personifying the consumer, the brand, the positioning, or whatever.  And, it can mean personifying the audience, casting them in the role of a hero on the quest of insight.
• Leave room for surprises; no story is exciting without it.  An insight is simply a finding made new and exciting by a sense of discovery and surprise.
• The corollary of surprise is anticipation.  Tell your story as if there is always something better, more interesting and valuable around the corner.  When you reach the “end,” would you rather your audience feel they have been presented with a logical conclusion or experienced the explosion of a new insight?
• When I talk to consumers, I encourage them to find metaphors within themselves.  Metaphors give voice to truths and bring richness to the experience.  Moreover, a great metaphor is memorable.

We can all become better storytellers by being attuned to our culture.  Stories are the ways we all tell the truths about ourselves without realizing it. And, just as in society, stories are what connect the reality of consumers to the needs of marketers.

By Steve Stallard, Senior Vice President

“Pure” ethnographic observation can be so telling.  It strips away the noise and clutter from what’s really going on.  I love the example of “Muffler Shop Clarity.”  One of our ethnographers sat in the shop waiting room to understand and get to the bottom of customer annoyances.  Early in the process, she noted that the inability of customers to see their cars and the progress being made was a source of ever increasing anxiety.  That was the major problem.  Putting in windows in the waiting rooms was an easy fix.

So much can be learned from simple customer observation, but, with so many customers, observing them all is impossible.  So, in situations where it’s possible we often seek volunteered feedback from customers.

Point-of-Sale feedback (“volunteerism”) has been employed for ages in the form of customer guest cards and 800 call-in numbers on receipts (now replaced by the ubiquitous website address).  I’ve even come across a rather egregious example that required the customer to use his or her own stamp to mail in the survey!  To be sure, POS data collection has been altered by mobile technology, yet it still depends of the voluntary good will of the customer to generate responses (leaving incentives out of the equation).

Much of the excitement over mobile research focuses on the recency of a sales or service evaluation and the instantaneous results.  What seems to be overlooked in these discussion is the evident engagement of consumers with their mobile devices that inspires a level of volunteerism not seen before.  And, what does this do for us?  It increases base sizes (increasing not just the “delighteds” or the “discontenteds” as with other modes), and makes more complete and more representative results.  More than that, the customer engagement with their mobile device produces more thoughtful responses.

Today, a mobile phone is like our keys.  It is always with us.  And, if it’s not, you know exactly where it is.…OK, my wife may not always.  The point is, we like our mobile phones, they are personal to us.  And, it’s that “person-ability” that makes us honest and frank when we respond with them.

So when we can’t observe all our customers or we can’t do a census of them to improve our products or service delivery, we can get more with mobile technology and, the results takes us farther than we previously could with the POS “moment-of-truth.”

By Walt Dickie, Executive Vice President

I’m not a news junkie, but I’ve always read newspapers. Having grown up and gone to college in New England, I’ve been reading the Times since I was a kid, and I can’t remember a time when www.nytimes.com wasn’t the home page on my computer.

My opinion of the Grey Lady has varied over the years. I’ve always admired how the Times tried to be the newspaper of record, even when it fell short of its own standards. And although I’ve thought they made some remarkably dumb moves over the years (see “Paywall, failure of”) I’ve increasingly come to admire the Times as an online innovator.

Although it’s commonplace today for online companies to have an API, the Times was the first major newspaper I was aware of to do so. It’s also the only newspaper I know of that has an experimental development arm, beta620. And although it’s almost impossible to imagine a news site without graphics, the Times has been especially thoughtful about the graphics they build and how they relate to the principles of journalism.

But the Times has also been working on data collection projects – I first noticed these around the last Presidential election cycle, but there may be earlier examples. I remember sending friends of mine links to an online “mood tracker” that aggregated answers to the question, “What are you concerned about right now?” into a timeline and used type size to indicate the number of people sharing a common concern. It was simple, informative, constantly shifting, and sometimes surprising.

More recently, the Times took a step further and created what looks to my eyes – practiced as they are at looking at surveys – as a truly re-imagined survey. It was in  (a) timeline.” Here’s a small screen shot of what the display looks like:a year-end piece about the future of computing, and it asked readers “to make predictions and collaboratively edit

If you hover over any of the entries, it will open up and show a longer description of the topic. Here’s what you see under “Routine Voice Interaction”:

This is a survey question – something on the order of, “In what year do you expect routine voice interaction to be available on all computing devices?” But, besides displaying the question, the Times survey shows who suggested it (they also link to information about the proposer), the current consensus answer, the number of respondents who have previously disagreed with the then-current answer, and an invitation to vote on moving the date forward or backward. Imagine how grueling this would be set up in a typical online survey. The Times version has 53 separate events – I can hardly imagine a way to make responding to a survey grid that size bearable.

A lot of things are going on here; one being better graphic design than most survey tools can support, of course. But the more I think about this, the more it strikes me that the big change is that the Times has shifted the concept of this “survey” from a model of “we ask questions, and you answer them,” to one that puts more power in the hands (and mouse) of the “respondent,” who is invited to explore this space of topics, to think about topics in a context of their own choice rather than in the sequence that the questionnaire author chose, and to ignore topics in which they have no interest and/or knowledge. The “big idea” here is a significant shift of control from the researcher to the respondent.

I encourage you to go to the site and try it – especially if you’re a tech person who knows and cares about computing. You’ll find that you don’t just respond to one topic at a time – you can, for instance, look across the items that are now all clustered around the same year and think about whether, in your mind, they should all belong together. You may advance one of the items a few years, which may make you re-think one of your earlier answers, so you go back and adjust that one to bring it into line with how you’re thinking now. And you’ll almost certainly give some items a pass.

Let me be clear here: I know the analytic reasons for questionnaire order and error messages that say, “You must answer all of the questions on this page before continuing.” And I’m not suggesting that this exercise represents the future of all surveys or that it’s even the best possible expression of a more user-driven alternative.

But ask yourself whether the ability to conduct certain kinds of statistical analysis based on certain kinds of sampling models, with control over order effects and incomplete data records always and in every case would outweigh the value of considered responses from involved respondents. The MR industry’s answer to data quality issues almost always involves a critique of survey design, so why do we continue to produce surveys that perpetuate the ones we designed for phone interviews in 1992?

By Robert Relihan, Senior Vice President

The use of MROCs is burgeoning.  They enable the researcher and the marketer to immerse themselves deeply in the lives of their consumers.  The experience is incredibly rich.  We can hear consumers in their own voice; we can peek into their homes.  They can show us the things and images that are meaningful to them and their families.  And, they still are able to talk among themselves in ways that make the most sense to them.  It’s an embarrassment of riches.

How do you make the most of these riches?  MROCs are qualitative research.  Right?  Yet, unlike a focus group or an individual interview, they don’t come at us as a simple, single stream of information.  Rather, they give us different types of information, both synchronous and asynchronous, and they give us tons of it.

As we have mastered the operational aspects of this approach, we have also developed principles for maximizing the learning it delivers.  Here are a few rules to follow if you want to get the most out of your MROC:

• Get your team organized and focused.  More so than with traditional qualitative research, it is important to assure that all team members understand the goals of the project and the specific details of how those goals will be achieved.  This is essential because most MROCs are built with a range of discussions, stimuli, and projective exercises.  There are lots of little pieces to keep straight.
• Give everyone on the team a research buddy or two.  Rather than ask every member of your team to pay attention to everything happening in the MROC, assign each member of the team one are two of the participants.  Have the team members follow everything that just their “buddies” say and do.  This makes the task of following the community much more manageable for each team member.  Moreover, by immersing themselves in the experiences of just one or two participants, team members will feel the consumer experience much more deeply.  In your meetings, they will become advocates for their research buddies.
• Use the technology platform to communicate questions and comments among the team members and with the community leaders.  It may be tempting to e-mail, text, or simply grab someone in the hall to talk about the community, but using the technology platform will allow everyone on the team to see every comment and serve as a repository for those comments when the project is completed.
• Hold a “study hall.”  It is important that the team not let the rush of information get ahead of it.  Therefore, we have found it essential to bring the team together almost daily to share the current state of its learning.  Since everyone has a research buddy, the regularity of these meetings is less onerous than it sounds.  We all want to give voice to our new friend.
• Give the team a framework.  While the study hall is great for collective sharing, we also find it useful for the group leader to send almost daily, but brief, summaries of the three or four key insights of the day.  Not only is the information valuable, but these insights focus the observations of the team members for the next day.

Following these simple rules will assure that your team gets the most from its MROC experience.

By Robert Relihan, Senior Vice President

Traditional qualitative research methods like focus groups and individual interviews have often been conceived as a first step.  I need to explore a new category.  I need to develop hypotheses.  Even, on a more rigorous and technical level, I need to pre-test a questionnaire.  In all of these cases, qualitative research served to point a brand or product team down the path that led to a new product, positioning, or campaign.

Over the past few years, we have seen growth in methods that put us in immediate contact with consumers.  Often consumers are in the moment of the experiences and behaviors in which we are interested.  So, we have seen the mining of social media, the creation of online communities of users, and various forms of mobile data collection.  All of these approaches have engaged marketers and given them exciting pointers to the future of their brands and products.

But these activities produce a wealth of observations and data.  They are capable of stimulating a mound of hypotheses.  It is possible to mine through the comments on a brand’s Facebook page or listen to days of Twitter feeds and come away with directions going various ways.   Now, what to do?  How does the marketing team get the targeted direction it needs?

The answer may well be several well-designed focus groups.

• The focus groups will permit exploration of each of those directions with consumers in real time.  It is possible to hear how they view the strengths of each and the problems they see.  The brand team is right on the spot with the moderator crafting rejoinders and alternatives, pushing the consumers to a place they might not have taken themselves.
• While there can be a ton of conversation in social media, it may not focus on areas that are of most interest to the brand team.  Focus group can force conflict and debate among the participants on those specific areas that can grow the brand or create the positioning.
• And, ultimately, hearing all of this discussion face-to-face from consumers “in the flesh” will galvanize the brand team like no other exercise.  In fact, when focus groups are conducted at the end of the process, there is much less need to observe the research niceties.  Why not have the consumers and the brand team face off in the same room?  Focus group steel cage?

So, savvy marketers will re-think how focus groups can help can help them in their development processes by saving the best for last.