The accuracy and quality of studies on people and brands are influenced by countless factors that must be meticulously addressed to obtain actionable, reality-based findings. Since the inception of our industry, ensuring that all research processes meet minimum standards has been non-negotiable. However, given the advancements in the field and the growth of our industry over the years, quality management has also become more complex.
This becomes even more relevant when we understand that once certain shortcomings are identified in a project, there is no going back or correction that can fully remedy deficiencies in steps such as sample design or data collection. Nevertheless, there are ways to minimize these situations. Therefore, this week we are listing four quality control alternatives for Market Research protocols.
Automated. One of the many possibilities offered by new and existing software tools is the real-time review of incoming responses in our databases. By designing a series of pre-established rules, it’s possible to detect data captures that are inconsistent and therefore cast doubt on their veracity. Safeguards can also be implemented to help analysts and interviewers determine if a collected response is valid, giving them the opportunity to correct it or discard the case.
Field supervision. Given the protocols that require fieldwork, the role of team leader exists. This person typically performs other field tasks, such as managing the resources of a team of workers and resolving problems that arise spontaneously. However, one of their main functions is to proactively ensure that the interviews conducted align with the design requirements. This can be achieved by personally verifying the responses given or ensuring that the participation filters were applied accurately.
Desktop supervision. Avoiding quality issues in consumer studies often requires multiple layers of monitoring. When these fail, remote validation can be used afterward. Part of the work of market analysts includes reviewing, evaluating, and determining whether the provided data meets the initially defined characteristics. If not, they have the option to request that anomalous records be replaced or discarded in extreme scenarios.
Subsequent confirmation. In some specific studies, it will be necessary to redouble efforts to ensure the greatest possible certainty in the captured responses. To implement this, a means of contact with the interviewee must be established. This is fundamental because it involves making a second contact to validate that what is recorded in the database matches the consumer’s answers. However, this method has fallen somewhat out of favor due to newer and stricter laws regarding the possession of personal data by private entities.
All these and other mechanisms at our disposal are a response to a reality present in our sector. Generally, every effort will be made to prevent situations that could call the studies into question. This last point is the current best practice, one that agencies pursue with great care: ensuring that the results of each study meet the requirements of reliability and certainty. Otherwise, investments in this area become expenses.
At Acertiva, we are aware of this reality, which is why our processes strive to meet Market Research’s quality standards. This commitment has allowed us to accumulate two decades of experience in the sector and to have offices in Brazil and Mexico so that your brand can meet its knowledge needs in LATAM. We offer a free fifteen-minute consultation to answer your questions. This first step can be the beginning of your next success story.
Short Link: