Session 4 Homework

Update:

Hope all's going well with the FGD prep.

A few links (content related) that maybe useful:

An article speculating on 5 Trends Shaping the Future of Work in the next decade+. Useful insights for the moderator's checklist, perhaps?

The homesite of Airbnb which is an infomediary+ for a C2C business model in the bed-n-breakfast business. A more general-purpose classifieds/ C2C site is craigslist. Is C2C or some blend thereof a key trend that we'll come to expect as a matter of habit in many sectors?

A recent economist article that talks about how small businesses (e.g. microbreweries) are issuing bonds that promise to pay an interest + part of the interest in terms of product. Very interesting. The future of business financing as Euro banks retreat from lending in the face of an ongoing bank capitalization crisis?

And so much more.

Looking fwd to seeing the FGD output, folks.

My friendly advice: Have fun with the FGD homework. It will show in the output quality. Good luck.

Sudhir

-----------------------------

Hi all,

Session 4 got done Y'day. Longish session. Ran into time trouble in 2 of the 3 sections.

Session was readings heavy. At the intersection of qualitative and predictive analytics, too.

Was told that my star readings of the day - Target and Febreze - had already been discussed in CoBe.

Sigh.

Can only hope the MKTR treatment of these readings was distinctive enough to have added value, new perspective and fresh insight.

Only.

OK. Enough musing. There are two home works for Session 4.

Session 4 Homework 1:

Pls fill up the following two surveys.

1. Survey on Brand preferences and some social network ties.

The first survey above'll come in handy in the analytics sessions including both text and network analytics.

Fair warning: Its kinda longish, but *totally* worthwhile in terms of analysis insights.

For instance, wouldn't it be great to know how information on elective bidding or placement applications flows across social interaction networks?

So, pls do your bit to contribute to this insight. Do take the time and patience to fill it in. In any case, full credit only for *complete* submissions.

2. Survey on perceptual mapping inputs.

The second, available here, for the perceptual mapping session.

Privacy Note: I've assigned a unique ID string sequence to every MKTR student. Will use that only for both Classwork and HW analysis. Your responses are thus protected and anonymized.

Deadline for survey filling: Sunday 14-sept midnight.

Session 4 Homework 2:

The following is group HW, one submission per group only.

Author Jamie Turner compiled a slideshare presentation of 50 Amazing Facts of Mobile Marketing in 2012.

Download and go through the above slideshare slide deck. Its a collection of factoids on what I admittedly cheesily had dubbed 'new age habit patterns' in class.

Clearly, if even half the factoids in there are even half true, the world as we know it is already half in flux.

And firms would dearly like to know more about emerging trends in how the typical high-value consumer of tomorrow (i.e. you and people like you):

(i) perceive 'cues'.

For instance, how might traditional 'cues' or triggers that firms have used such as conventional ads, display ads, banner ads, search ads, coupons, product reviews, etc - change and adapt to tomorrow?

(ii) might develop 'routines' around.

For instance, how might the purchasing process, the choice process, the search process etc be impacted by new age habits?

(iii) And might assess or measure 'reward' or utility at the end of the habit loop.

For instance, ask what need is satisfied by the process? Instant gratification at the end of impulse purchases? Distraction or diversion? Deal prone-ness and coupon arbitrage? Some compensatory mechanism?

Frame an exploratory R.O. around this interest firms have.

However R.O.s, like much else of MKTR, are context specific. So, give the R.O. some context.

Select a sector (Services/ manufacturing/ Infra etc.), an industry / vertical (Edu, healthcare, Banking, Travel, entertainment etc.) or even better, a firm (goog, amazon, HBO, apple, flipkart, McKinsey, IBM, some startup etc.).

Ask yourself what might be a pressing R.O. for the relevant space/ domain that hinges on how new age habits turn out.

To solve the R.O., run a mini focus group discussion (mini-FGD) with around 4-6 participants for about 45 odd minutes among your peers (yup, people from your or other MKTR groups are fine as participants).

Whether the participant profile is that of 'experts', of 'opinion leaders' or of 'regular' consumers in the target segment is a judgment call you'll have to make (based on your R.O., besides).

Explore group dynamics in the focus group, if any. Are there constructs and possibilities seem to agree upon (unification dynamics)?

Are there faultlines wherein folks disagree sharply (Polarization dynamics)? What topics might folks be ambiguous about? Etc.

Submission Format: A short PPT.

• Title slide of your PPT should have your group name, member names and PGIDs.
• Second slide, write your D.P. and R.O.(s) clearly for the problem context.
• 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 Friday (19-Sept) midnight.
• Update: Am told there's some CFIN midterm on 19-Sept. So am postponing the deadline by a bit to 23-sept Tuesday midnite.
• Extra points if you can put up a short edited youtube video on the major highlights of the FGD. Share link on the PPT.

Additional FGD Gyan (based on last year's experience):

• The point of the FGD is *not* necessarily to 'solve' the problem. It may merely be to point a likely direction where a solution can be found.
• Different R.O.s lead to very different FGD outcomes. For example (taking last year's Google Glass 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 30-45 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 wearable devices? Where do you see the trend going in wearable devices like your smartphone, fuel bands and so on?" and get the ball rolling, then steer it to keep it on course.

Some FGDs from last year can be seen here.