Session 4 Updates

Hi all,

Session 4 Big-picture Recap:

The readings-heavy Session 4 'Qualitative Research' covers many topics of interest. To recap the four big-picture take-aways from the session, let me use bullet-points:

• We studied Observation Techniques - both of the plain vanilla observation (Reading 1 - Museums) and the 'immersive' ethnographic variety (Reading 2 - adidas).
• We then ventured into deconstructing the powerful habit formation process and arrived a 3-step loop framework to describe it for Marketing purposes: cue-routine-reward.
• We saw how the innovative combination of qualitative insight and predictive analytics can lead to windfall $$ profits (Reading 3-Target and reading 4-Febreze)
• Finally we saw how unstructured respondent interaction personified by a focus group discussion (FGD) can be a powerful qualitative tool for digging up customer insights.

Update:
This is a link to the NYT video that failed to play in class today.

**************************************

There are two parts to Session 4 HW.

Part 1 of Session 4 HW: Survey filling

Fillup these two surveys please, each less than 15 minutes a piece. Kindly do so positively by Sunday midnight deadline.

Survey 1 for COnjoint analysis in Session 7

Survey 2 link for Social Network Analysis in Session 9

**************************************

Part 2 of Session 4 HW: FGD

Read the following two Economist articles (added later: and one ET article) outlining a new product about to hit the shelves that wants to do an Apple on Apple.

Every step you take

India's answer to Google Glass: Hands free wearable device enables users to carry out computer functions (Economic Times)

The people’s panopticon

Problem context:

You are a mid-sized technology firm with a US presence. Your R&D division has recently won angel funding for hiring bright talent and developing applications for the google glass platform. You, as a the Marketing manager need to give inputs to the tech team on what kind of apps and products may appeal to customers. You have a few ideas in mind but are unsure if they'll appeal to customers.

Run an FGD to explore tech-savvy early-majority customers' expectations and wishes from the Google glass (or more generally, a wearable networking and technology) platform. Pitch your ideas to the group and see how they receive it, what their expectations, concerns and first impressions are etc.

Submission format:

• For a group (no more than 4 people) and select a name for it (based on a well-known Indian brand)
• Title slide of your PPT should have your group name, member names and PGIDs
• Choose a D.P. and corresponding R.O.(s) for the given problem context for the FGD.
• Next slide, write your D.P. and R.O.(s) clearly.
• Third slide, introduce the FGD participants and a line or so on why you chose them (tabular form is preferable for this)
• Fourth Slide, write a bullet-pointed exec summary of the big-picture take-aways from the FGD
• Fifth Slide on, describe and summarize what happened in the FGD
• Note if unification and / or polarization dynamics happened in the FGD
• Name your slide groupname_FGD.pptx and drop in the appropriate dropbox by the start of session 6
• Extra points if you can put up a short video on youtuibe of the FGD in progress and its major highlights. Share the link on the PPT

Any queries etc., pls feel free to email me.

********************************************

Update 1: FGD HW guidelines: (This is based on my experience with the Term 5 FGD HW in Hyd)

To keep it focussed and brief, lemme use the bullet-points format

• The point of the FGD is *not* to 'solve' the problem, but merely to point a likely direction where a solution can be found. So don't brainstorm for a 'solution', that is NOT the purpose of the FGD.
• Ensure the D.P. and R.O.s are aligned and sufficiently exploratory before the FGD can start. Different ROs lead to very different FGD outcomes. For example, if you define your R.O. as "Explore which portable devices will be most cannibalized due to Google Glass" versus "Explore potential for new to the world applications using Google Glass", etc.
• Keep your D.P. and R.O. tightly focussed, simple and do-able in a mini-FGD format. Having too broad a focus or too many sub-topics will lead nowhere in the 30 odd minutes you have.
• Start broad: Given an R.O., explore how people connect with or relate to portability, Technology and devices in general, their understanding of what constitutes a 'cool device', their understanding of what constitutes 'excitement', memorability', 'social currency' or 'talkability' in a device and so on. You might want to start with devices in general and not narrow down to Google Glass right away (depending on the constructs you seek, of course).
• Prep the moderator well: The moderator in particular has a crucial role. Have a broad list of constructs of interest, Focus on getting them enough time and traction (without being overly pushy). For example, the mod could start by asking the group: "What do you think about Portable devices? Where do you see the trend going in portable devices like your smartphone, fuel bands and so on?" and get the ball rolling, then steer it to keep it on course.
• Converge on Google Glass in detail: After exploring devices in general, explore the particulars of GGlasss as a devices - what is it, how is it viewed or understood, what are the perceptions, hopes and expectations around it etc.
• Do some background research on Tech trends and their Evolution first. See if any interesting analogies come up.
• See where people agree in general, change opinions on interacting with other people on any topic, disagree sharply on some topics and stand their ground etc.
• In your PPT report, mention some of the broad constructs you planned to explore via the FGD.
• Report (among other things) what directions seem most likely to be fruitiful for investigation.

BTW, here are some FGD video links by MKTR groups in Hyderabad in the last term.

Their FGD topic was different, though. FYI.

That's quite enough for now. Good luck for the placement season.

Sudhir