Competitive Intelligence

There has been a longstanding debate over which research methodology is best, traditional market research (quantitative/qualitative) or Competitive Intelligence. Market researchers and CI people tend to support one methodology over the other. Taking into account that your view may be biased towards one methodology over another, how would you resolve this debate?

This writer has been to conferences where speakers declared that a CEO should not make a decision unless the VP of Market Research signs off on the decision and other conferences where speakers declare that the VP of Competitive Intelligence should sign off on a decision.

There has been a realization that such absolutism overlooks the needs of the end-users, the decision-makers who depend on research findings to make critical decisions affecting their companies.

As a result there has been an evolution towards the idea that the objective is to provide key insights and actionable intelligence to decision-makers in the most cost-effective research methodology possible. This is often dictated by turnaround time, budgetary constraints, and complexity of the research required.

What Research Is Required?

First of all, any research requirement from an internal client should be in writing, detailing what information is required, how this information is to be used and why. Having the research request in writing ensures that the client requesting the information will take responsibility for the expenditure of time and money required to conduct the research and that such expenditure will not be on frivolous, flavour-of-the-week issues.

Identifying the Most Cost-Effective and Timely Research Method

Whether there is an economic downturn or not, careful consideration should always be given regarding the most cost-effective way of obtaining the information requested, whether in terms of time, money and company resources.

For example, there are some types of information, such as customer satisfaction, consumer decision-making and market share that can be best achieved through traditional market research. The decision then becomes whether to spend money on custom research or buy research that already has been completed and is available for sale.

If there is a need to understand the business practices of competitors or to gauge how a new technology would impact your industry, then Competitive Intelligence would be the best methodology. Primary data gathering is best for CI, but secondary research can be used to provide leads or fill in any information gaps.

If there is no budget for primary research, then the services of the corporate librarian would be invaluable in uncovering the best possible secondary research available.

Conclusion

Whether your most favoured research methodology is Competitive Intelligence or traditional Market Research, you must never lose sight of the fact that the interest of your internal clients is what is most important. You should be open to the idea of using the most appropriate research methodology to meet the information needs of your internal clients and, ultimately, your company.

After presenting the report for a major CI project to senior management, I found myself being questioned about the results of the study. It seems that a number of senior managers had made certain assumptions about the competition, and when they found that the report contradicted their assumptions they immediately called into question the results of the study and the methodology used.

As a CI Manager, I know that the methodology was valid, that we double-checked the data and the sources of the data, and that the conclusions we made are based on verified information. It’s just that these senior managers made the wrong assumptions.

How should one deal with the crossfire of internal politics?

This situation is one which most CI professionals (and Market Research professionals as well) will face sooner or later in their career: a client has a strong belief regarding the anticipated results of a study and, when that belief has been proven to be inaccurate, the client questions the results and those involved in the research.

In a recent study on wind turbines, a client questioned the results for a specific North American manufacturer, which indicated a high level of quality, high customer satisfaction and praise from industry experts. Further research and data were required to finally convince the client that the information was accurate and that, indeed, the manufacturer produced a high-quality product that was making strong inroads in the North American and global markets.

Knowing Your Client’s Biases

When interviewing or networking among internal (and external) clients, not only is it important to understand their information needs but also what their information biases are as well. Every client has a skewed view of the world based on their responsibilities within the company, their professional background and their experiences. As a CI professional, you should note clues these biases so that you will be able to address them during your research.

Being Prepared

When collecting and analyzing data, be prepared to respond to potential questions, especially if the information contradicts any set beliefs held by your clients.

If it is likely that the results of the study will likely engender criticism from clients:

1. Gather information from as many verifiable and reliable sources as possible;
2. Get more data than you usually need so that you can call upon a mass of data to support your findings;
3. Think about some of the questions that may be asked and answer those questions in your report;
4. Know your data and your sources thoroughly, because you may be asked a question you did not anticipate.

Conclusion

Understanding your clients’ biases can provide you with a forewarning of potential questions of study results. This will allow you an opportunity to gather sufficient, verifiable and cross-referenced data to be forearmed with the ability to answer those questions or criticisms.

You will never completely eliminate the possibility of criticism of study results but you can minimize their impact.