Blogroll    |    Favorite Sites    |    Books we Read    |    Visit crimson-consulting.com

Market Research: How to NOT Create a Community
Posted by Glenn Gow on 01/18/08 under Products & Markets

We recently completed a project for a client with the objective of creating a community of advisors. Our client wanted frequent, highly qualified input to gain an understanding of market requirements as they developed a series of product plans. This leading edge community would help us recommend to our client the best way to put in place the services, training, support, future program feature sets and market programs to best serve the market.

We conduct research of all types for our clients, and we sometimes develop communities (some call them panels, see my post on “What’s Your Market IQ?”, and Karen O’Brien’s post on social community success). When developing this community of advisors we learned that:

  • online recruitment didn’t work,
  • third-party “panel vendors” didn’t work,
  • banner ads didn’t work.

What did work was a personal approach. We eventually had to get on the phone and talk with the potential community members. This is a more expensive, time-consuming approach, but an approach that works. Why?

  • Potential community members can ask questions about the benefits, structure, and goals of the community; and realize that they could personally profit from their participation,
  • Phone recruitment is much more personal and real (online solicitation has a much more “spam” feel),
  • Potential community members feel much more comfortable divulging their personal contact information to someone on the telephone, as opposed to via an online form.

We learned to start with human contact to most effectively create the community. What ways have you seen community building work?

(Marek Ranis of Crimson Consulting Group, contributed to this post).


Trackback

http://www.achievemarketleadership.com/wp-trackback.php?p=202
Subscribe to this topic Comment Rss or TrackBack
Ron Shevlin said on January 18th, 2008 - IP:159.127.66.112

Glenn — Recently, the CEO of a TX-based consulting firm (serving the financial services industry) set out to create a community of financial services-minded people. The end result — www.banktastic.com — has been pretty successful, in my opinion, and there are two things they did that I think helped contribute to that success:

1) They initially invited a bunch of people they knew to join, and gave each invitee the ability to invite 2 other people (so they kept it self-limiting, but not too exclusive). Personally, I’ve still held on to one of my invites.

2) They created a “Q&A” core construct. Meaning, community members often pose questions to the community for feedback, input, and discussion. Sometimes they’re work-related questions, other times just questions geared to generating discussion.

The community has a good “feel” to it (i.e., like-minded members), and the content is interesting. Can’t beat that, eh?

Glenn Gow said on January 18th, 2008 - IP:76.102.157.96

Ron, thank you for your comment.

I like what I saw. My favorite part is the Q&A approach.

I also like the idea of enabling people to invite others. My only concern would be how do they ensure that those that join meet the strict criteria that defines that community?

In our view, it’s critical to make sure that when you choose to listen to people, you know you’re listening to the right people.

Brad Garland said on January 19th, 2008 - IP:76.251.151.102

Hi Glenn,

Ron referred me to your post and I thought I let you in on what we think about these topics.

As far as ensuring good ‘definition’ of the community, we have decided to put that control on the community. We have built features into Banktastic that allows anyone registered to be able to rate others comments or answers and by doing that not only does the system get smarter (better answers, faster) but it creates a natural attrition of bad comments/answers to fall to the bottom.

We also have the ability for anyone to ‘flag’ a person or comment. So by us giving the community these features we’ve enabled them to self-police themselves. We might be able to police the system ourselves today but at scale, there’s no chance of this so we wanted these concepts in early on in the development of Banktastic.

So in the event that we have a spammer, someone pushing their own agendas, or otherwise the users will rate or flag accordingly and we can handle those situations easily.

Also, it’s our belief that limiting Banktastic by some pre-defined criteria not only hinders the usefulness of the system (the collective intelligence model) but also drastically reduces a certain serendipity to naturally occur. And we would NEVER want to stop that.

Feel free to email me directly if you have any more questions/comments/thoughts, thanks!

Thanks for the referral Ron!

Glenn Gow said on January 19th, 2008 - IP:76.102.157.96

Brad, thank you for sharing your thoughts.

I think we look at this issue from a different perspective which is captured in a statement I made in a different post …

http://www.achievemarketleadership.com/?p=51

My statement is “If Dell knows what target markets they are focused upon as a company (or even within product lines), and they can map these new ideas to those target markets, then they can force-rank ideas so that a great idea is defined as one that helps them serve the needs of their most important target markets.”

Another way of saying this is — it’s not just community input we want, it’s input from the specific community we are targeting to sell to.

Here’s wishing you luck with Banktastic.

Leave Comments

  
Security Image

Blog Search

Recent Posts

Art & Science of ...
State of Collaboration: Return ...
What Crimson Has Learned: ...
Using Analytics: Statistical program ...
Evaluation Factors: Identifying and ...

View by Author

Glenn Gow (79)
Rick Sklarin (11)
Allan Adler (7)
Dylan Charles (12)
Steven Lamont (26)
General (44)
Karen OBrien (41)
Judy Hopelain (1)

View by Categories

Interactive (107)
Products & Markets (102)
Channels & Partners (38)
Other Interesting Topics (5)
Lead Management (7)

Archives - Past 12 Months

July 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009

Archives - By Year

2010
2009
2008
2007
2006