Part 2 - Context: What primary, qualitative research provides, that no other means can

This is where lab settings and quantitative methods fail. Sure there are focus groups, and other qualitative and quantitative methods that can be interesting in a lab setting, but they are only telling part of the story, and the accuracy of that story can be questionable (I’m not going to debate focus groups in this post). What is missing is context, which illustrates what people do, not just what they say they do as well as all of the things that go on around what they are doing. This knowledge can lead to insights and innovations that could only be gained by in-context observations.

In-context research reveals many more options than the ones that you bring to a focus group, or that your participants can think up or rationalize on the spot. It shows us things that maybe aren’t recognized as important, but really are.

Who cares what your product is supposed to do. If you don’t understand how it actually fits into people’s real lives then you will never be able to truly design a good product or experience and then market it properly.

By understanding the context that surrounds products and services, we are able to suggest innovations, improvements and communications that truly resonate with people. The upfront costs of this are definitely more expensive, but the ROI on this investment will definitely have positive ROI if done right.

Anthropology, The Oscars and the Creation of Personas

Like much of the country, I watched the Oscars this weekend. As I witnessed various Hollywood talent receive their awards, I started to reflect on what makes a good actor or actress. How do they transform from character to character, and how does this differ from who they are in real life?

As I got to thinking about this, I realized that the key to good acting is ethnography at it’s finest. It’s studying and understanding a character so deeply that you can embody them (the inside-out perspective, if you will). While anthropology doesn’t go as far as to try to play the people we study, in my particular line of anthropology I’d argue that we actually have a harder job in the creation of tools like personas.

Let’s start by looking at the Wikipedia definition for personas. It states, “A personality, in the word's everyday usage, is a social role or a character played by an actor.” If we took out the phrase, “played by an actor,” would that be very different from the definition of personas in marketing?

The marketing specific definition states, “Personas are fictional characters created to represent the different user types within a targeted demographic, attitude and/or behavior set that might use a site, brand or product in a similar way.” What I’m interpreting is that the only difference is in the execution – actors “play” the character, while marketers deliver them on paper.

Ultimately when developing the marketing version of personas, both of those definitions apply. In developing personas, they should be real, believable, and hopefully Oscar worthy. They need to include such attention to detail that they can be used as a strategy and design tool. In some ways, I’d argue that those developing personas have to go one step beyond acting because their “characters” must transfer to the other players in the production seamlessly so that anyone member of the troupe can play that role.

Good personas are the result of a three step process: research to gain an ethnographic understanding of target audiences, the embodiment of those archetypes through analysis and synthesis of that research, and the creation of a performance of those characters that can stand up to the toughest critics.

So is anthropology that different from acting? Maybe there’s a career change in my future…Or maybe Los Angeles is getting to my head.

Data Visualization and Anthropology

Data Visualization (DV) is all the buzz in marketing. While everyone is rushing around trying to figure out how they can apply it to their business, I wanted to take a moment to discuss how the discipline of anthropology might benefit from DV.

Traditionally, anthropology is not a quantitative science. All Anthropologists are trained in some form of quantitative methods, and analysis – but our essence is in things observational or qualitative. However, that does not mean that we can’t use data visualization to help organize our data into quickly digestible elements for our client presentations, or in our own analysis to help us identify patterns in our field notes.

Here are a few of my thoughts on how we might use DV. I would love your input on additional applications.

Identifying Patterns in the Data: When using an ethnographic coding software such as Atlas.ti there’s a function where you can export a word count into an excel sheet and how many times they are mentioned in the notes. You can feed this list into one of many word cloud generators on Wordle (http://cli.gs/N31M5H) and it will show you which words “pop”. This can help you easily identify patterns in your field notes or transcripts.





Quantifying Findings: One of the biggest challenges for an anthropologist is the need to balance qualitative with quantitative. More often than not, clients want a quantitative element to their research projects, or at minimum want “proof” of our findings. Data visualization tools can help us put a “wow” factor in our presentations. IBM’s Many Eyes http://cli.gs/Gm8VZDis an open-source site where people make thousands of visualizations. The site allows you to enter your own data into the system and customize the various charts and graphs.






Find and Visualize Online Artifacts: Anthropologists (at least from what I’ve seen academically) are just starting to become attuned to plethora of data and artifacts that are publicly available online. Photo and video sites such as Flickr and YouTube are chock full of artifacts that we can draw upon to further contextualize our work. Tools such as Tag Galaxy (http://cli.gs/yYa5Tq) allow you to type in a keyword and see related tags and the photos that are associated with them.





There’s no doubt many more applications for data visualization to anthropology. The point here is that applied anthropologists have to make their findings accessible to their clients and the people they study. Data visualization is a great toolbox/practice that will support the discipline in presenting findings in a way that is mutually comprehendible and visually pleasing – especially in business. I see the field of data visualization as a way to continue to bridge the gap between the academy and the field, as anthropologists continue to work to find the right formula for conducting valid ethnography within the time and money constraints of the business world.

Local Marketing in a Global World

Global marketing is a tricky feat. For years we’ve been trying to figure out “glocalization” or the concept of global marketing on a local level. While there are hundreds of case studies where local translations have gone wrong and missed the point culturally, we’re now seeing the reverse issue where local campaigns are receiving global backlash.

Last week there was outrage against Burger King’s Texican Whopper, "the taste of Texas with a little spicy Mexican." The commercial featured a tall cowboy with a short and round Mexican wrestler clad in an outfit resembling the Mexican flag. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CwpNQWrD8PY&feature=player_embedded)

While this commercial might have been successful on the local level (I’m not sure locally what the impact was), what marketers did not expect was that the commercial would be heard about in Latin America. Almost immediately there was an uproar from Mexico and other Latin American countries. The Mexican ambassador to Spain, Jorge Zemeno, immediately publicly denounced the commercial.

What marketers and anthropologists alike are learning from case studies such as this, is that as consumers become more interconnected through social media and global brands, the reach of our work grows larger and larger. So how do we balance both sides of the global/local equation making sure that our campaigns are locally relevant but globally sensitive?

Crispen Porter in Europe created this commercial. I’d bet that had they consulted with their U.S. or Latin American counter parts, they probably would have been forewarned on the cultural sensitivities they might upset with this content. It’s a clear sign that Crispen Porter, a leader in ad creativity, is not a single global brand, but rather a collection of regional brands sharing the same name.

Sure, having anthropologists or other cross-cultural experts working with your teams is helpful, but co-operation is the name of the game in this global world. As global marketing brands, we must unify the delta between our regional affiliates. While this gets complicated in terms of P&Ls and they way each country’s office is run, brands that don’t form strong partnerships between their global offices are going to face blunders like this.

In the very least, when creating campaigns with references to other cultures, contact someone with some local expertise or run the concept by your colleagues in that country – hopefully they can tell you if you are going to hit a soft spot or not.

A New Cultural Paradigm

As we head into 2009, we are inundated with talk about the recession, the credit crunch, the housing crisis, the stimulus package, and on, and on, and on...There’s no doubt that the marketplace and many individuals find themselves in a frenzy.

If we step back however, and analyze the situation from a cultural and anthropological perspective it’s quite interesting to see what is going on. We are witnessing a number of micro-cultural shifts that together are forming a new cultural paradigm on a macro level.

We are experiencing a shift in our culture of consumption. Our social currency, rituals, and beliefs are changing right before our eyes. And while we can’t at this point name it, if I had to bet on it, I would say that the cultural and behavioral changes that are occurring in response to this economic crisis are going to permanently change the way that we as people consume for generations to come.

Gone are the days of mass conspicuous consumption and unquestioned trust in corporations. What people are experiencing today from the job market to the supermarket is going to have lasting cultural and psychological effects. We have already seen that consumers are being much more careful about their purchases. Furthermore they are fully skeptical of corporate executives. Brands and companies must more than ever prove their value through quality, transparency and generosity – because the culture of consumption has changed indefinitely.

As our clients continue to come to us for answers and advice on how they can make it through these times, remember that it’s not just about surviving today. Price cuts and discounts are a temporary tactic that will only undermine their brands once things get better. We have to remind ourselves and our clients that once the economy recovers from this mess, people are not going back to their old ways. Now is the time to solidify our spot as players in this new cultural paradigm.

The Ethics of Blog Monitoring

In the corporate world blog monitoring is becoming a more and more popular means of conducting primary research. Unlike focus groups or one-on-one interviews, the blogosphere is seen as an uninhibited universe where consumers discuss anything and everything without the influence of researchers or other respondents. And it makes total sense – consumers are literally living out part of their lives online. We certainly cannot ignore what they are doing there. Furthermore, it is proven that what people say about products, service and brands has significant impact on buyer behavior. How many times have you researched a product online before buying it?

Having done blog monitoring first hand, I know that the insights that emerge are rich and valuable. But as an anthropologist, ethics have been engrained into my brain. I can’t think of a single graduate course I took that didn’t spend a significant portion of the time discussing the ethics of conducting anthropological research. I committed to being candid about who I am and why I’m conducting research. Also, I promised to reciprocate for the things that I learned. And finally, I pledged to make my findings open to the public for the greater good of the communities I study. But there are some major conflicts here. How does this translate to the online space, where the identity of myself and those I study are often anonymous? This is further complicated by the fact that as the employee of a corporation, my findings are more often than not proprietary.

I’ll admit, that while I made these promises and I’ve certainly pondered the ethics of this type of research I don’t have all the answers. I’d like to think that the work I do studying the blogosphere in the end is for the greater good, rather than an attempt to sell people more things and services they don’t need. Often my findings identify need gaps and concerns that consumers have, allowing my clients to address them. But what would consumers say if they knew that their blog was being monitored. Would they change what they wrote?

I wonder who’s looking at my blog right now…?