We had a tremendous response to our Blended Reality Research^TM (BRR) webinar and wanted to follow up on some of the questions that we didn’t get a chance to explore and answer during the Great Research Thinking webinar hosted by Revelation in July.

Q: What do you learn from the face-to-face ethnography as compared to the online study?

A: We find Immersive Research – an online, activity-based approach  really useful to get a deep understanding of how people feel and think about a particular topic.  Because we spend more time with them, they have time to reflect on their own attitudes, behaviours and ideas, often coming to interesting and insightful revelations on their own.  Online platforms are also fantastic for learning about something that takes place over time – days, weeks, months - which is very expensive to replicate using ethnography.

In our work, we spend a lot of time thinking about user journeys and systems of interactions and connection points and we still find it difficult to get a clear read on this using online platforms only.  Participants can only report and document behavior that they’re aware of so it’s incredibly helpful to be able to watch them complete a set of tasks.  We usually start this learning online and deepen it when we’re in the field.

Q: Were the experts you spoke to during the BRR project case study you presented engaged in person, online or over the phone?

A: When we engage experts to help stimulate our own thinking, we engage them in whatever way is most convenient for them.  Some we spoke to by phone or Skype and others we met in person.  We don’t usually engage experts using online platforms as they have very limited time to spend with us and we tend to get the best insight from them when we’re engaged directly in conversation and/or show + tell.

Q: How do you manage/mine the tremendous amount of data generated from multiple weeks online followed by ethnographic fieldwork?

A: When we first started using online research tools, we definitely made the “more is more” mistake.  We still battle this on every project because we’re a curious bunch and it’s so easy to ask more, add one more activity tack on a few more days to explore this really interesting bit…

But in most cases more isn’t more, it’s just more.  So, we’re really rigorous in our project and research design and think about how we’re going to analyze the data generated by each phase, activity and question from the outset.  We also schedule analysis and downloading time throughout the project so we’re thinking with the data as we go, rather than have it to pile up to be dug into and dealt with at the end.  This can be very overwhelming.

And although we’re really rigorous about our project and research design, we do build in time and budget for what we call “rabbit holes”.  You just never know what surprises are lurking about on discovery-based projects and it’s important for us to have the time and means to explore the unexpected.  This is often where the juiciest insights and opportunities lie waiting.

Q: You talked about posting content from the digital environment to your physical project space.  Do/how do you package this as a deliverable for your clients?

A: The content and artifacts that find their way into our physical project space aren’t packaged as a deliverable for clients per se.  However, we do design the project space and populate it so that we can use the contents as stimulus for some of the divergent thinking and co-creation work we do with clients at different stages of the project.  It’s also incredibly helpful for the project team to be “steeped” in the data throughout the project.  It’s critical for pattern recognition, collaborative thinking and concept development.

Q: You could spend endless time analyzing all of this data.  How do you know when it’s time to stop analyzing and start synthesizing and reporting? 

A: Truthfully, it’s usually the project timeline that dictates when we stop!  We schedule analysis time throughout the project and our analysis/synthesis is quite iterative.  When it feels like that iterative process isn’t generating new insights and ideas, we know we’re ready to move onto reporting or concept/prototype development.

Q: To what extent do your clients participate in reviewing and commenting on the raw data?  Do they have an appetite for this level of engagement in the data?

A: We actually insist that our clients dig into some of the raw data with us and build this into the project design.  They usually do this in a few ways…

(1) We strongly encourage clients to do some reading while we’re online.  In our experience, the client teams that get the most out of BRR actively schedule reading time throughout the online study;

(2) We strongly encourage them to come in the field with us; and

(3) We immerse them in curated data when they join us in our project space for ideation and collaboration work sessions.  We design these sessions so they have time to browse and interact with the data so we can use it to think and create together.

Q: Have you found that clients want to eliminate face-to-face “in-context” time with online research?

A: No, not really.  Sometimes we don’t think “in-context” research is required so we’ll recommend online only.  But most of our projects benefit from a more integrated approach because BRR creates incremental value that is so much greater than 1 + 1 = 2.  A BRR approach really does deliver a 1 + 1 = 5 level of insight.  Our research design is very purposeful and we take the time to educate our clients on our recommended approach and why/how it will deliver the learning we need. 

Q: What are the time and costs associated with planning and implementing a BRR project like the one you presented?

A: A full Research + Concepting project that includes BRR tends to take at least 3 months, more depending on the complexity of the challenge and the number of markets we need to learn in.  And cost, well, it really depends.  Let’s say more than $100,000 and less than $1,000,000!

Q: Does the BRR approach work for projects with much shorter timelines (2-4 weeks)?

A: In our experience, it’s difficult to integrate digital and analog methods and have time to learn and leverage the various phases to maximum effect in less than a month.  The smallest scale BRR projects we do tend to take 6-8 weeks.  We’ve actually never had a client come to us and expect turn-around in 2 weeks.

Q: How do you determine which projects are a good fit for BRR?

A: We ask two key questions when we’re designing the research phase of our projects: (1) what can we get people to do for us digitally; and (2) what do we want to do with them in context?  If the answer is “nothing” to either of those questions, a BRR approach probably isn’t appropriate.  We are finding, however, that most of our Research + Concepting work includes a Blended Reality Research^TM approach.

Q: Do you find that access to and comfort with digital world skews to a particular demographic?  How do you accommodate groups who have limited access to digital technology?

A: Using online platforms and digital capture tools is not always appropriate.  There are some populations that simply don’t have access.  If we need to learn from and work with a group that has limited access to digital technology, our research design reflects this.  However, we have done online studies with people of all ages and from a variety of backgrounds.  In our experience, as long as someone is using email and able to attach a picture or document to an email message, they are usually able to participate in one of our online studies. 

Q: Do the participants you engage normally participate in online studies?  Or do you have to recruit people who are familiar with online tools/platforms?  

A: Not at all.  Many of the people we recruit for the online portion of our BRR projects have never participated in an activity-based online study before.  They love being able to do it on their own time and most really enjoy being asked to think creatively in a way that is rarely asked of them.  They also appreciate the “deep listening” we do when we’re with them online.  We read every word and probe and ask for follow up so they feel acknowledged and heard.

Q: How did/do you keep the participants engaged over the span of the project?

A: You can not communicate too much.  When a participant has been accepted into one of our online studies, they are emailed right away by the Project Manager to welcome them to the project.  Within the first 24 hours of the online study launching, every single participant is contacted by the Researcher who will be reading and responding to their work.  All participants receive a daily email from their assigned Researcher that provides thanks and kudos on the previous day’s work and advises what is expected of them that day.  We think of ourselves as cheerleaders and coaches as much as researchers.  We want participants to feel our presence online and to feel appreciated and acknowledged.  It can sometimes feel like overkill on our end, but the more we communicate and congratulate and actively moderate, the better the learning and level of engagement is.

Q: Do you ever do larger online samples to get more quantitative data to support the qualitative learning?

A: No, we don’t.  Our focus is qualitative research, though we will sometimes work with a client’s existing quant partner (or one that we recommend) to determine the size and strength of the various opportunities that have been identified by our qualitative Research work and Concepting that emerges from it.

Q: Packaging is a very physical type of innovation.  Do you have examples where you’ve applied this BRR approach to more conceptual types of innovation?

A: Absolutely.  We have used BRR in Research + Concepting projects that have led to brand/positioning concept development and service and/or experience design concepts.

If you have any further questions about Blended Reality Research ^TM and how it might help you tackle your most pressing curiosities, please get in touch.  We can be reached in Toronto at +1-416-531-7222 or at karen.ward@curiosityinc.com