An old oak log and advertising research
My son and I went on a hike Sunday to enjoy the first sunny day of a very rainy winter. At the top of the hill, we plopped down on an old oak log to take in the sunshine and the valley below.
As we relaxed, he mentioned that he wants a camera...a nice one. A camera he cannot afford on his college student budget. Enter dad. What I know about cameras is limited to the app on my phone. So, I began to ask questions. Was the camera digital or film? He laughed. Digital of course! Not yet sufficiently embarrassed about my lack of knowledge, I asked him about brands, specifically Kodak. HA! That led to a totally different discussion about Kodak and the demise of one of the great companies of the 20th Century.
A Kodak engineer, Steven Sasson, actually invented the digital camera. But, Kodak made money in the film business, not the camera business. Though they invented filmless digital, they ignored it until it was too late. The digital camera did not fit their existing business model and they did not have a "bridge" business model to make a change. So, they ignored the new technology. Kodak didn't change. But, others did. The rest is history. Today, though my parents called EVERY camera a "Kodak," my son barely knows the name.
Like cameras, our world is changing and we cannot use old saw "we have always done it that way" as a reason for not changing, too. Media consumption is changing and so must the way we measure it. One cannot understand ad effectiveness today the same way we did ten years ago. The medium has changed and so must the methods.
None of us want to be Kodak. Even so, I see Kodak in the research industry. Kodak did not have a ready-made business model to move from film to digital cameras profitably. So they rode the old model until it died. Sometimes in research we don't readily see how to adopt new methods because we have invested so much in the old methods. In a radically changing environment, often the old methods simply do not measure up. Then, the risk we run is not just the risk of being wrong, it is the risk of being irrelevant.
Julia Eisenberg and Isaac Rogers addressed the need for changing methods and the effectiveness of hybrid approaches in an article in the March Quirks Market Research Review. https://www.quirks.com/articles/a-hybrid-approach-to-ad-testing
Communicator | Simplifier | Advocate
5 年I trust you'll take these thoughts into your new role with the Tennessee Parks & Conservation. (Congratulations!) Us out-of-towners are very startled when we come across a state park with a name that honors the first Grand Wizard of the KKK; especially in 2019. It's embarassing to try to explain it - especially to people living outside the US. How can we help get the "Nathan Bedford Forrest" name updated ASAP? I'd be happy to help (at no charge). (e.g. Need $ for new signage? Need a justification document? Need presentations created?) www.HonorableMentions.weebly.com?
I can relate to this Jim.
Curious explorer of the human experience | Diplomatic with a dash of sass | Joyfully neurotic and loves a good story
5 年While I do agree with this, I also believe that some of the "old" methods of market research are still needed and relevant.? In fact, in many instances "new" methods do not work at all.? Relying only on the new isn't always the most (cost or result) effective answer.? What's nice about this are all of the options now available to us researchers.? Instead of getting rid of options, we've just added options. The trick is to understand and recommend the appropriate method for the market research need.?
Murphy Marketing Research/TRENDTOWN
5 年Compelling message for all industries, especially market research!
Writer, Researcher, Truth Teller.
5 年Great story! And a great bridge to what 20/20 is doing ;)