Visit www.consumerboard.pl and contact us on awiszniewska@eei.com.pl, jkomor@eei.com.pl.

Online respondents can’t see you face- to-face, but they are constantly checking if you’re there. The moment any issues arise (a technical glitch, a content-related or an organizational fault) or anything needs clarification, they will post, start threads with questions for the moderator and will e-mail you. And they expect a fast (if not an instantaneous) response 

It’s also in your best interest to keep on top of events as they develop. Posts need to be read on an on-going basis if not for other reasons, then simply because their number tends to increase rapidly (and they are made 24 hours a day – every respondent posts when he/ she’s got the time and the inclination to log into the online platform). To stay on top, to keep in touch with where the different threads are going, and to avoid becoming swamped by and lost in all the new information coming your way, in practice you need to check the online platform at least several times a day.

There are certain restrictions that apply to moderating an online community that you will not come across as often when moderating focus groups. If an online discussion is getting off the main subject and is moving toward an area your Client isn’t interested in, you can write a post to get people back on track but it will probably get lost in an avalanche of other posts made by community users. If this happens, you are advised to keep your cool and stay patient!

Keep in mind, that as a tool, an online platform suffers from a specific shortcoming: it doesn’t allow a moderator to pacify overactive respondents and get the less active and less frequent posters to involve themselves more in the discussion.

Unlike you, online community posters aren’t aware of the logic and the objectives behind the different subjects posted on the forum. Often, they tend to focus on their own threads that are on the sidelines of what the research aims to explore. Don’t write this extracurricular activity off, don’t skip over what they wrote in the cafeteria – there too you can find a lot of surprisingly ingenious and paradoxically relevant information.

It might look like online research ‘happens on its own’ with the moderator’s role mainly boiling down to ‘throwing in’ new subjects for the respondents to discuss on the forum – this is a complete misconception. Though in the background, the moderator’s presence helps keep the online platform on the right track. It also imparts the platform with a ‘human touch’, something even the best and the most sophisticated online platform and the best software can’t replace.

• The 1^st in: ‘Good research organisers, e.g. keeping deadlines, reliability’,
• The 2^nd in: ‘Particularly concerned about the quality of fieldwork, including interviewer performance’,
• The 3^rd in: ‘Provides valuable recommendations’
• The 3^rd in: ‘Researchers feel co-responsible for the shape and results of projects’
• The 4^th in: ‘Researchers are communicative, easy to cooperate with’
• The 5^th in: ‘Can tailor research solutions to  the Client’s needs’
• The 5^th in: ‘Offer good value for money research products’

We would like to thank all our Clients for having participated in the survey and for having evaluated us so positively.

We have to remember that users of a given brand have entirely different preferences than people reaching for competitive products. Heavy users of a given category shall evaluate the product formula far more positively than its light users or non-users will. Hence, if a given research agency does not ensure proper sample selection in order to include in each cell ‘the same type of respondents’ as regards their demographic and usage variables, it shall not be possible to compare the results between cells.

I have several times had an opportunity to view monadic test results we have been provided with by our Clients. Unfortunately, it was impossible to correctly interpret them, because the sample selection procedure was incorrect. I would not mention this problem if it were not relatively common. I remember a very nice speech given at the Research Congress presenting the results of a very interesting experimental test carried out for one of the Agency’s Clients.

I was really impressed with the idea of methodology used, scope of analysis …but when I asked how the respondents were selected for particular monadic cells, I was informed that the respondents had not been asked screening questions about the use of brands within the category. This is why researchers did not know who they actually surveyed, i.e. whether, for instance, in one cell there were no A brand users, while in another there were only brand B users. The study aimed at testing reactions to branded concepts of brand A. Hence, the methodology as such was fine, the approach to the research problem was creative…. but the results were totally useless.

A positive experience would be the bread consumer tests which we have been conducting for the last couple of years. Bread is a very interesting category, which is highly involving for consumers, and which evokes many positive emotions. Bread is something you think about, you seek, you come back to. Brands have been introduced to this category relatively recently. Consumers treat both Schulstad and Awiteks from Kraków as brands – as both names stand for certain constancy and repeatability. An interesting insight is that the purchase of a different, unknown bread brand is burdened with relatively high risk, in spite of relatively small price per unit. It should not come as a surprise, taking into account the consequences of incorrect choice of bread: unhappy and hungry household members, who do not like the new type of bread might have a very discouraging effect on every homemaker looking for a change.

Even though more and more bakeries close down, and the consumption of bread is decreasing in Poland, the value of the market is growing. According to forecasts, in 2015 it shall reach 13 billion PLN in value. Let’s hope that emerging brands turn to the research industry for help to understand market dynamics and consumer needs.

One way or the other, this is an actual problem. Within the last year I have had an opportunity to test several highly creative and unique advertising concepts, which required from viewers the ability to imagine certain non-existing environments (e.g. a friendly luxury hospital, or a virgin island which would at the same time be highly advanced technologically) in which the spot protagonists interacted with advertised product. The worlds presented were so very abstract, unreal and weird that they should have doomed the creative concepts to failure, resulting from certain limitations and rational attitude represented by customers. But it was not the case.

Concept tests run very smoothly which was a source of great satisfaction for the Client, the advertising agency, and the researchers. This might have been affected by highly professional preparation of stimuli materials. Apart from regular (technically speaking) animatics, the agency also prepared mood clips which were to introduce the respondents to the unique tonality referring to abstract vision of the world which was to be tested. The respondents very quickly understood the convention and expressed relevant and workable comments on concepts presented. This experience proves that in the times of the Internet, and availability of countless online clips, it is very easy to prepare a good movie stimuli, which can facilitate the testing of the ‘weirdest’ advertising concepts. I believe that mood clips are likely to overcome the negative approach to testing creative concepts.

“EEI is a very supportive and client oriented agency with professional moderators who are well in adapting to new client specific methodologies.” “Agata is a very professional moderator who helped me to get valuable consumer insights on consumers and their perception of fragrances up to a level that was helpful for recommendations on possible reworks.”