2016 RAPP Research Forum

2016 RAPP Research Forum


[Josephine Mazzuca] I wanna
welcome youto our third annual Humber RAPP Research Forum. Special order beautiful spring day ’cause we wanna show off
our beautiful Lakeshore campus. Um, it’s great
to see so many people here. Um, our industry sponsors,
our partners and, for me personally
and for all of us, it’s really exciting
to see so many alumni, um, so thanks for coming. I just wanna mention
that, um, you have the program and also a USB. And on the USB you also have
an electronic version of the program with all the students’ pictures
and names. And if you click
on the students’ pictures, you will be directed
to their LinkedIn page, so it’s a great way, um, for people
to also keep in touch and potentially contact,
um, our students. So at this point
I’m gonna invite Dawn Macaulay, the Associate Dean of Liberal Studies,
for our formal welcome. [applause] [Dawn Macaulay]
Thank you Josephine. Uh, good morning everybody.
I’m so glad to see you here today. Um, thank you for joining us at our,
uh, beautiful Lakeshore campus, as Josephine already mentioned, we’re,
it’s, uh, a showcase for us to be here. Um, I just wanna take this moment
to formally welcome you here today on behalf of President Whitaker and the Board of Governor-
Governors of Humber College. Um, the School
of Liberal Arts and Sciences, uh, Dean Paula Gouveia
and myself, are so proud to, uh, be hosting
the third annual RAPP forum. Uh, the forum gives us
an opportunity to, um, think about, uh, the challenges
and the issues in research today, gives these students an opportunity
to showcase some of their great work and also to connect with you,
the industry experts, and to hear how you’ve dealt with
some of these challenges yourselves. So we look forward for, uh,
to a terrific day. Um, I’m so pleased to see so many
of our program supporters here today. So any of you who’ve been able
to sponsor, thank you so much. Um, all of our
program advisory committee members, thank you again
for your contributions to the program, to being here on the occasions
that we ask you to come, and, um, again, to our alumni,
to our placement partners, all of you,
welcome to the day. [applause] [Ryan]
Good morning everyone. Uh, my name is Ryan.
[clears throat] Excuse me. Um, I’m a student here,
um, in the RAPP. And, uh, I’d just like to start
by welcoming everybody and thanking you
for taking this time out of your, certainly,
very busy schedules, uh, to join us here today. Um, I’m here
to introduce our keynote speaker. Uh, it’s a pleasure and an honor
to introduce Susan Abbott. Susan is an internationally renowned
expert, leader, and innovator in customer insights
and qualitative research. Uh, just a little bit about her. She holds an MBA
from Ivey at Western and is a certified
market research professional. Uh, she worked as a VP at TD Bank
before striking out on her own to found
Abbott Research and Consulting. Um, Susan has served on the board of the Qualitative
Research Consultants Association and, uh, next month in April, is going to be the co-chair
of their worldwide, um, Qualitative Research Consultancy
conference in Vienna. That sounds
like it’s gonna be really interesting. Um, Susan is also the co-founder
of Think Global Qualitative, which is a global alliance of, um,
qualitative, uh, consultancy experts. Uh, Susan is also a published author
of, uh, two books, uh, the latest one is
Qual-Online – The Essential Guide. Uh, so, on behalf
of, uh, students here, I would just like to thank you Susan
for, uh, coming in here to share, uh, your expertise with us,
and welcome. Thanks. [applause] [Susan Abbott]
Well, thank you. You know my Mom never raised me
to say things about, like that about myself
so it always feels pretty weird. Um, I guess we need to, uh, would you mind switching
that up for me? Thank you. Super.
So thank you very much. I’m really pleased to be here. I think, uh, the RAPP program
has such a tremendous reputation that it’s, it’s really an honour
to address the group. Um, I also liked your theme, research methods tried and true,
bold and new because we certainly have, uh, a lot
of industry challenges in front of us of, um, what we have to deal with. And that’s what
I wanna talk about today. I’m gonna talk a little bit
about what’s changing in, in our business,
fossil or future, eh? Um, what’s changing? Uh,
where I think we need to go and why? And why it’s important
and saving the world. Um, which might sound
like a lot to get in to 40 minutes and have Q and A
but we will do that. Um, so when I was thinking
about the future of our science and our craft of research,
our industry, our profession, I happened to get the idea that we do have
some fairly fossilized ideas. And that some people think
our industry is actually dying, even while we’re in the middle
of this tremendous growth, change, and innovation. So which is it?
Are we the fossils or the future? Um, so I Googled that phrase,
always productive, and, um, found out that it turns out
that this is a rather rich theme that artists have been engaging in,
um, for some time. They- and, and because they’re artists,
they can take liberties with things, so you can’t actually fossilize
something that’s made of plastic, but they pretend you can. And so,
I’ve put a few artistic creations into this presentation
for your watching pleasure. And I wanna just mention
a little bit about why I think it’s important
to pay attention to art, even though researchers
are basically scientists. Even qualies are scientists. First thing,
I think the world of art has a lot more relevance
than we might think, uh, because artists think deeply
about things that we’re all dealing with
in the world. And they often do it
in advance of the rest of us. So if you think about
some of the issues we’re dealing with today in the world
like self driving cars, the disappearance of work to robotics,
and artificial intelligence, that kind of stuff, that’s 20 years old
in the world of science fiction, maybe older, really,
it’s all been talked about by artists. Um, so a great many of the things
that we need to think about, um, are already out there, and artists are already thinking
about them. So I, I think all of us
should not get too fixated on the world of business,
and we should bring, bring a much larger view
into our work. So if we’re going
to avoid becoming fossils like this, we are going to have to in- evolve. And taking with us only the things
that are useful. And I think that’s going to mean
leaving behind things that are familiar. And it’s going to be
actually somewhat scary. And we’re going to have to find
and focus on the things that are actually important. And that’s what I wanna talk
about today. I created my first survey
when I was in high school in grade nine. I’m sure many of you came
to research early in your lives. So a, a girlfriend and I, we surveyed grade eight students
on drug use. Um, and I learned how difficult it is
to get good data, as you might well imagine, uh,
especially on a sensitive topic. And, uh, you know,
people ask me all the time, well, you know, is it okay
to use Survey Monkey? Well, you know what,
it’s just a tool, right? Survey Monkey doesn’t give you
good data or bad data. It is just a tool. Most people don’t understand that. As I, I’m sure
that the senior researchers here in the audience
will know that, and those of you entering
the profession are, are soon to sadly learn
that very few people, in fact,
think scientifically. The meteor landed awhile ago
in our industry like it did in a lot
of industries actually. It landed because
of the democratization of tools. Because it used to be that you didn’t have things
like Survey Monkey. So any fool
could not just write a survey, you actually had to have access
to the right tools. But now, like these are-
this is Survey Monkey’s homepage, create surveys, get answers,
pro sign up, sign up free. And Focus Group It,
uh, a really cool tool, also has a free level. It’s just an online, uh, uh, threaded,
uh, discussion tool, right? So you, any, any fool can run
a focus group, right? Uh, so if anybody can use
these tools, one of the things that it means is it’s eroding
the understanding people have that there’s actually
some skill involved in doing what we do. And, I think,
we are actually experiencing classic disruptive innovation. Anybody know who this guy is? Well done, you get a book!
Who said that? Okay, pass this lady a book,
please, and come and see me later,
I’ll sign it for you. Clayton Christensen, exactly. So he figured out this idea
of disruptive innovation. So let’s just look at this chart.
[clears throat] What he said is in, in anything from, you know, construction equipment
to technology, uh, there is degrees of performance,
high performance and low performance, and over time,
the performance demanded at the high end
of the market is up there, and at the low end
of the market is down here. So let’s think about research,
the high end of the market is gonna be Ipsos, P&G, TD Bank,
right, what they want. The low end of the market
is people I know who are running a little training firm,
right, they just, they want some simple little thing
that’s better than a pen and paper. So the high end of the market is, is always asking
its suppliers for more. And so Christensen said, well,
that’s sustaining innovation, right? So the stuff gets
a little bit better every year. And, initially,
the clients want something that the suppliers
aren’t actually delivering. They want more
than the suppliers can deliver. And over time,
through innovation, the suppliers eventually exceed,
uh, what’s needed. And if you think about what you can do
in Excel, for example, and what most of us do in Excel, you will see that
that happens everywhere, right? There’s so many tools in there,
it’s far in excess of the simple things
most of us do. Um, so then there’s
the performance demanded at the low end of the market,
that’s all these freelancers and independent consultants out there
who just want a simple tool. Disruptive innovation comes along
with a tool that’s not even really very good,
it’s actually terrible. It doesn’t,
it doesn’t do things very well at all, but it’s cheap like anything,
and it gets better really quickly. And that is exactly
what’s happened with every technology
in the research space. It’s, it’s gotten better,
and better, and better. And, uh, let me show you the evolution
of online qualitative tools. When, uh, Jennifer Dale
and I wrote this, uh, this book about online qualitative, we wanted
to document the history of it while we could still
kind of pull that together. Um, and she was actually, uh, Jennifer’s, um,
she’s probably my vintage, which I’m not gonna tell you,
you can just guess, but, uh, she’s,
she started out early on. She was,
she was a junior researcher, like a lot of the people in this room,
when people went online. You, lot’s of you
probably never even heard about AOL, America Online, which was one
of the first internet providers. And they had these chat rooms,
right, so public chat rooms. And so, uh, a woman
named Marian Salzman, she started running
the first online focus groups in these public chat rooms. Now, they weren’t private,
so you’d recruit people, and you’d tell them,
okay, go to the room called bubble gum
at 9:15 tonight, right? And so they’d real quick
run this live text chat thing. And, uh, so they started publishing
in Quirk’s magazine, which is a big research magazine, and Greenfield Online, uh, decided
they would work with AOL, and they built them
a private, uh, thing. So that’s what was happening. So in the 90s,
so earlier than most people think, actually a lot earlier. Communispace,
still one of the great behemoths in online communities, they launched before 2000,
which is amazing. Okay,
then we have the big explosion. I stopped documenting after 2008, it was just impossible,
it was just impossible. So we get Artefact, which, uh, was using Ning,
the Ning platform, which I, I don’t even know
if it’s still out there but it was a free platform. And if you look at what’s happening
on the bottom, this was all these
communication technologies and information, right,
Wikipedia, LinkedIn, Facebook, first at Harvard,
Facebook for everyone. Flip Video,
anybody know what a Flip Video is? It was such an innovative tool. It’s a little video camera, it’s like the size of a package
of cigarettes, right? It’s, it’s a little bit bigger
than this, and you push a button,
and out pops a USB key. So we thought this is great. So we would buy these,
mail them to people, and say, shoot some video,
right? I’m gonna give you missions,
I want you to, you know, go shopping
and shoot some video, then upload it on your computer,
and send it to me. Fabulous innovation,
worked great, everybody loved it,
don’t need it anymore. Why? Everybody’s got video
on their device. You don’t need to do that,
right? It’s still a very cool thing
but it’s, it’s already, it’s whole life cycle happened
in the space of a few years, it’s just crazy. Uh, so now, basically, you can’t
keep up with, uh, online qual tools. So let me show you
a little bit about, I, I’m not tight enough
with the quantitative world, I’m sure it’s equally sexy. But let me just show you a little bit
of the evolution that I’ve seen. So it started out with text chat,
and then we had threaded discussion. So, you know, like a forum type
of a discussion, uh, then moderators said,
we really want images, right, we wanna have, um,
better moderator controls, godlike powers so we can decide
how long people can see things and all that stuff,
then we wanted to be able to have our participants post
their own images. So you can do that. Um, now all of the platforms
have really good image mark up tools. So I can show you a layout
of an ad, let’s say, and ask you to post stickies
and make comments on it. And the analytics now will give me
a heat map of who does what. Which all sounds really great
except human beings, of course, don’t actually follow
your instructions perfectly, so they slap the little stickies
all over the place not necessarily on the thing
that you want them to be talking about. So the heat map tools
only sort of work, uh, which I love actually, I love that human beings
keep disrupting the whole thing. Um, you, you know, we wanted to be able
to give people vis- video stimuli. And, you know, now,
now some of the platforms have onboard video editing tools. You can make clips
and highlights right in the thing. It’s, this is just crazy. Uh, of course it’s all on mobile,
it’s all on mobile. Uh, you can push questions
to people, there’s mobile shopper tools,
I’m gonna show you a couple, um, you can combine mobile
with live interactions so that you’re doing some assignment
or answering questions I’ve given you, but then somebody
in a call room someplace is monitoring. And if they see a really cool response
they can go, oh, we wanna see if you will talk
to Susan right now. I mean, this is, this is crazy. Um, communities of any size. So when you hear
the word online community, that is not a defined term,
that could mean anything. That could mean, you know,
uh, a dozen people for three days or it could mean 10,000 people
over a year, and we pull them in
for this and that. So that’s, that’s all available. The latest thing, uh, and the thing that is starting
to happen now is very fast recruiting, almost instantaneous
in some platforms. So if you’re not too fussy
about who you need to talk to, who your target is, um,
you can do it almost immediately. I, I wish I had those projects. My projects
are always low incidence, very difficult to find people
for some reason, but anyway. Um, here’s a couple
of these mobile only shopper platforms, Dscout is one, there’s a bunch of these,
Field Agent is another. And they are, basically were created
to serve the needs of big retailers. So, um, I think Field Agent,
really, their first and best client
has been Walmart. Uh, they do a lot of other stuff,
but they’re the one that, um, you know, you can upload pictures and photos,
you could push questions, they have geo-fencing capability. So if you say you’re in the Walmart
on Eglinton Avenue, they know if you’re in the Walmart
on Eglinton Avenue. This is, it’s crazy stuff. One of the weird things
by the way, which I’m not gonna talk about
but which we all need to think about, is that researchers who built
the first tools knew research ethics. Now the people building the tools
are not researchers, they’re technology people. And so they don’t
necessarily worry about whether it’s appropriate
to geo-fence, and whether they should keep tracking
what’s on your phone, maybe look up your other contacts,
uh, link to your Facebook account. Like, who knows
what’s going on out there. That’s all against research ethics but these people aren’t even
in our associations. Uh, I just learned
about this one recently, Ask your target market. Look at the size of this panel.
25 million? Like, I don’t know how they have this
set up on the back end, there may be other people here who do,
and we should talk about it at lunch, but, uh, you know,
maybe they’re amalgamating other panels
or something like that. And, um, so I looked at that and thought, wow,
yeah, 25 million panel, guaranteed price and turnaround,
look at this. 50 respondents, 3 questions,
anyone in the USA, 50 bucks? 50 bucks? So you can see why clients
may start thinking that, um, you know,
sort of the basic, almost nobody runs research projects
under less than 10,000 dollars. I mean you can’t
make any money doing that. And these guys are telling you,
oh you, no, you, you can do it for almost nothing. So we, we do have
some challenges in our industry. Uh, you guys might have heard
about RIWI. Anybody here heard of RIWI? They’re an interesting company.
They’re a Canadian company. Uh, they have this technology
called random domain intercept. Basically,
here’s what it does. You, you type in a web address,
you make a mistake, you go somewhere else,
they’re counting on that, they can launch a survey
to you anywhere in the world. So one of the reasons people like this
is they can actually survey people in countries where marketing research
is not accepted at all, like really nasty places
that we wouldn’t wanna live, right? And they can get good data because it’s, it’s like,
it really is random. I just think
that’s so weird though, right? They’re counting on people
making a mistake. Gilgo consume-
Google Consumer Surveys. Um, I’m not sure if you’ve heard
a presentation from them. But if you ever get the chance, go,
because it’s so weird. If you answer
a Google consumer survey, they will not ask you
a demographic question, you know why? They already know who you are,
that’s right. They already know I’m female
because of my browsing history, and they just pulled that in. I mean,
some of this stuff is pretty, it, it kind of, uh,
flies in the face of how we think about things,
doesn’t it? And, then there’s all
that whiz bang neuroscience stuff where, uh, you know,
the… the thing that qualies get demonstrated
most often is we hear about
facial recognition. And I’ve seen
some of this evolving over time, and it’s pretty darn good,
actually. Uh, it used to be you needed
a specialist to do the coding, but the machine coding is starting
to come along. You, you still need an expert
but, um… So imagine you’re looking at an ad
and I, I’ve also wired up my skin so it’s getting
galvanic skin response, and they might be tapping
my blood pressure or some other thing and you can see
where this is going to go, right? Does anybody have, um,
a Fitbit on them today? Yeah, can’t, can’t you just see
where this stuff is gonna go? It- we’re not gonna have to ask you
what did you do yesterday, we’ll know what you did yesterday
and what you thought about it. It’ kind of creepy, actually,
uh, I think. Uh, so this is an interesting thing,
the GRIT Report. Uh, I, I urge you all to make
the GreenBook Online Resource part of your regular
tour of duty, um, because it’s,
it’s a very good content site. It started off as a directory. But then when the directory business
kind of tanked, they, they turned themselves
into a content site, as so many people have done. And they do a couple of times a year
a big survey of the research community. You know, it’s one
of those samples of convenience. So who the heck knows
if it’s any good, right? I mean, you, you know,
people send out links on Twitter saying hey, answer the survey. But the people who answered
the survey, this is the most recent one
a few months ago, do they an-
and they are well aware of all this disruption
I’m just telling you about, do they think the disruption
is slowing down? No, they think it’s gonna get
more disruptive. I, I can’t even imagine
how it could get much more disruptive
than it already is. Um, and we’re in an environment
where if you have an education, like everyone in this room, you might have heard people talking
about elites in political campaigns. You probably didn’t think
they were talking about you because you
might not feel wealthy. They are talking about people
with an education. So you are an elite,
and they’re campaigning against you. This is the environment
that science lives in today. One of the things that I found
really distressing last weekend was I was reading about, um, uh,
a creation, uh, museum in the US, and they’re building
a museum of the ark and Disney people
are helping them build it so it’s gonna be really cool. And 20 percent of Canadians believe
that the world, literally, was built in a literal week
by a supernatural being, and it’s less than
10,000 years old. And 40 percent
of Americans think that. So I have no issue
with people’s religious faith, but I can tell you this,
when you know the conclusions before you start the analysis,
that’s not science. Um, so I see that we have some threats
and opportunities in front of us. What does it all mean?
What is going to change as a result? Did you people just waste a year
in this program? No, you did not. Um, you did not waste a year
in this program. I can see the people
at this table thinking, oh my God, who thought Susan Abbott
was a good idea, what a disaster. Um, so there’s this guy
I’m gonna tell you about, Stan Sthanunathan, he’s the SVP of Consumer
and Market Insights at Unilever. And he just did a presentation
at the MRS Conference, which is a big conference
in the US. And, uh, I wasn’t there,
but I saw this really cool video of him. I urge you to look it up, it’s around on LinkedIn
and stuff like that, and if you can’t find it, then you need
to re-enroll in this program because you didn’t learn
about research. Okay, here’s what he says
is going to happen. Nerds will rule. So people with quantitative skills,
uh, are going to be in high demand. And, uh, I think
that’s kind of cool. Nerds are gonna become more sexy. Uh, I had a nephew that,
that studied, um, you know,
advanced quantitative analysis and math and stuff like that
and my Mom said, “What’s he gonna do,
be a math teacher?” I said, “No, he’s gonna go
make a ton of money as a quant
in the investment industry.” And she’s like,
“What’s that?” Right? So quantitative is popular
all over the place, really high end quantitative. Technology is the tail
that wags the dog. Okay, so he says,
technology is not just going to enable what we want to do, it’s gonna change
what we think of doing. That kind of makes sense,
right? Now that we’re starting to,
to figure out new stuff. Boutiques will flourish.
I was thrilled to hear that. Um, because they will offer
a unique skill. Because you can’t be good
at everything today. You can’t possibly be good
at everything. Anybody who tells you you can
is not telling the truth, in fact. And in fact, uh, a lot
of large research companies outsource and white label a lot
of their specialized services, they just don’t tell the clients
that it is happening behind the scenes. Integrators emerge. So accelerated by technology. What I believe he means by this is we will be able
to integrate multiple data sources much more easily
than we can today. So, um, imagine a bank who has all this operational data
from ATM machines, and they have all this customer data
from phoning people up and asking them
customer experience surveys. That’s really hard
to integrate that stuff today. He’s saying it won’t be as hard
in the future. So that seems like a good thing. Scale will become a liability
for big businesses. I was fascinated to hear this because several people
have told me that just recently, people who know more about,
you know, the world of Ipsos than I do. Um, the quantified self. We were talking about that,
the power over wearables. Um, artificial intelligence
takes over the routine stuff. That could be good,
but it means humans have to find a way of adding incremental value. We have to think,
what is that incremental value. He says we’ll go
from why to why not. Instead of asking questions, the insight industry
will be more proactive in generating insights
and action plans. Annual briefs. Now this is really something
that he’s not talking about the research brief
but the marketing brief that’s given to an agency
for communication. So the cycle is,
you know, you sit down
with the agency once a year, you do a big brief,
and then they create communication. He’s saying, that’s ridiculous.
Why would we do that once a year? We should be listening constantly,
responding, engaging, it should be a continual thing. Insights in hours
not days or weeks. Um, and that scares me
to hear a client side person say that, uh, but I do know
that to an extent that’s desired. So that’s his predictions,
pretty interesting stuff, here’s mine. I think I’m seeing this trend
in my own work and oddly enough it’s coming from shrinking budgets
as much as anything. So in order
to cope with tight budgets, you have to spend your research dollars
more, much more strategically. So you do less ad hoc little projects,
and you do more strategic projects. And when you do
a strategic project, you don’t have to look at
the same problem again for quite awhile because you, you know, you’ve
pretty much got your marching orders for the next several years
usually. Um, so there’s larger projects
but fewer of them. And, I think
the single method research project is probably dead
and probably should be dead. Uh, we’re gonna see,
I’m seeing a lot more hybrid work. I always recommend
hybrid work to clients. And, um, not just qual and quant
but multi-method. And I’m gonna show you
a couple of examples. Okay, this first one, uh, somebody mentioned my,
my global network. It, it- I want to tell you
this is how it happened. So, um, because I go
to the qualitative conferences, and most qualitative people
are in tiny little companies of one or two people,
um, we have a lot of fun at our conferences,
we are buddies. You walk in,
the first time I walked in I thought, oh my God, who are they people,
they’re all flowy, you know, and huggy
and ooh, it’s so great to see you, and I’m just, oh my God,
is this a business event, am I in the right place,
was this Mary Kay? Um, but we all, you know,
we hang together, and we like knowing, you know,
other people who know what we do. And so I know a lot
of these people worldwide. And I sat down with Ilka Kuhagen, the lady with the curly hair
on the right who’s in Munich, and I said,
“Do you know what Ilka? The big research companies
are eating our lunch. We’re better at this work
than they are, but they want
a more coordinated offering. How can we do that?” So we formed a global network, and every few years,
we do some research on our own to just to show clients
how cool we are. Um, shameless self promotion, something you all need
to learn how to do. And so, a few years ago we decided
we wanted to look at mobile technologies and so we chose dogs
and their owners as the topic. So here’s what we did. It was, uh, basically three weeks
in each of a dozen countries and we had about 12 participants
in each country. So the first week a VisionsLive, which is another online platform
that has both mobile and desktop apps, um, based in the UK, they,
they provided their platform for us for free globally
so we could do this. So the first week
was an individual diary. Uh, so every single day, uh,
we would ask you, you know, to tell me morning, noon, and night
what are you and your dog doing, take pictures of stuff,
give me videos, all this stuff. So people did that,
that was very interesting. And the second week, we moved you
into a forum type discussion. So that’s what
a threaded discussion looks like, that’s just lots of text. One of the reasons I picked
that particular shot is because it shows you
the volume of response you get from a project like this. If it’s working well,
you get a ton of data. This is one of the challenges
of the digital age is that the analysis part
didn’t get cheaper yet, right? You actually have more data that you collected faster
and more cheaply, but, you know, we’re still there
with all that transcript. Um, my, just Canada,
I got 49 videos. Yeah. I mean, imagine,
really, this was a small project. Uh, so that’s what we did
the second week. We had themes,
we talked about things. And so out of those themes
people came up with ideas. The third week we did ideation. And we, we gave people
some concepts to react to. So one of the things they told us is,
uh, I’m not a dog owner, but the dog owners in the room
probably can identify with this, cleaning your dog,
washing you dog, is a real pain. Ir takes hours,
dogs don’t always like it, makes a big mess, it’s expensive
if you do it somewhere else. So, uh, we, we had a graphic artist
mock up a design and gave it to people
and we had them help. So a co-creation exercise. So that’s three weeks, um, and you can do the,
something like that globally now, p- in parallel,
you could run it all at the same time. The client could be looking at
all of it at the same time. So it’s kind of fun, uh,
and works well. And you get really,
you know, cool stuff like this, pictures of people just hanging
out with their dogs, dressing their dogs up, like,
we found a ton of stuff out about this. Interestingly, we did not find
big global differences. We expected to and we didn’t. What we found were
big global socioeconomic differences. So the rising middle class
all over the world, wherever they are,
they’re interested in dogs too. Um, they might not,
you know, have them in the same incidence that we do
but that’s largely a financial problem. Um, yeah, so we found
all this things out. So that, that’s a typical,
that’s a simple hybrid project, right? You’re doing multiple approaches,
individual diary, mostly mobile, group discussion,
mostly kind of app or desktop, bigger screen that would be
probably a better way to say it, and then you’re doing
ideation co-creation. Here’s the project
I’m just wrapping up right now. It’s darn near killed me,
but this is what we did. We started off with, um… So the client wants
to completely understand a given customer journey. And they want to understand it… I mean, one the the things
that is driving this kind of work too is in mature industries
it’s getting harder to beat your competition. You have to be a lot better
not just a little bit better. You can’t just throw out
new advertising and have it work. Consumers are far too fussy
for that. So we started
with leader interviews. I thought it was interesting
that the client asked me to interview their executives
on this team. They wanted it documented, they wanted to make sure
internal biases weren’t affecting
those conversations. So that was kind of neat. We did a knowledge harvest. Now,
that’s a data synthesis thing. Um, lots of you will probably do
this kind of work in your career, where somebody gives you everything they have
on the topic, right? “Here’s the last 25 studies we did. What does it all mean?” And when they say,
“What does it all mean?” Shockingly, they’ll want,
you know, six slides, uh, but that’s what
a knowledge harvest is. You get everybody
on the same page, and then you debrief that, and you say, “Okay, what do we
already know about the topic? Okay, now let’s plan
the next thing.” I recommended
a social media component, for budget reasons we didn’t do it,
but, uh, a company called Backamo, which is based in Europe,
they do this interesting hybrid. They pull social media data using, you know, well known tools
like Radian6, and they do the initial, uh, analysis
with, um, technology tools. And then they have human beings
do the next phase of the analysis, which is why I’m interested
in their offering. So it gets you
beyond sentiment analysis or brand dimensions,
right? It’s about what are people
talking about. Anyway, so we had that planned,
didn’t do it. We did a video survey, I’m gonna show you what
that is in a minute, really cool tool
called MindSwarms, because we had this one segment
of the market that we thought was emerging
and doing something really different, and we didn’t have money
to do a conventional project. So I said, “Well, why don’t we throw
this little thing at that?” So we did. We threw this little part
of the project there. And we did depth interviews,
we did 20 of those, um, most of those were
in-home interviews, so me, and the client,
and a video camera. Um, and because we were getting
a lot of video, I had a video editor, great guy,
named Cory Schaeffer, former CBC person, there’s a lot of those out there, um,
and they’re really talented people, um, to help me
with managing all this video. We did, uh,
competitive intelligence shops. So that also was another company,
um, Market Alert. David Lithwick,
well known guy in the industry. We shopped, uh,
mostly Canadian firms, but we also did some,
because it was a digital, partly digital, project,
we did some worldwide shops. So he’s recruiting people
all over the world to do, to actually, you know,
shop online and document that. And we did
front-line staff interviews. Because this is a high touch business,
we talked to a bunch of people who actually deal with customers
and got their perspective. So we had a ton of stuff. We, uh, did a competitive scan,
what are other industries doing, are other companies doing
in this industry? Um, that wasn’t done by me,
that was done by an agency. And all of this
is coming together. So this is a big project,
a lot of work, ton of data, ton of data, that’s,
that’s why it’s so brutal. And, of course,
the clients want this to happen fast. Somebody told them agile research
is a good idea and they heard fast. Um, this is what
a video survey is. I mean, there’s different providers,
this is just the one I used. I, I think they’re,
these guys have really nailed it, it’s called MindSwarms. So this is a snapshot of, of, um,
the reporting interface, of what I get. So, it’s a panel recruit,
I give them a screener, it’s gotta be a simple screener,
none of these, you know, 25 question things, and, uh, they, they go
and find these people. And I can ask them seven questions,
the questions are in text form, and 15 people answer and they,
they can chunk that up into more. But so there’s actually 15 rows. And question one, they’re,
they’re answering in video. And they’re asked
to give you a one minute video. So I can look across Garret
and hear his answers in video. Or I can look down,
and if I click on them, I can also see a transcript
of what they said in the video. And they’re producing the transcript
within about two days. I thought it was automated at first,
but it’s better than that. So it’s- I think they’ve got
human beings keyboarding away. Uh, there’s one of the things
that hasn’t yet disappeared is transcription. Um, and I can also see
their screener specs, right? So I could click on Garret and go,
“Oh, where was he from again?” This is, so this is really cool,
it was, it was really cool. It was surprisingly in-depth. I, I couldn’t believe
how much depth we got. I mean I was crazy
wanting to ask some follow up questions, which I couldn’t,
but it was a great, I mean, it was a terrific tool,
it was really, and, uh, the client loved it
because they’re getting video. So I think we’re gonna see old
and new combine in, in some… I don’t- I think as your,
your theme here talks about, um, we’re going to bring
the best of the old with us, but we’re gonna have to get rid
of some stuff. So one of the things
that we’re gonna have to get rid of is some of our old work methods. We want all the speed, all the agility,
and we want it inexpensive. But we still want five revisions
of the screener. This is a huge problem
in my world, um, and probably soon to be
a huge problem for the rest of you here if you’re not
already experiencing it. So the clients, largely, have not
changed their work methods. They’re demanding a lot more, but they haven’t changed
how they go about it and some of, some of the suppliers have not changed
our work methods enough either. So we all are gonna have to figure out
how to do stuff differently. We’re gonna have to learn
to work in new ways because, uh, the old ways
are not really meeting the needs of people anymore. And when they’re not meeting
the needs of executives, I’ll tell you what the executives do,
they go around the research department and they directly hire
somebody else. They hire somebody else
like Frog Design, or IDEO, or Adaptive Path,
who are basically designers who slap on a little bit of research
and call it research. They don’t do research
like we do research. They do, you know, like skimming a stone
across the surface. And we go scuba diving,
right? They, they do talk to people,
uh, and then, but they have a lot of sizzle
and whiz bang around it, and executives love it. Um, and so they, you know,
they’re going around us. They’re… they’re going around us. Um, I think we need to reconsider
the working relationship. And I, I’ve experienced
both sides of this, and I wanna take you through
what I think is happening here. So I, I tried to think,
what are the dimensions of the relationship I have with clients
and clients have with other people? So there’s the consulting relationship,
um, and I’ve, I’ve experienced that. Um, I used to do,
when I first started on my own I used to do these big,
strategic kinda change projects. And then there’s
the vendor relationship, which is what I’m experiencing
mostly now in the research world. So the management model
in the consulting side is trusted advisor. Right? If you’re McKenzie,
you’re a trusted advisor. You, you share, you, you trust that people have
your best interest at heart. You, you know,
you look to them for advice. On the vendor model,
it’s careful supervision. These people are paving a road for you,
watch them closely. Yeah, I know, crazy. How much access do you have
to the sponsoring executive? In the consulting model,
very frequent. They’re the person who hired you,
they’re the person you know, you can call them up any time. If you’re having a problem,
you call them and say, “Your staff are not helping.
Your staff are in the way, fix it.” And then they fix it.
That’s what happens. On the vendor side, limited,
sometimes never. I’ve been through entire projects where I never meet
the sponsoring executive. I’m, I’m not sure
they even know who I am. It’s, it’s, uh,
kind of a strange thing. What is the role
of the sponsoring executive? Now, here’s one
that we don’t think about all the time. In the vendor model,
it’s to cut the cheque, basically, and to show up
at the final presentation. They are often not that involved. In the consulting model, they are not involved
in method selection, but they define the goals, uh, they help inform the project
as it evolves and they help you decide
how you’re gonna make the trade-offs because there’s always trade-offs
to make. Who defines the methods? Sometimes in the the vendor model
the client defines it. You get something and they say,
do this, this, this, and this. Um, which is sort of weird because I thought they were hiring me
for my expertise. In the consulting model,
you tell them. Like, when you’re hired
as a consultant, I’m telling them what we’re doing.
They’re not telling me what we’re doing. So this is-
they’re quite a ways apart. The basic approach, on the one hand,
on the consulting model, is focus on the big picture,
strategic insights, inspire change. Move my business forward,
that’s what they want. On the vendor model,
it’s like multiple reviews and revisions at all points, it’s making tiny little tweaky changes
to my interview guide. And I,
I have a secret to tell you, you know what actual qualies
like me do when we get in the room? I take out most of that crap, and I have, like,
a few questions with me. And by about the third time
I’ve done whatever, I don’t even need the guide,
I’m not using the guide, and I’m certainly not worried
about those minor tweaky changes you made to the 25 probes
you added to the guide. Because nobody can sit there
and work through twelve pages and go, wait, just hang on,
I’ve got this one more… It’s ridiculous, right? So I’m not sure that
that’s the right model either. How to choose a supplier? Well, purchasing has taken over
in most big companies. They have taken over. And the research departments
don’t actually like it. Uh, on the consulting model though,
where it’s the executive who hires, they basically hire for expertise
and track record. That’s what they’re looking for. And quite frequently,
they will try to engineer things to get around the purchasing process,
if possible. So I’m not sure we can go
from this to that, but I think we should not
let ourselves get too stuck in this because I think the research
really suffers from that. And I don’t think executives feel
well served by that model either. So I think we need to reconsider
some of our working relationships and probably look to companies,
like Silicon Valley companies, for maybe some guidance
in how to do that because they do stuff really different
than the rest of the world does. So we need to open ourselves,
I think, to some stuff that might sound kind of threatening,
or weird, or whatever. How we avoid fossilization. Well, we need
to ask strategic questions not tactical questions. We need to deliver insights
not data. Everybody’s got tons of data,
nobody needs more data. Trust me, there’s data,
we’re swimming in data. And it’s only gonna get worse. So what does it all mean? In fact, I think most working managers,
middle managers, are so busy they’re just
like little hamsters on the wheel, meeting, meeting,
meeting, meeting. They have no idea
what the data means anymore, and they don’t have the time
to stop and think. They actually really rely on us
to do that. So we have to force that time
into the schedule no matter how ugly the schedule is,
that we can sit back, have a beverage of choice
and think, “What does this really mean,
and what does it signify?” I think we need to deliver soo-
solutions to problems not tables, nobody wants another table. It scares me when I get ads
all the time for software that will produce tables for you,
really? Is that why the reports
are now 125 pages long with a table on every page? Yes, because a piece of software kicked
that out not a human being. We need to create
immersive multimedia portals. That is starting to happen.
We’re gonna see more of that. Um, I would tell you
more about that, but I think most of us think
it’s a little bit proprietary right now, but PowerPoint reports are not really
that mobilizing for people. Seeing other human beings,
that’s mobilizing for people. So we need to find more ways
to immerse the clients in the work because when that happens,
they love it. Like, one of the things
that, um, uh, happens in my work, and I try to convince clients
to do more often, is you do more of a lab format than a focus group format
if we’re doing groups. Um, or if it’s individual interviews,
sit in a room with me. Because when you are sitting in the room
with another human being, you cannot sit there
and go, “She’s not our target.” You can not sit there and say,
“I don’t believe that. What a ridiculous thing to say.” And you can do that when you’re
behind a pane of glass. Well, we should stop that.
Let’s kill the glass, break the window. So we need collaboration more. I think we need to push for that. And when clients say,
“We don’t have time to collaborate,” we need to dig in on that because that makes
for much better research. And that is what will keep us
from being fossilized. Okay, I said I would talk
about saving the world. I am getting there. Um, there has never been
a greater need in the world for meaningful answers
to important questions. I mean, look at the newspaper. We need real thinking. We need evidence-based
decision making. We need understanding that will motivate
global behaviour change. That is how
we are gonna save the world. By figuring out how to mobilize people
with stories that compel action and researchers are the people
who should be doing that. That’s my opinion.
What do you guys think? Thank you. [applause] So we have tons of time
for questions. Yeah. Well, I wanted time for questions,
we need time to… [Josephine]
Can I just have the students come up and, uh, each grab microphones. So if you have a question,
we have a microphone for you. We’ll walk it over. Um, so like Susan said, she, I think, will be happy
to take some questions. Thank you very much,
that was great. Yeah, very insightful. [Susan] Awesome.
Yeah? [Josephine]
I see a little hand over there. [man] First of all,
thank you for the presentation… [Josephine] Why don’t you stand up
Ramsey, we all want to see you. [Susan] And, oh,
and say your name. This is part of the shameless
self promotion thing. [Ramsey] I’m Ramsey.
Uh, thank you for the presentation. Um, I just wanted to ask, with the rise of automation
in a lot of industries, where do you think
the research industry’s gonna be hit hardest
and what do you think we can adapt and, uh, flourish
with that advent? [Susan] Well, I think we have
to figure out where we can add value. Um, I’m gonna focus
on the qualitative side of things, I think, uh, more. Um, we have to stop thinking
about ourselves as methodology people and think about ourselves
as people who solve problems. So instead of a researcher, you are a consultant
who has deep expertise in a certain kind
of information gathering. Uh, I think that’s a good place
to start in terms of a mindset. Some of the things that I do today I, I kind of look forward
to losing, actually. Okay, and, um, one
of them is text analytics. Now, if you, if you follow what’s
going on in text analytics at all, you’ll know
that it’s improved a lot. And I follow a guy
who’s quite active on LinkedIn, uh, and speaks all over the place
named, uh, Tom C. Anderson, and his company, OdinText,
is one of the big world leaders in this. And, um, so he posted a thing
on LinkedIn one day… Uh, his, his company has
an interesting model, by the way. He takes, I think,
six different text analytics engines and runs the same data
through all of them and then integrates it somehow. It’s an interesting,
different kind of approach. Uh, so he posted a thing
on a LinkedIn group one day and, uh, said, uh, if you wanna see
what text analytics can do for you, you know, just say
you’re interested in a demo and throw me some data and,
and I’ll, I’ll do a freebie for you. Now, he was probably thinking
that people who do, you know, big, um, have lots of open ended questions,
right, like satisfaction surveys, that’s probably
who he was expecting to get. You know who the first dozen
or so people responded? Qualitative. We all, we were all like,
“Yeah, yay Tom, I got transcript for you buddy,
alright!” And he, so he was instantly was like,
“No, no, sorry, if you’re a qualitative
I’m here to tell you, we can do nothing
for you right now.” Interesting, eh? So I was like, I keep hearing
text analytics, text analytics, but it’s, it’s really, it’s not
that much past the word cloud yet. Uh, and the tools
that are past the word cloud phase, um, have a lot
of human intervention. Like, oh yeah,
it’ll, um, you know, it’ll do this and that
with your codes, great. And who’s doing the coding? Oh, that would be me. Okay, yes,
I’m gonna tell you what’s in there, and then you’re gonna pile it up
for me. So I might as well
just pile it up myself, right? So I think
that’s gonna change real quick. And so a lot of transcriptionists
probably will be out of work because we’ll, we’ll get, you know,
automated transcription will be good. Um, you know, so that,
that low end stuff I think will disappear. I think, uh, nobody
is gonna be writing an automated questionnaire
any time soon that’s any good,
right? I, I think
that is not gonna change, uh, and same thing goes
for designing studies, uh, figuring out,
you know, the client says, “I’ve got budget X and problem Y,
wha- what can I do here?” Figuring that out. And, you know, human beings
are much, much better at doing that stuff, so… Uh, it worries me a little though,
like when I first saw MindSwarms, I just though,
“Oh my God, how long can I keep making a living
in this industry?” Um, but, you know, I still had
to write the seven questions. I still had to figure out
who to talk to. Who should we talk to,
and what exact seven questions. I mean, that’s not many questions. And I wanted them to tell me
about a whole thing from,
you know, in some detail and so, you can imagine,
I spent most of a day fussing with those questions,
you know. So that’s kind of,
it’s kind of a funny thing, and, unfortunately, you have
to be relatively sophisticated as a buyer of work to understand that
that much time goes into that. Uh, so that’s a challenge
we all have. Auta- other automation. I think the biometrics stuff
is gonna be more automated. I think the people who are
making a living doing facial coding are probably, you know,
they’re going to be experts that work on the technology side
making the tools better, they’re not gonna be looking at
video telling you this person
is making microgestures. Um, I dunno.
What do other people think? What’s, what’s automation
gonna change? I have a book for you,
you asked a good question. Would you mind passing that along?
Thank you. Come on guys, you just spent
a lot of money getting smart. You must have a question
at this table. You guys looked so engaged. Anything? No?
There’s no dumb questions. Do I need
to put my moderator hat on? Just try to relax.
Don’t worry about the camera. [woman] Hi there.
Uh, I have a question. [Susan]
Yes? Hi. [woman] Not a question,
but just a additional comment. I would love to hear your opinion
on, uh, machine learning technology that’s coming into play
that is beyond just text cloud and how-
I, I totally understand that techniques
are so important on the front end, but disruption
of those technologies also is, you know,
embracing them is helpful. And also, you’re, uh, thoughts
on, uh, I, I like the, the analogy
of skimming the surface versus deep dive
that you mentioned earlier. The, the UX user design kind of work
that we always hear about, in terms of how do you incorporate
primary research in a lean way. I’d love to hear your thoughts
about that. [Susan] Okay, so the first question
I think we, uh, many of us… Um, gonna have to make sure I,
I think that might be the last book ’cause I wanted to make sure the,
the gurus got some. So would you mind passing
that back for me? Thank you. Okay, so the, the thing
that we’ve all heard about in the news was how, um,
uh, Twitter was used as a, a database. I think you might be thinking
about this. It was just in the news
in the last week or two weeks, I think, uh, or maybe I just finally heard
about it. Uh, Twitter was used
as the data set for a machine learning exercise,
uh, right? Yeah, so… You know what happened.
What, tell us what happened. [man] [inaudible]
[Susan] Yeah. Yeah, right? Yeah, he tur- the… the machine
turned into a jerk pretty quick. Um, and it was supposed
to be, you know, uh, interacting with,
with other, other users on Twitter. That’s what is was designed to do –
learn how to interact with other users. And it turned
into a jerk really quick. Well, of course,
the machine learning is based on the data set
that you give the machine to learn from and Twitter has a lot
of jerky stuff on it. So, um, but, yeah, I think it’s, I think it is coming along,
uh, really fast and I think we’re gonna have
to figure out, you know, what, h- how we work in a world where the machines
are as smart as we are. Um, I don’t know if anybody else
was a fan of Battlestar Galactica, but that didn’t have
a happy ending, um, when the machines
became smarter than human beings. So that’s… Yeah. I, I do think that they will help us
make sense of large reams of data. Probably in my work,
I would think we would be slow to adopt some of that. I think it’ll be adopted
in other kinds of applications first. But, um, I don’t know,
it might be nice if a machine could do your taxes for you,
let’s say, right? So complicated things. Uh, machines are very good
at doing things that are repetitive because they don’t get bored,
yet, they don’t get bored yet. What will we do when machines start
to get bored? Now what-
remind me your second question? [woman]
[inaudible] [Susan] User experience.
Yeah, that’s interesting. I’m a big fan of Qualitative Research
Consultants Association because they’re, even though
there’s research associations all over the place, we’re in every
other research association nobody really cares,
we’re a tiny little piece of it, and so the Qualitative
Research Consultants is where you get educated,
basically, that’s where we go. And we decided recently
that we really need to be much, much closer tied
to the user experience people because they’re doing
the same stuff we’re doing. Um, so lots of qualitative people
specialize in that. I think you do need
to specialize in it if you’re going to do
sort of digital user experience. If you’re going to do
customer journey work, which I do, um, I don’t know
that you need to be sort of a usability specialist
in that same way. Um, but yeah, I, I think that
that’s what those folks are doing. I think we need to bring
the design community closer too, um, because they’re doing
this surface skimming research which… Okay, here’s a story
I heard from a client. Um, they said, well, they flew up
a team of six people, they rented a whole floor
in Consumer Vision for a day, each of them simultaneously
was interviewing people, and we did that for one day,
and, uh, that was the research. Um, and I saw the report
that came out of that. And I can tell you…
you cannot generate
game changing insights from that. Because here’s the, here’s the thing
that I find in a lot of my work. And the, and the secret fear
I have on small projects is that I won’t find anything. Because if you study human beings
for a long time, you know that, you know you’re
gonna have to tease out something. And big companies
know a lot already, right? I mean, P and G knows a lot
about consumables and cleaning, and Colgate knows a ton
about oral care. They already know a lot. So you’re gonna have
to help them find something new. You’re not gonna get there
with a handful of inexpert people just being chatty. That’s,
that’s just not enough. Um, because what I find,
often, in a project, like that big,
that big one I showed you. Um, I knew I was
onto something really big when people in different countries
and different parts of the project said almost word for word
the same phrase. I heard, heard that same phrase
almost word for word from several different people
in very different segments. That was the key insight. But, I mean,
look what we got to get there. Like, like, that was a huge project
to get to that but that insight, I think the client will be able
to do something quite magical with. Uh, and it certainly wasn’t what
they were expect, expecting to hear. Of course, the… the other challenge
of the insight business is that as soon as you hear it,
it’s obvious. You hear the insight?
“Oh yeah, we knew that.” You did not know that, okay?
I sweated over that thing. Uh, so, I think you have
to do these deep dives. And I think, you know, I think the,
the best marketers know that. Now, for those of you
who are going into social research, I don’t know if the best policy makers
understand that. And if you do good research
on the policy making front, does anyone pay attention to it? I, you know, I used to think that Ottawa did not pay attention
to that stuff. I’m hoping for change now
but, uh… Yeah, so we, we’re gonna have
to invent a lot of the future together ourselves really, I,
I think, because these technology changes
are a- amazing. If you ever listen
to that, um, CBC program on Saturdays where,
or Sunday afternoon, I guess, they, they interview people
on technology and machine learning
and things like that, some of the stuff
that’s happening is amazing. Um, so, anything that is adding cost
into research is gonna be looked at. You can bet
that the larger companies, you know, the GFKs, the Ipsoses,
the Harris/Decimas, those people are gonna be
looking at those kinds of things. And so are they
on the client side, you know. As I ramble on. Did you have a specific
machine learning thing that you were thinking about? Have you seen
some applications in research that we should be
paying attention to? [woman] I, I think…
Sorry, not, not anything in particular. It maybe will be helpful to know, uh,
what kind of work I do. I’m not in traditional market research,
but we work with start-ups. Um, and because they don’t have
a ton of money, we look for other lean ways to,
to help them. [Susan] Oh, you’re one of the people
that’s sucking us dry, eh? Okay. [woman] They wouldn’t have
the money to pay you anyways. So maybe that,
maybe that’s the, the… [Susan] Well, one of the things
that I think actually is, uh, there’s some interesting ideas
that people have. I mean, every now and again
a client will ask me for something really small. And, uh, I think we’re understanding
human behaviour better because of all
the behavioural sciences. And so we’re learning how
to be better at it. And we’re also learning
that N equals one is not necessarily bad if you ask the right questions
of the right people. So I wanna-
I’ll give you a concrete example. So you can do
some pretty good work for cheap. You don’t have
to have a lot of money. Um, the client said to me, “Okay, it’s a disaster.
Check on creative.” Which I hate ’cause those aren’t
really very interesting studies, but fine, um, good client. So they said,
“We can afford two focus groups.” I said to them,
“Well, that’s a bad idea. We’re not doing two focus groups. We’re gonna do four mini groups and we’re gonna recruit
four people for each of them, I’m gonna talk to them
for an hour, um, I’m not gonna let them
say a word until they’ve been
through the entire campaign, I’m gonna make them
anchor their notes in this.” And, uh, so that’s what we did,
which is a better model. It’s just good design,
right? And, uh, much better than
having two focus groups where traditionally, maybe
somebody says something negative because we’re rewarded
in our society for critical analysis. So we learn how to say,
“Well, that’s, I hate that blue.” And, “Yeah, I don’t really
like the message either.” And now we’re off,
and the campaign’s like, trashed. So I, I think we’re learning
a lot more about behavioural sciences and how to do things better. Um, I don’t think machine learning
is going to help, you know,
young technology companies. And here’s, actually, my thinking
about young technology companies. They gotta stop budgeting
for version three when version one is still sittin’
in the warehouse. Uh, you know,
because lots of times you see things, and you think, “Wow, hmm,
don’t think that’s gonna work.” Right? You see some of these ideas. And I think
when we fund those sectors, we have to start valuing marketing because marketing is what wins,
marketing wins. I mean, think about it. Uh, you know, the best technology
is not necessarily what wins. What was the VH-
VHS versus Beta? Probably most of you don’t even know
there was a Beta. Beta was the competing technology. A lot of people
thought it was better. It lost.
It lost to good marketing. So, I- I think,
you know, publicly, we need to stop saying,
well, we’re gonna fund innovation but not marketing,
not research. So, you know,
I would rather than machine learning, I would rather have the owners
go out and talk to people. Just go talk to people. Not your friends,
not your geeky friends, go, you know, talk to people
in line ups at movies or something, would be a lot better. [John Crockett] Good morning Susan,
John Crockett from Environics. [Susan] Hi. [John] Um, just sw-
shifting gears a little bit. You were talking about, uh,
some of your concerns around some of the, the innovators
and disruptors in this space because they don’t necessarily share
the same code of ethics or professional standards
that market researchers do. Um, while I agree in principle, one of my concerns has always been,
uh, as an industry, are we actually updating our, our view
on those standards and ethics in a way that actually aligns with, um,
the perspectives of Canadians? Specifically,
when it comes to things of, uh, you know, the kinda changing role
of privacy, et cetera. Just wondered
what your thoughts were on that. [Susan] Mmm. Yes, I’ve been, uh,
hearing that that’s an issue. I know that when they came out
with the social media guidelines a couple of years ago… Here’s, here’s sort of… The guidelines
that most of us pay attention to are actually written by ESOMAR. Uh, because the European standards
for privacy and confidentially typically beat everybody else’s. The Americans think it’s theirs.
It’s not, it’s the Europeans’. They’re very concerned about that. Um, and then there was this outfit
called MRMW – Market Research
in the Mobile World. They came out with their own
mobile research guidelines. ESOMAR adopted some of them, and the Canadian MRIA, uh, standards
align with ESOMAR’s. So one of things that kind of upset me,
or concerned me a bit, was the standards
around social media. So if you, um, you know,
scrape a bunch of social media stuff, when you put it in a report, it shouldn’t be tagable
back to the person is basically
what the guidelines say. I shouldn’t be able to tell it’s you.
Except you put it out there publicly. And I, I sorta wrestle with that,
uh, as a- an issue. Um, I think, uh, I was thinking about
handheld appl- applications, in part, where the application
should play nice. When you…
It shouldn’t do things that you, it hasn’t disclosed
that it’s going to do, I think that’s important. Um, I don’t know,
some of the phoning and stuff. Like, I, I probably don’t deal with
some of the problems you guys deal with. An- because it’s,
my stuff is all small sample. But it can be difficult. The disclosure rules
cause a constant problem for me. It’s- I mean,
it’s a constant problem. You can’t out and out
lie to people. I to- support that
in principle. But, um, if I’m having to interview
business executives on a business topic, I spend a lot of time
trying to figure out what I can disclose
that won’t actually reveal the purpose of the study, but they’ll be willing
to participate in. It’s, you know,
so it’s tricky. You know,
can we use LinkedIn for recruiting and Facebook for recruiting?
Yeah, we do. Um, I don’t-
I think that’s still okay. What, what are some of the things
that you are worried about? [John] Um, I guess one of my comments,
and what got me thinking, was when you were showing
some of video content that you were, uh, collecting.
[Susan] Ah! Yes! [John] And a very kinda specific,
um, project level, that becomes challenging because while you’ve recruited people
into that exercise, and they’ve opted into doing a,
a video activity, um… [Susan] Did they know
they were gonna be on that slide? [John] Well, but it’s also,
it’s hard to take the, the personal element
out of that data set. You know, when we’re working
with a quantitative data set, we can just scrape out e-mail addresses,
IP addresses, et cetera. [Susan] Yep, yep, yep.
[John] But now you’ve got video content, um, an- and often in cases
maybe exchanging raw data that has a, you know,
an intrinsic kinda personal value to it that, um,
that wasn’t there before. [Susan]
Yes, okay, so, of course
you have to get informed consent, and we do. Do people really understand
what they’re signing up for? I mean,
when I did the Mindswarms thing I asked them,
you know, what is, what kind of consent
have these people given? And I was shocked
at how broad it was. But, you know,
they’re an American company. Like,
they weren’t worried about it. And so people
have agreed to this. Like, um, by showing you their faces
on that screenshot, I did not violate
the consent they gave. They gave consent
to have it used for anything. Um, now, when I do a two hour
in-home interview with somebody and they’re on camera
the whole time telling me about
their personal financial life – I do a lot of financial work – uh, you know, they’ve agreed that that video is gonna be used
in clip form by the company. Now, I would prefer
to keep the originals myself, but some clients want them. So are you gonna go to- into a big fight
over giving them your, you know,
40 hours of video in original form? I have to think
that their ethical standards are, are as good as mine –
I sure hope they are. I remind them of that
when I turn over the data. But, um, it’s, it’s tricky,
it’s tricky. Um, I’ve done projects
where we knew at the beginning we wanted to use
the video footage to create training programs
for people, right? So we’re gonna, you know,
you’re giving me stuff, and we’re gonna use clips of you talking
in video-based training modules. Are you okay with that? Uh, you know, where are
the video training modules gonna be? Are those gonna be hosted
on a private company server, or is that gonna be on YouTube? Or- ’cause once,
you know, once it’s out there, it’s out there, right?
I mean, it’s, it’s gone. So yeah, yeah,
I think the standard, basically in some countries,
is you can’t show faces, which is easy to do in Premiere Pro
and similar tools. You can,
you can identify a face. I mean,
this is amazing technology, isn’t it? And so, you’re,
you’re in a video editing tool, you can put a circle
around a face, and the software
will follow that face, and keep that blurred circle over it,
even as it moves around. It does that all by itself, so. [Ricardo]
Ricardo Gomez-Insausti from Numeris. I’m glad
that the topic of privacy pop up because this is a topic
that effects many media, uh, companies, and having a meeting
with a privacy commissioner in Canada gives a different picture
of the reality. Uh, we are conducting a test,
and we can use, uh, return path data, the data
that come from television boxes. And let me tell you
that they are fully aware that many microsearched companies
do not comply. The policy is, if nobody complains,
they no- they don’t act. It’s very strange way of working at this very difficult
environment right now. [Susan]
Yes, yes I can totally see that. You know, we’re giving away
so much information online that we don’t even realize,
right? I think we’ve all had the experience of,
uh, you know, looking things up online, and, you know, on a different device,
suddenly the ads popping up. And you’re like, “Wait.
I was on Firefox on my desk, and now I’m on my iPad on Safari, and, you know, you’re showing me
that same thing at Staples? What the hell?” Uh, so, I, I don’t know. People are giving up a lot more
than they realize, I think. And, and, uh, you know,
we do those silly quizzes on Facebook, and, of course,
that’s sucking our data out too. Um, when are we going to object?
I don’t know. That’s, that’s a good question. I think it gets back
to the education levels. One of the best things we can do
is, is, uh, defend public education. We need smart people voting. Um, so yeah,
we have challenges, and, and not everybody
is falling the ethical codes because you’re not part
of the industry. Uh, it’s as simple as that.
And some people will leave. I have heard this dialogue too
from certain companies. They’ll leave the industry if they’re
forced to adhere to the codes. They just won’t be members anymore. It’s not illegal.
We just think it’s unethical. See, so we really aren’t fossils. There’s lots to talk about. [Josephine] I was gonna say
we can end it on, “What the hell?” And then continue that conversation
throughout the day. Does that sound good?
[Susan] Thank you. Thank you so much. [Josephine] Thank you so much, Susan.
[Susan] I really appreciate that. [applause] [Josephine]
But, um, now we wanna move on to another very much anticipated,
uh, part of the day. We know it’s always a, a highlight,
um, of the RAPP Forum. So just for those of you that
aren’t as familiar with the program, um, the RAPP students are with us
for two semesters in the classroom and then one semester
while they do their placement. During the time, uh,
that they’re in the scho- during the school year,
they form groups, and they complete
a major research project. So the posters that you’re seeing,
uh, out in the hallways and the foyers are the results
of those major research projects. So the students
selected their own topics, uh, with a little tiny bit of help
from faculty, designed a study, they’re now, you know,
been carrying out the study, collecting the data,
and analyzing it. Uh, four of the groups, uh, will be presenting,
uh, their research to you, uh, over the next hour or so. So the first group
that is going to be, uh, presenting, the study is called
“New Age of Mental Health – Post-secondary Students
Open as Towards Using Mental Health
Smartphone Applications.” And I’ll just let them
introduce themselves. [Veronica] Hello everyone.
My name is Veronica. And on behalf myself
and the rest of my team members, we would like to welcome
all of you today. Uh, today we’ll be going over
our major research project, uh, A New Age of Mental Health – Post-secondary Students
Open as Towards Using Mental Health
Smartphone Applications. Uh, to start things off, um, Ramzy will be go- going over
some background information, Heba will discuss
our quantitative piece, Ayelet will be going over
our qualitative portion, and Jelene will be talking
about our results more comprehensively, and finally,
I’ll be wrapping up. Thank you. [Ramzy]
So over time, we’ve gone from looking at
mental illness as an acute disease that only affects the afflicted
and those around them to something that affects a much broader
social and economic context. We understand that mental illness
to be a global issue, but for the purposes of our study, we’ve chose to focus on the demographic
of post-secondary students. We chose this population not only because
it’s personally relevant to each of us, being post-secondary
students ourselves, um, but also
because this population appears to be particularly vulnerable
to mental illness. A study that came out of Ontario
not too long ago showed that post-secondary students are far more likely
to report mental illness than those who did not go
to college or university. And having mental illness
in students relates to things
like poor academic performance, weaker interpersonal relationships,
um, substance abuse, and reduced hireability,
among many other negative outcomes And this is problematic,
because when you think about it, these people are going to be
the driving force in society in the next coming decades, and so it’s in our best interest
not only to help them with any issues
they may be harbouring, but also establish
effective preventative measures that deal with issues
before they become severe. Now it’s not all grim. A lot of schools have recognized
the need for mental health services. Schools like Western, U of T, Queen’s,
and our own Humber, all have services
that are available to students. However, when we conduct,
when we c- uh, consulted the literature, uh, realized that many students
who need these services are not seeking them out
citing fear discrimination in their academic
and professional careers as one of the main barriers. So this inspired our first part
of our research. We really wanted
to get a first hand account and understand
what Ontario students think about the mental health services
at their post-secondary institutions. Uh, specifically,
we wanna look at their knowledge of, attitudes towards,
and experiences with these services. Switching gears a little bit, we also have
a second component of our study. We wanted to really see
if we could increase the accessibility of services
while also with- dealing with barriers like stigma. And we thought smartphones
might be a good way to do this because smartphones
are incredibly prevalent nowadays and using them is not counter normative
to what people do in their daily lives. And we have some numbers
backing this up, but I just quickly wanna ask who here
has a smartphone on them right now? Okay. So yeah, given their popularity,
it seems pretty easy to see that these things may be used to,
to promote good mental health. Ha- and there are
mental health apps out there. However,
again when we consulted the literature, we found virtually
no formal research, uh, that evaluates
the efficacy of these apps. So this inspired
the second part of our research. Uh, we really wanted
to start from the beginning and see the if,
within our demographic, if there is a market that is open
to using mental health apps, uh, to promote, or sorry, smartphone apps
to promote mental health. Note that I’ll be handing
it off to Heba. [Heba]
So for our study, we used an online survey
to collect data. Um, the survey was sent out
to post-secondary students that were, um,
known to, uh, the researchers, as well as posted on various
social media, uh, platforms such as li- LinkedIn,
Facebook, Twitter. Uh, we also stood around
various locations on Humber Campus and asked students passing by
to complete our survey, and we used candy
as a small incentive. Um, to develop our survey,
we used the Q-Fi online software. And our survey consisted
of around 13 questions all pertaining to the perceptions
and attitudes that post-secondary students held about the counselling services
that currently exist at their post-secondary
institution, and also using mental health,
uh, smartphone based applications. So we were successfully able to collect
215 responses from our survey, and we found
a few interesting findings. Uh, firstly, we found
that a high proportion of students reported to being only
somewhat aware of the counselling services
that currently existed at their schools. Um, and also when asked, they stated that
they would have benefited from them. We also analyzed
the perceived barriers to accessing mental health
counselling services, and we f- unsurprisingly found that stigma was one of the most
frequently cited barriers to accessing counselling services. However, we also found that, uh,
most students stated that, students wanted to deal with, uh, their issues on their own
rather than seek help. And that was stated as one
of the most frequent, uh, barriers to counselling services. So importantly, we found
that students are overwhelmingly open to using, um, smartphone based
mental health applications. When looking at
the different features that students wanted to see
on these mental health apps, we consistently found
that students were looking for apps that, uh, provided them
with techniques to deal
with mental health problems such as meditational techniques
and breathing exercises. Also, they wanted advice and tips
on better mental wellbeing in general. They also wanted information
on mental health such as mental, uh, such as, uh, information
on different disorders and symptoms, and also information
on counselling services in their areas and how to access them. [Ayelet] So in addition
to conducting the online surveys, we also conducted, uh,
a total of five hour long, sorry, five focus group sessions,
each an hour long with the purpose of gathering
in-depth information on our topic. Now, in order to ensure that focus groups
were conducted in a consistent manner, we developed a moderator’s guy- guide
consisting of seven main questions, as well as three
pre-session exercises. So each focus group session began
with some icebreaker activities to ensure
the participants felt comfortable, to ensure that participants
felt comfortable in the group in sharing their experiences. And following this, the three ma- the seven main questions,
um, took place. And following the completion
of each focus group session, all, uh, sessions
were audio recorded, and subsequently transcribed
and analyzed for overarching trends,
patterns, and themes in participants’ responses. So in terms
of participants’ views towards the current services offered
at their post-secondary institution, participants felt that a huge benefit
of having the services on campus is that it increases accessibility
to services as well as it increases how convenient
it is to access the services, and it adds a level of anonymity. For example,
one participant stated, “People don’t really know
where to seek help, so having one in your school
definitely helps. People would be more comfortable,
like they would know where to go.” And in terms of the barriers, perceived barriers
that students saw to these services, there were two main ones. And the first one was
a fear of being stigmatized, both by fellow peers and other individuals
within the institutions, as well as a preference for dealing
with their issues on their own. For example,
one student stated, “I can take care of myself.
I take an advil. It’ll be fine. It’s almost the same
for mental health. You know,
it’s just a little bit of stress. I’ll deal with it,
just continue on with my day.” Now we also asked, “What are the type of features
that you would wanna see on an app?” as well as, “What is your openness
towards using these apps?” And a significant finding was that
students view mental health apps as needn’t to be used as a supplement
to in person mental health services. However, it can by no means replace
in person, face-to-face services. And a second noteworthy finding is that many students
perceived the app as a first step towards admitting
that you need help. So in that sense,
the app can serve to de-stigmatize accessing in-person services. [Jelene]
So the majority of our participants are not thoroughly familiar
with the services at their schools and are unsure of whether or not
it will benefit them at all. Um, so why is this? So when we looked at our, uh, feedback
that we got from our focus groups, we got was that students
perceived services at the school as a bit superficial. So they said things like,
yes, there are flyers, posters, and there are these events
that advertise for these services, but at the end of the day, quote unquote
one of the participants said, “Schools are just a business.” So students perceive this
as non-personal, and that deters them from accessing
help offered by the school. However, word of mouth
is much more effective in that it’s perceived to be, uh,
much more genuine and it works. Additionally,
as mentioned by Heba earlier, our survey uncovered
two other main reasons that students
don’t access these services, and that is stigma and because students prefer
to deal with issues on their own. Now shifting towards, um,
mental health apps, our data shows
that majority of students are open to using
these mental health smartphone app. ‘Cause when we asked if having apps
will make services more accessible, more than half
of our participants, um, or respondents,
claimed that, yes, it will. Linking this to what we found
in our focus group sessions, students propose having an app
that acts as a bridge towards, uh, counselling services. Specifically, an app that, uh, students want to see some sort of, uh,
connectivity with others, whether that be with, um,
other users or healthcare professionals. And they also wanted to see
various self-help techniques, so, like, um, uh, meditation
or breathing exercises, things that they can do on their own
so that they can get over the issues they’re going through. They also wanted various information
help- mental health information and information
about mental health services, like, nearby,
so where they can access these things. So just to reiterate, we learned that students
think the services at the school can be improved on
in terms of awareness and accommodating
to student needs. And from what we’ve gathered,
the students believe that using both smartphone applications
and face-to-face counselling would be more effective
than either one alone. [Veronica]
So as mentioned before, there is basically no,
no research out there examining mental health apps. We believe that this research will contribute to greater knowledge
of technology based counselling and improving access
to mental health services among post-secondary students. Getting input,
input directly from the students provides a first-hand account
of how we can effectively des- distribute halpt-
help to those who need it. Though our research
only examines post-secondary students, the findings get- can aid in further understanding
hard to reach populations such as individuals
living in remote areas, stigmatized individuals, and those who might be
more reluctant to seek help. The literature available
on mental health in general suggests that there are great social
and economic consequences associated with mental illness. We see providing mental health services,
uh, through every available avenue, whether technological
or traditional, as important to safeguarding our society
from these negative effects, and we hope that this research is the first step
in the right direction. Thank you. [applause] [Josephine]
Thank you so much. So I forgot to mention
that we will take questions, uh, at the end of each
of the student presentations. So if I can have my students, uh,
come up and grab the mics, and, uh, if there’s any questions,
if you just wanna raise your hand and we’ll come over with a,
with a mic. There’s one there. [man] Excellent work, guys.
Uh, very well done. In terms of the anonymity, did, uh, privacy concerns,
uh, also did that come up? Is that part of the anonymity side
that you guys have talked about? [Ramzy]
[indistinct] So the, uh, features graph
that was up there that, unfortunately,
did not have all the titles that we put in there on there, um, did have a section
for anonymity. And that was brought up a lot
in the open ended questions where users could type in
what they would want to see in the app. And it actually fell
about half way between, like, the most
and the, the least requested, so it was around the middle path. But, uh, that and transparency
were both there. [man]
Very… Hello? [laughter] Okay, very interesting topic.
Very, uh, timely as well. I’m curious,
were all of the respondents active Humber students, and how representative was the sample
in terms of things like gender and age, the overall population? [Heba] Um, so basically,
because we used an online survey, uh, we got respondents
not only from Humber Campus, but also
from other post-secondary institutions. Um, so yes, because it was,
there was also an intercept piece to it there were a lot
of Humber students involved. As far as gender was concerned, uh, we didn’t really have control
over that too much. But I believe that our data
was a little bit more female heavy. So I think that, I th-
maybe around, if I can remember,
it was 60 percent female. But, yeah. [Ramzy]
Uh, and for age, we, we just asked
if you had been enrolled or graduated in the last two years.
[Heba] And they were all over 18. [man] Great, uh, thank you, folks.
Wonderful presentation. Um, an- and such
a huge topic as well. One question I had,
and this might have been out of scope, uh,
for your project was, did you have any
of your respondents comment on whether or not they use
some of the helplines, not necessarily an app, but for example, uh,
the post-secondary helpline, the Good2Talk helpline, those are services
for post-secondary students with, uh, with mental health issues,
or, or academic concerns. Any, any comment on that? [Ayelet] So, essentially,
across all five focus group sessions, it was a repeated theme
that kept emerging. People want a hotline or a helpline feature
included in the app. However, there was no-
not much of a mention made to h- if students were accessing
these helplines already. But there was a huge consensus that that’s a feature
that they wanna see included. [woman] Wonderful presentation.
Thank you very much. As a college administrator,
this is the kind of information that helps us
really to move forward on initiatives. So echoing on the question
that was just asked, did you ask your respondents
if they had been using any apps already for self-help purposes? [Ramzy] Um, we actually didn’t really
want to get into what they were doing s- in terms of their services
and them accessing. Um, we essentially only asked if they had ever experienced
the services at their school. Um, but because
it is a sensitive topic, we really didn’t want to pry too deeply
into that respect. Um, so yeah. [man]
So, uh, as one of the barriers of the reasons why they’re not, um,
accessing the services on campus, you didn’t ask them whether they are accessing
any of these services off campus? Or whether, um, they’re on
any sort of medication or anything, like treating it
through other means? [Heba] So, um, we were mainly
interested in the counselling services that schools can provide
in their institution because i- it is something,
it’s a service that is provided, uh, by most pec-
post-secondary institutions. We didn’t want to pry too much
into the personal, um, details of whether people
are accessing them, whether they’re taking medications
outside of school or anything like that. Just because we wanted to keep it
a little bit low risk. [Ramzy]
Um, also in the focus groups, some people volunteered
that information. We didn’t necessarily,
like, ask them for it. Uh, but we did hear some things
about people’s personal experiences with services outside of schools
or even, in some cases, medication. [Josephine]
You wanna add something? [laughter] [Heba] So I just remembered
that from our study, we also had an “other” option, and when I was coding,
um, that f- option, some of the people did say that they didn’t access
the services in school because they were seeing people outside,
so that’s just, yeah. [Josephine] Okay, thank you so much
for a great presentation. Thanks guys. [applause] So the next group has,
uh, tackled the topic of Online Sports Betting –
A Psychographic Profile. [Senay] ‘Kay.
First and foremost, I want to thank
everybody who came to support us
and support the RAPP program. So fellow students, uh,
RAPP faculty, future employers. So I’m hoping that
by the end of this presentation, you’ll have a better understanding
of our topic. So before we actually
get into the topic, I’ll quickly introduce
the rest of my members. So over here,
we have Nick, Haley, Dhilip, and Randy. Collectively, we make up SBRG –
Sports Betting Research Group. But we also have an unofficial
sixth member, Betting Bob. And Bob is gonna to help us
on this presentation, and we’ll talk about him
a little bit later. So over the past six months,
we’ve been working together to collect, uh, triangulated,
quantitative, and qualitative data in an attempt to create
a psychographic profile of the prototypical Canadian male
online sports better. Our profile encompasses
the personalities, values, opinions, attitudes, interests,
and betting habits of Canadian males
between the ages of 21 and 35 who bet on online sports. For hundreds of years,
people have been wagering on the outcomes
of various games and events. And today, that activity
increasingly takes place online. The online betting market actually represents
one of the fastest growing segments in the betting industry. And as avid sports betters,
we settled on this topic initially because we were interested at looking
at how online sports betters view themselves
versus how society views them. As we know, generally speaking,
online betters, uh, or online betting in general, is linked to problem gambling
or degenerate gambling. But from there
we kind of morphed our research topic. And we wanted to look, or have a holistic look
at online betters to give us,
as well as you, a better understanding
of who makes up the four billion dollars
per year industry, and that’s just in Canada alone. So our target population is males, and we chose this specifically
because they make up 80 percent of the betting market. And we chose 21 to 35 as the age range
because this is also the age range where, uh,
people will bet on sports online. And as we go through various parts
of our presentation, we will focus on a different aspect
of Betting Bob. And as we view on the various parts
of his physique, it is a metaphorical representation of us building our project
from the ground up. With that being said,
I’m gonna to pass it to Nick, and he’s gonna talk about
our qualitative methodology as well as our findings. [Nick] [clears throat]
So hi. My name is Nick, and I will be discussing
the qualitative portion of our major research project. So we ran three asynchronous
online focus groups to find the motivations
behind why participants engage in online sports betting as well as to uncover
any determining factors that they make take into consideration
when placing a wager. The online focus groups
ran for a duration of five days and consisted of five participants
and one moderator per group. Seven questions were put forth
by the moderators, and participants could answer
at their own leisure. They were also encouraged to comment
and interact with other participants as if they were taking part
in an online forum. So two researchers
transcribed and analyzed the discussions
from the online focus groups. Uh, the results revealed 15 themes
consisting of 6 primary themes and 9 secondary themes. A primary theme had to appear
in all three groups. Additionally, for a theme
to be categorized as primary, it had to occur in the top ten most frequently occurring themes
in each group and it had to be identified by both researchers
during the coding process. Two of the primary themes
were further broken down and analyzed to reveal seven elements
that participants take into account when placing a wager. Uh, these were found by… Sorry, um… These themes had to occur
in all three focus groups, um, it had to be transcribed, or had to be transcribed
by both researchers, um, during the coding process, and they had to occur
at least twice in each group. So as we can see,
there’s more to online sports betting than simply
choosing the winning team. And as one participant put it, “I see no real difference
between an informed sports gambler and an informed stock broker. They both are doing essentially
the same task. They seek data that can help them
make a more informed decision on chance. The primary difference
is that one is socially acceptable because it is legal, and the other
is pushed to the black market by dated
and frankly uninformed laws.” With that,
I’m gonna pass you off onto Haley, who’s going to discuss
the quantitative portion of our major research project. [Haley] Hi guys.
Uh, so thanks, Nick. Uh, as Nick said,
my name is Haley, and I’m about to discuss
the quantitative portion of our project. So sorry about that. Um, so in our, in the quantitative
portion of our survey, uh, we ran an online survey, uh,
which encompassed 25 questions that were broken down
into two parts. Um, questions that were
specifically related to, uh, betting habits of our participants and then
another section that focused specifically on questions
that you would find in a standard psychographic profile,
uh, survey. Um, so those would
encompass questions like, “What do you choose to do
in your leisure, uh, your leisure time?” And,
“What kinds of life goals, uh, might you have
in the next six to twelve months?” Um, and a couple other questions
like that, uh, that examine the motivations,
lifestyles, and attitude of our, uh, target population. Um, we had approximately
a ten percent completion rate, which is pretty much standard
for online. And in total,
we had just over two hundred uh, respondents
complete our survey, which, um, we-
which was great for us considering we didn’t actually
offer an incentive to complete our survey
or to participate in any of our subsequent
online focus groups. Um, so after we, uh,
collected our data, we dumped it into SPSS,
cleaned it, and coded it, myself and one other researcher, um,
and beyond running basic frequencies and measures of central tendency, we also actually did
wind up clustering our data using a two step cluster process
in SPSS in order to, uh,
find two distinct clusters of, uh, betters
that came from our respondents – people that bet for excitement
and people that bet for monetary value. Um, so while we’re not exactly
discussing our clustering, uh, in this particular presentation, if you want to learn more about it,
uh, you can come and find us. Although, essentially what we found
is that those that bet for excitement, um, generally spend less money and less time
researching sports betting, um, and they spend more money
on other leisure activities. Uh, whereas, those that bet
for monetary value spend a little bit more time and money
on sports betting and spend less time, uh, focusing
on other leisure activities. Um, but what
we are gonna focus on today is who exactly is Bob. Uh, so Bob comprises
of some overarching, uh, trends that we found in our data. Um, and I’m gonna start off
by talking about, uh, some of his lifestyle preferences. So to begin with,
uh, this is Bob. Uh, Bob likes variety
and really dislikes repetition. Um, as Nick was suggesting,
uh, Bob likes excitement in his life so much so that he’s generally
willing to do things like invest in the stock market
and take on other risky propositions. Um, and as Nick was saying,
one of our focus group, uh, participants even alluded to the fact
that he really doesn’t see a difference between himself and an online, uh,
and… and an informed stockbroker. Um, the second thing, uh,
that we found commonly is that Bob does not
consider himself to be religious. Uh, but he may consider himself
to be spiritual. Um, and that might be because religion,
uh, i- relies on a very, uh, dogmatic and overly repetitive principles,
which Bob doesn’t like. But spirituality is based
on compounding intellectual information in order to achieve enlightenment. And something that Bob does value
is his intellect. Um, Bob is not a very big fan
of major brands and brand preferences as he doesn’t follow the latest
fashions and trends, which is interesting considering that,
uh, afterwards, Dhilip is going to talking to you
a little bit about what betting websites
Bob does like to bet on. And the two major ones
that he likes to bet on are Bodog and Bet365, um, which are the two
most major, uh, betting websites. However, uh, what we did glean from Bob
is that he likes those betting websites simply because, uh, they actually offer
the easiest methods of transactions for withdrawals and, uh,
and deposits into his account. And, uh,
because they’re trustworthy. But that mostly comes
from friend recommendations, not necessarily from the advertisements,
uh, that they may or may not run. Um, lastly, uh,
Bob doesn’t necessarily know how much money is in his bank account
at any given time, uh, but he does feel
that borrowing money makes him feel uncomfortable,
which is, uh, generally, uh, conclusive with the rest of our studies on, on non, uh, addictive
or recreational gamblers. So I’m gonna pass it off to Dhilip,
and he’s going to talk to you a little bit about, uh,
Bob’s betting habits. [Dhilip]
So Haley gave you an overview of Bob. I’m gonna talk about
his betting habits. So Bob is most likely
to bet on Bet365 and Bodog. These are the sites that he likes. So what he does is he spends
two hours a week researching sports – sports related news, box scores,
anything sports related, talk shows. And the thing he do-
he does this… The reason for that
is he wants his money to be safe, he’s interested in sports, and he wants to be knowledgeable
on the sports he bets on. So after serious,
this serious two hours of research, he’s gonna bet on four sports. These are the ones he’s gonna bet on –
basketball, American football, hockey and baseball. The three days that he likes to bet
are Friday, Saturday, and Sunday. Part of the reason for this is
he likes to relax when he wants to bet. And this- these are his days off. But also a lot of sporting events
do take place on the weekends. This is especially true
for the NFL season. So Bob likes to bet one-
he makes individual bets. So he makes one to five
bets per week. He also bets, um…
And Bob works hard. So when he receives his paycheque, he bets
about one to four percent of his monthly income
on online sports betting. Un- he also likes to bet, he bets around 1 to 50 dollars a week
on his bets. The thing about Bob is he likes to prefer
betting before the game, not during the actual game,
’cause this is when he like to relax and watch
and see if his predictions came true. And the mediums he uses for betting
are his ta- his mobile phone, his laptop,
his desktop computer. And he is comfortable
using these technologies. Also Bob, he likes to watch the game
from his house and also at his friend’s house. When it comes to betting,
he mostly prepares to bet from his house and also at times,
he will bet from his friend’s house. And these
are Bob’s betting habits. Um, if you want anymore stats,
you can come to our, um, poster, and we’ll go more into detail
on the stats. And these are Bob’s betting habits. Um, now Randy
will talk about preferences. [Randy]
My name’s Randy, and I’ll be talking
about Bob’s preferences. Um, Bob loves Italian food. And growing up
in an Italian household, it’s kind of hard
not to like their food. So he l- he loves it. He also enjoys family outings such as going on weekly visits
with his family, going out to family dinners,
and he also likes to go to neighbouring cities
to visit his cousins. He also likes to play cards
and watch the occasional movie, just to sit at home and relax. He also enjoys
surfing the internet. In our research, it was discovered
that 51 percent of respondents occasionally like to watch movies
and 86 percent of respondents say they enjoy
surfing the internet. He had a strong love
for hip-hop music, his favourite artists are Vanilla Ice
and 2 Chainz, and also, and he also loves
all comedy related movies. When it comes to sports,
his favourites, his favourites to watch
are basketball, but he also likes to watch
hockey and football as he grew up playing these sports,
he has a strong love for them. Um, he- Bob doesn’t like to partake
in art galleries, live theatres,
or museums because they just simply
just don’t interest him. Accor- according to our results,
it was also known that 76 percent of our respondents
said that they don’t parti- they rarely or don’t partake
in these, um, events at all. Um, also Bob doesn’t-
Bob has no plan to make any life, life changing purchases
in the next twelve months. So this includes buying a house,
buying a car, buying a laptop,
or even buying a new phone. This is an important factor
as it allows Bob to have more, to have more, more choice and selection
in what he can spend his money on. Uh, Bob has, uh… Sorry. Bob spends between 150
and 300 dollars a month on leisurely activities
because he enjoys going out, and he enjoy-
he lives a very exciting lifestyle. He falls into another norm,
as 34 percent of our respondents spend the same amount of…
spend the same amount per month. These statistics show
that Bob doesn’t differ much from our average responses
from our survey. So this is why we consider Bob
as the average better. Through this presentation,
we’ve given you insight on what the average better is
through our analysis of Bob. We’ve discussed his likes,
his dislikes, his values, and his opinions
all through, all of which are based off our
qualitative and quantitative results. We’ve also provided you with some,
with some statistics from our, our survey. So if you need more information,
please come to our booth afterwards. For the betters in the audience,
we hope this information h- will help you become more successful
in your betting and also helps you bet more s-
um, responsibly. For the non-betters,
we hope that we, we’ve given you a better insight of what
the average online gambler looks like and takes away
from the negative perceptions that h- that are on
online gambling. Thank you. [audience applause] [man]
Testing, testing, testing. [Susan] I’m curious how you, uh,
found your online betters, and how you convinced people
to participate for no incentive. That feels like a great opportunity
for us here. [audience laughter] [Haley] So, uh, we, we weren’t allowed,
actually, to offer an incentive because it was considered
an ethical implication. Um, and the way that we found betters
was, uh, mostly through online, but because all of us, uh,
bet on, on ourselves. So we started with our friends
and bullied them, uh, into, into doing the survey. Uh, and luckily for us,
they, they sent it, uh, out and around to people. But if you can believe it,
so the largest forum in the world is a forum called Two Plus Two, um, and it’s specifically
a poker gambling website. Um, but it- they have
a large section for sports as well. And there’s a couple million people
that traffic the site per day. Um, so spamming that,
uh, helped us, uh, or posting nicely,
I should say, helped us… helped us obtain
a large enough sample size. But we, we did actually,
as a group, encounter, uh, we, we did feel
that not offering an incentive was really tough for us
because a lot of times, people would get
about halfway through the survey and then they would just
kinda quit out, uh, on it. But, I think,
mostly it helps that a lot of the people
that participate in this are really interested in research. So it was,
they were making a commitment to do it. [man] Well done, guys.
Is, uh, Bob making money or losing money
based on his betting habits? [Nick]
So because we were, um, focusing mostly on building
a psychographic profile, we decided
not to ask specifically on the, uh, the profits
or losses of the betters. Um, focused mainly on just what they like to do
outside of betting, um, the preferences for food,
and, and so on and so forth. So we didn’t actually
ask them specifically how much
they would have won or lost. But one of the themes that did pop up
in the online focus groups is that they do like to bet online,
um, to make a profit. [Samantha Robinson] Hi there.
Samantha Robinson from Environics. Um, a question
kind of tying to that would be, what did you find
to be their motivation? If it wasn’t money, would you say
that it was maybe just a past time? Or was it something like more risky
for them to do? [Nick] Yeah. So, um,
the other motivations that were added in is that it makes the event
that they’re watching more exciting. Um, it was a social thing to do, so they often got together
with friends. Um, they like
to bet between each other and kind of, you know, um,
be the person who says, you know, I’m the one who made the correct bet
on say your NCAA pools, which I’m sure
are going great so far. [woman] Hi, guys.
Thank you so much for that. Um, when you were developing
a psychographic profile of Betting Bob and, you know, what he likes,
what he dislikes, did you find any, how is he different
from your average young man? ‘Cause when you say
he doesn’t like museums, or, you know, some things
that he likes and dislikes, it sounds a lot like what you would
expect from a young man. Um, were there any differences at all,
or were they just, they’re pretty much the same? [Haley]
Um, so, uh, something, something surprising
that we found is that, uh, I think the,
the more surprising end of that is really actually how many young men
do, uh, do bet online. Um, because, yes,
that’s essentially exactly, uh, exactly what you’re,
what you’re describing. Um, I think one anomaly
that we did find is that Bob
is actually very family oriented. Um, and he,
uh, the amount of respondents we had that said they were
either planning on getting engaged or becoming a parent
in the next six months to a year was actually quite high. Um, and also,
the number of times that Bob claims that he goes out
on family outings or actually enjoys family outings
is quite high as well. So that may be slightly less typical
for your, your prototypical, like, your prototypical male. Um… Yeah, that’s probably the biggest,
the biggest anomaly that stands out. But I, I do think on the other,
on the other end of the spectrum that what is kind of interesting, is just how big of an industry
this is, and how little
it’s actually talked about. But, uh, it does impact
a lot of young men. So that’s probably
how w- Bob got to that profile. [audience applause] [Josephine]
Thank you. So it’s always a good idea to, um, find a topic that’s close
to your teacher’s heart and go ahead and choose that
as your, uh, research topic, right? That’s a little inside, uh,
information there. So this group, um,
looked at coffee, which is something
that I quite enjoy. But I’m sure that’s not why
they chose the topic. I find students,
almost every year, I think, we’ve had a project
somehow having to do with coffee. So coffee’s very important
to student life. Um, but this topic specifically looks,
this project specifically looks at, uh, coffee, uh, beverage pods. So the study is How Do You Brew?
A Beverage Pod Study. [Natalia]
Good morning fellow classmates, industry professionals,
and faculty. So as you may know, the theme for today’s forum
is tried and true, bold and new. And we really think that we’ve captured
this theme with our project. As we look at the bold and new
subject area of beverage pods, while still using tried and true methods
throughout the research design. So I’ll begin by talking about
the background of our study. And this will be followed
by my colleagues Stefanie and Mitch, who’ll be talking about
the methodologies used. And then, Mitch will lead this
into the qualitative analysis, and Tammy will talk about
the quantitative results. Finally, we have our fabulous team lead,
Nicole, who’ll be talking about
some of the insights that have resulted
from this study. Additionally, we have started
a conversation on Twitter. And that’s with the hashtag
RAPPpods. So please feel free to join in
and tweet out any thoughts or opinions you may have
on this subject. Alright,
so let’s talk trash. So our team got together
because we are passionate about the issue
of too much garbage. Specifically, we began looking
into the usage of beverage pods. And as we started to look into
some of the literary review, we came across
some staggering numbers. Um, first of all, such as
the widely cited sastis- statistic that originally came from the author
Murray Carpenter in his book Caffeinated, which estimated that in 2014,
enough K-Cups were sold that if placed end to end,
they would circle the globe 10.5 times. That’s a lot of garbage. Additionally, these past few years
have seen a rise in household ownership of these beverage pod machines. And so nearly 40 percent
of households in Canada actually own these machines. Even John Sylvan,
the inventor of the K-Cups, kind of regrets it. And when he was interviewed,
he was noted to say, “I feel bad sometimes
that I ever did it.” However,
there have been recent developments that do indicate a shift to address
these environmental concerns. And so for one,
the city of Hamburg this year, actually banned coffee pods
from all state run buildings. And this is an initiative
to address see- re- to reduce waste. Additionally, Keurig Green Mountain
reported a decline in sales by nearly 20 percent
in the Canadian market for last year, indicating that Canadian sentiment
towards pods actually may be shifting. So we really wanted
to explore this issue further. And to look into
this dirty little secret. The dirty little secret being
that we know they create excessive amounts of waste. We want to reduce waste,
and yet we continue to use them. And so we also believe
many consumers consider themselves
environmentally friendly, and they engage in gring-
in green behaviours, but continue to use
disposable pods. And so we really wanted
to know why. Especially because there are
sustainable options out there. And some of these sustainable options
include recyclable, which are recyclable pods
which can actually be taken apart. And you take the plastic cup
away from the aluminum lid, and you can even compost
some of the grounds. There’s also biodegradable, which can be composted
and fully break down. And lastly,
there’s reusable cups, which are compatible
with some of the machines, and you can even use
some of your own coffee grounds. So if these options are available,
why continue to use disposable pods? Why do they remain so popular? And this leads us
to our research question. What factors contribute
to consumer’s decisions to use single serve beverage pods rather than more environmentally
friendly ones? And with this question in mind,
we set out to explore the issue, and we began to design our study. And now, I pass it on to my colleague,
Stefanie, who will discuss the, the d-
the study’s research design. [Stefanie] Okay.
So for our research design, our study focused on
method triangulation. So this was done
by using intercept surveys, online surveys,
with the thanks to Q-Fi for helping us
and supporting us, um, as well as focus groups. So we decided to do
the method triangulation technique for three core reasons. The first reason
was for internal consistency. So by using
these different methods, we were able
to reach different audiences. But we also found that our data
for all three methods generally said the same thing. So this helps
to validate our results. The second reason why we chose
to triangulate our methods was to answer both what and why. So as we will discuss shortly, our surveys provided us
with baseline statistical data, and our focus groups allowed us to explore peoples’ opinions
more in depth. And lastly, since we are all
student researchers at this point, We wanted to test the waters
of different tried and true methods for practice and to help augment
our professional development in both qualitative
and quantitative analyses. So our intercept
and online surveys. Um, one reason why
we did two forms of our survey, so both paper and online, was just to reach
as much of an audience as possible. So both of our surveys
had the exact same format and question order. Um, so there wasn’t anything
really different about them. But we just wanted different ways
to access our sample. Intercept surveys were recruited
at Humber campuses. So here at Lakeshore
as well as the North Campus. And online surveys
were recruited through social media such as Facebook, Twitter,
Instagram, and LinkedIn. With this,
we had a total of 353 participants, all of which were recruited, um,
to be 18 years of age or older and use beverage pods
at least once per week. So the content of our survey. We had 15 questions, which can be grouped
into three general categories. The first category is demographics. So we wanted to just learn
who our sample represents in terms of age, gender,
their household income, and so forth. We also asked
about their buying preferences, behaviours,
and attitudes towards beverage pods. So we ask, such as, um,
which brand they prefer and how they make their decisions. So do people prefer one brand
because of the price or because it’s fair trade? Um, we also looked at factors
such as recommendation, um, taste,
as well as convenience. And lastly, we looked into
their environmental tendencies, um, both in terms
of the beverage pods themselves. So how are they disposing
their beverage pods? Do they go in the recycle? Or the garbage?
Or do they use reusable pods? And we also looked at
environmental tendencies in general, such as if respondents are bringing their own, um,
grocery bags to the store, um, just to see their environmental
tendencies in that way. Um, so in the grand scheme
of our survey, we wanted to approach participants
with a main, um, question in mind. And rather than asking them politely,
“How do you do?” We asked them,
“How do you brew?” And this is a question
which we continued to explore in our focus groups. [Mitch] Moving on
to the qualitative methodology, we chose to run focus groups. So we had three
focus groups sessions, each consisting
of five participants. And they were held between
February 13th and 20th. Uh, the location was
the Centre of Social Innovation at Bloor and Bathurst
in downtown Toronto. We found that
with a lot of our surveys, we were doing a lot
of intercept sampling on campus. So we were attempting
to diversify the age and the geographic location
of our population. Uh, for recruitment, we recruited our mem-
our participants through Facebook. So advertising through our own fers-
personal Facebook accounts, as well as posting on general
Facebook groups that we were members of, using both convenience
and snowball sampling. Um, mem-
participants were notified beforehand and signed consent forms. They were also notified that they could
leave the study at any time, and the compensation
was ten dollar Starbucks cards, given the theme of coffee. So going into the focus groups, for discussing points,
we were looking at four key themes. The first is the reasons
for using the beverage pods. Why they used, um,
the Keurigs, the Tassimos, Nespressos over the traditional
brewing methods. Um, the second,
is the disposal method of the pods. We were curious, uh, as to if people were just
throwing them in the garbage, attempting to recycle, or even using the alternative pods
mentioned previously. Uh, the third,
we were looking at marketing strategies. So how participants, uh,
came about knowing new brands, how they selected their brands,
and preferences, and if these marketing strategies
could possibly be adopted to the newer alternative,
uh, pods. And the last, we asked participants
just about recent news. So such as the new
Keurig KOLD machine that’s coming out, and the Hamburg,
uh, article banning pods that Natalia previous mentioned. So in terms
of our preliminary qualitative results, uh, shockingly we found
that most participants noted that the pods were cost effective. So what I mean by this is if you were to buy
a package of ten pods for ten dollars, most, uh, said that was cheaper
than going to a coffee shop and getting, uh,
for the same price of ten dollars, only five coffees. Not one participant noted
that you could, in the old fashioned,
traditional brewing methods, that you could still go,
and for ten dollars, get a tin of coffee grounds where you could brew
about 80 coffees for the same price. Um, in terms of disposal,
no shock there, uh, the dominant theme was,
uh, was disposing of the garbage. There were a few
that attempted to recycle, such as Tim Hortons pods
have an option where you can remove the filter
from the plastic pod and recycle the pod, but most, uh, described that
as annoying, cumbersome. Uh, apparently the filters,
they rip everywhere making a mess, so it was not convenient at all. Um, also, not shockingly, convenience was the major factor
for using, uh, the beverage pod systems. Most noted in their morning routine how they wanted
just a quick coffee to go. Also, the convenience
of only brewing one at a time as opposed to wasting
a general pot. Uh, surprisingly,
in terms of brand, most noted that, uh,
roast and flavour selection were more important
than brand loyalty. So they were more curious
as to if you offered light roast, dark roast, your French vanillas,
your cinnamon infusions, as opposed to, uh,
the tried and true coffee shops that they currently go to. Um, and the final conclusion,
uh, we came to in terms of news, surprisingly
most were fairly receptive of the Hamburg article
noting the ban on beverage c- pods. Uh, participants noted
that they were in no way, shape, or form tied emotionally to the machines. They constantly stated they knew
it was bad for the environment, but they still, uh, used it ’cause they justified their
environmental behaviours elsewhere, and would be open
if Toronto was to c- was to consider such a, uh,
a ban being implemented. And just down below,
we have a word cloud, ’cause we generated, um. All of our transcripts,
they were coded using a set of 23 codes. And using HyperRESEARCH,
we generated this cloud. Um, this can be seen in further detail
down at our poster, downstairs below. And we will move on
to the quantitative results. [Tammy]
So from our surveys, we found that nearly three quarters
of our participants actually use the machine at home, whether it’s only at home,
or a combination of home and work. And this is kind of surprising considering that this was a machine
that was found only at work, and then we’re seeing a shift
going towards the household as Natalia mentioned earlier. Um, when looking at
our demographics, we found that over half our sample
were between the ages of 18 to 30, and two thirds of our group
was actually female. Um, we also noted that
in terms of education level, we had a very highly educated
set of sample. Over 70,
nearly 70 percent of our sample had completed
their undergraduate studies in some shape or form. And this could have happened
for a couple reasons. One, our intercept surveys
were only done on campuses, so rather
than any other public places, like grocery stores, or shopping malls,
or anything like that. Um, additionally,
we only posted our survey online through social media. So only really the tech savvy, or really
through our sampling methods of using convenience
and snowball came to play, which may have effected
the age group that we had. Our samples were also asked about
what they considered as important when choosing a beverage pod. We compared people
who were using it currently… Oh wait, that’s the other way.
[laughs] Anyways, so,
in terms of our current pods, uh, we found that, not surprisingly,
looking at our focus group results, taste and price were the main factors
with brand trailing behind. And when compared to reasons
that people may change their brand, um, or different pods, once again price
and beverage flavour were the main reasons
why they would do it. But this time they shifted towards
more recyclable and biodegradable. When we take a look at disposal methods
of beverage pods specifically, uh, not surprisingly,
most people put them in the garbage. So about 60 percent did that. And reflecting also
with what was said during focus groups how recycling was viewed
as impractical, cumbersome, not surprisingly,
only 15 percent of people actually recycled it. What we did also find
was that most people who did recycle it were people
who used the machine at work. And this could have been
partly attributed to corporate, um,
recycling programs that were found
where, uh, the machines… company where
they make the machines bring in people
to dispose of the, uh, pods. And with that,
we came to a few insights. [Nicole]
Sorry. [laughs] There we go. Okay, so because of the way
that our sample was composed, our results aren’t really generalizable
to the larger public. As Tammy was saying,
we had, um, a sample that had a lot of females
and not males, and a lot of people
that were heavily educated. Um, but based on our sample
and our data, we did have a few insights
for companies that are looking to bring
environmentally friendly pods to market. So first and foremost,
to be successful, an eco pod would really have to be every bit as convenient
as a regular disposable pod. So this would have to be something that consumers can put in
their beverage pod machine, chuck into the waste
when they’re done, and not have
any additional hassle or clean up, um, that’d we’d seen with
some of the current pods on the market. And because of this, we thought that
the most efficient design would be a biodegradable pod. Now an eco friendly pod would also have to be comparable
in price to a regular pod. The people we spoke with
were extremely price sensitive, and we found that,
in general, anything between the two
to three dollar increase per pack would be something that people
just would not decide to purchase. A successful eco pod would also have to be
comparable in taste to regular pods, and as well as be available in a variety
of different flavours and roasts. And in addition to this,
it would have to be compatible with several different machines,
if possible, but definitely
at least with the Keurig since this is still where the majority
of people are using, both at home and at work,
to brew their coffee. Above all,
we would just really need a generalized, uh, increase
in the marketing effort. One of the things we found
is so many people just don’t know that these environmentally friendly pods
do already exist to a certain degree. Um, so one thing would just be simply
labeling the pod clearly on the box, that it is something you can recycle
or biodegrade. Darn it. Sorry. Where do I click on this?
Is it to the side? I think so. I’m so sorry.
[laughs] Okay. So continuing on
with our social insights. Now we know
that most people do recycle. But despite this,
most pods, even those that are recyclable
or compostable, end up in the trash. And one of the things
that our data showed was that pods just aren’t seen as being
part of the normal recycling culture. And as one of our focus group
participants mentioned, pods are just the exception to the general rule
of recycling culture. So the solution for this,
for a social campaign, would to just be making environmentally friendly pods
and proper disposal the norm and create some of those
general social pressures that exist
around regular products. As well, we definitely recommend,
of course, further research be done
into the subject, and using a larger,
more diverse sample that was more representative
of the general public would be a great way start, as well as, perhaps,
looking at some of those niche groups, so people that already are using
resuable pods, recyclable pods,
and compostable pods, and people
that are also using them properly, and looking into seeing, you know,
why they’re doing what they’re doing and how they’ve come
to make these decisions might give companies
further insight. And another thing we found
while we were doing our study is we thought, if possible,
it would be neat to broaden it up
to a larger audience. So not to just look at people
who were using pods, but people who aren’t using them
and say “Why not?” and see if there was any sort of environmentally friendly initiative
on the market, if this is something
that would consider- make them consider switching. So that wraps our presentation. And just wanna say again thank you very much
for coming and listening. And at this point, we would welcome
any questions from the audience. Thank you. [audience applause] [woman]
Hi, um, great job. Uh, just wondering
if you saw a behavioural difference between, uh, use in the home
versus use at work. Did people’s perceptions
and behaviours change in the different environments as to how they would use K-cu-
K-cups? Yeah. [Natalia]
So one of the things we found was the participants that noted
they used it at work, it’s really
just because it’s there, it’s available, um,
they really don’t have any other choice, and so it’s really
just the convenience factor, versus, uh,
those that use it at home, um, they either went out to get it,
but also they note, a lot of participants noted that it was either a gift
or something that it was given to them, but definitely the availability
of having it at work is the primary factor
for using it at work. [Nicole]
And just to add a little bit to that we also found that disposal method
was linked to work and home use as well. So in one of our focus groups, we had one person talking about
how they use a reusable pod, and how simple it is to simply
knock the thing against a garbage and all the grinds fall out,
and then they maybe rinse it off, and they can,
you know, use it again. Whereas at work,
some person said that they didn’t even have a sink
for their kitchen, so something like that
just wouldn’t be taken up. And that generally,
if there was, um, for example,
a place to just put them in the garbage, even if it was recyclable,
they would put it in the garbage rather than maybe themselves
taking it back to the store to recycle. [woman] Okay, um,
I just have a question about your lit review. If you came across something, um, you recommended
labeling the products as eco friendly. Do you find, like,
did you find something that there might be a barrier
for companies, like, very strict requirements
to label these beverage pods as environmentally friendly
or biodegradable? [Nicole]
Yeah, actually, one article we read that was really interesting, um, was talking about not pods
but Nespresso coffee, and they, of course,
do make the pod machines as well. So they had implemented their own, um, not for biodegradable,
but a fair trade and organic standard. And they actually
came up with their own. So instead of going with a company that was already registered
to do this for them, they came up with their own program
and generated their own label. And the results from that study said that people
actually were very trusting of that, and they thought that it functioned
just as well as a regular, um, seal from an external company. So I’m not sure how that would work
with biodegradability, but I think it’s definitely
something that, I mean, if a company wanted to say it
and had their own standard, I don’t see why
they couldn’t do that. [woman]
Hi. Um, uh, I found it really interesting,
uh, about the, sort of, uh, difference in people’s behaviour
about using, um, reusable pods versus, um, just throwing them out
in the garbage when they’re at work. Um, do you think that
the sort of social norms of what everyone else around, uh, at work is doing,
uh, would influence that, or do you think
it’s just a matter of convenience? [Mitch]
Yeah, we think, um, social and societal pressures
definitely played a factor. Um, most noted at work
that it was kind of, wasn’t their responsibility
even per se, it was, you know,
someone else’s. Um, quite a few participants… Actually, it was shocking, ’cause even though
you have to take the pods out and administer them each time, some believed that they were
just sucked into the machine, and that it was taken care
of that way. Um, so yeah,
so I guess on that, it, it all, a few talked about that, um,
some of their work places had environmental
recycling programs in place, where, um, every few weeks
a, uh, a company would come in, collect all the empty pods,
and go off and recycle them that way. Um, but for the most part, it was pretty much
out of sight out of mind policy. [Josephine] Okay, thank you very much.
Great job, guys. [audience applause] I bet you the person
who leaves a pod behind ’cause they think
it magically gets sucked in is very popular
in their workplace, right? So the last student presentation,
um, has to do with food. So that was either
a good idea right before lunch, or particularly cruel,
we’re not sure. Um, where’s my group? [laughs] So… We’ll just let them come up here. So this group looked at, uh,
3D food printing. I don’t think any of the food today
was created using a 3D machine, but, uh, Paula,
do you know anything about that? No? No. Okay. Um, so 3D Food Printing – uh, Knowledge and Attitudes
of Millennials in the GTA. [Jason] Wow,
this room looks a whole lot bigger now. Well, thank you all for coming. Um, as Josephine mentioned,
lunch time is coming up soon, which is quite fitting considering
we’re here to talk about food. Uh, not the kind of food
you’ll be eating today, but the kind of food
you’ll be eating in, say, ten years from now. I want you to imagine a scenario which many of you
can probably relate to. It’s a busy work day,
and you’re working late, again. You need to figure out dinner, but there’s no time
to prepare a nutritious meal. But what if you had an appliance
that could make any meal you wanted and have it ready for you
when you got home, all from the click of a button. Impossible idea,
right? Wrong. With 3D food printing,
anything is possible. My name is Jason,
and I have had the wonderful opportunity to work with four lovely ladies
on a project titled, 3D Food Printing – Knowledge and Attitudes
of Millennials in the GTA. I’ll be giving a brief introduction
to our research study, followed by Tracey who will be going over
our methodology section, Ankita and Juhi
will be going over our results, and last but not least, Anj,
she will be going over conclusion. So what is 3D food printing?
As I’m sure you’re all dying to know. Well, 3D food printing
is conceptually similar to 3D printing in general. These devices or appliances
add a third dimension to whatever it is
they are creating. 3D food printers are unique in that
these devices simply use food substrates to develop food into any shape, any texture,
or any consistency imaginable. For example,
some 3D food printers specialize in turning food into masterful
and creative forms of art. Eatable forms, of course. Others focus on being able to use
sustainable protein sources, such as algae and insects, turning them into more
eatable forms of food, at least visually, and as long
as you can get your mind around the fact
that you might be eating a cockroach. And there are many, many more
different types of 3D food printers, all with different benefits
and uses, but there are also
some potential problems and concerns
with this technology, which leads us
to our research objectives. In general,
we sought to find out what the millennials in the GTA
know about this technology, what are they most interested in,
what are they most concerned about, and do they even wanna buy
one of these things? And so you might ask,
“Well, who cares?” Well since
this is an emerging technology, and since there are dozens
of different models, and concepts,
and prototypes, researchers, developers,
and marketers wanna know
what people think about them, what they want from them, and what socially based obstacles
may exist that could prevent
this technology from being adopted
into the consumer population. And so it was our intention
with this research study to help bridge that gap
between consumer insight and product development. Now I’ll pass the torch
over to Tracey who will begin discussing
our methodology. [Tracey]
Thank you, Jason. After refining our research question,
we focused on who sh- who sh- sorry,
who should be our target market. After a literature review, we decided to concentrate
on adult males and females between the ages of 18 and 35 that were living
in the Greater Toronto Area. Our 18 to 35 year olds, or millennials,
were sourced as being a large population
in the Canadian workforce much more likely to be an early user
of a new technology, they embraced food innovation much more readily
into their diet than others, they preferred
convenience based foods, and would be willing to pay more
for a healthier food item. We wanted to target millennials
living in the Greater Toronto Area to allow for easy access
for face to face qualitative research, as well as allow
for additional intercept surveys without compromising
our target sample. Within our survey screener, we used an online visual aid
to standardize the definition of the Greater Toronto Area. Participants could link to this map
within the screener for a clearer definition. In order to answer
our research question, our research design employed
a triangulated mixed methods approach. We wanted to understand
millennial attitudes and behaviours towards this new food technology, as well as identify benefits
or potential hurdles to their adoption. We used random sampling in the form of convenience
and snowball techniques in order to obtain
our sample population for all our research methods. We conducted an online survey
for our quantitative portion to obtain results
for swift turn around. And the method fit well
with our intended demographic which are mobile
and technology heavy users. We administered the survey
using, uh, Q-Fi, and our total sample size for the survey
was 330 completes. Our quantitative survey started by addressing age
within the screener as well as location. The rest of the survey
consisted of all closed ended questions including two matrices. We wanted to keep the survey to approximately seven
or eight minutes in length to ensure higher completion rates. The survey was deployed via Twitter,
Facebook, LinkedIn, and e-mail. The average survey completion rate
turned out to be about 7.36 minutes. Intercept surveys. We also conducted
some additional intercept surveys within our research design. These completes are included
in our overall sample of the 330 respondents. A strict interview protocol
was followed, and the intercepts
were administered via an iPad following the same questionnaire flow
as the online Q-Fi survey. They were all conducted on-site
at the Humber College Lakeshore Campus. All quantitative, qual-
yes, sorry, quantitative data was analyzed
using IBM SPSS version 23. We conducted frequencies,
crosstabs, and chi-square analysis. Since this technology
was quite new, we were interested in finding out
more details to supplement
our quantitative understanding by includ- cluding
a qualitative portion to our study. We conducted two focus groups which were moderated
by team members in a home location
in the West End of Toronto. The focus groups
were both 45 minutes in length and had six to seven
participants in each. We followed
a structured interview guide to help us understand
the details about millennials and their knowledge
and attitudes of 3D food printing. We set out to discover more
about their meal preparation habits, if they’d enter- ever interacted
with 3D food printing technology before, and specifically, we wanted to know
had they heard of 3D food printing, was this something
that had interested them. If so, why or why not? And could they offer
any suggestions on particular features
that they were interested? And finally,
at what price would they be comfortable? The data was analyzed using a combination
of HyperRESEARCH and Excel for content analysis. Data was taken
from the transcripts, linked or grounded
into words and phrases from which
our major themes emerged. Now I’ll pass you on to Ankita
who will be presenting our findings. [Ankita]
Thank you, Tracey. Uh, so we wanted to know what millennials know
about 3D printing in general. We wanted to gauge
the level of knowledge millennials possess
about 3D printing. Our results indicate that GTA millennials
have a high level of knowledge with, uh,
88 percent of respondents indicating that they have heard
of 3D printing earlier. Of this group, only three out of ten millennials
have heard about 3D food printing. And the most common 3D products
were prosthetics, sculptures, toys, which were among
the first 3D printed products. So we realized that people were not aware
of 3D food printing. Next, we wanted to know
what millennials care about. So we provided them
with a definition of 3D food printing and we presented them
the features, asked them to rate these features,
uh, the importance, uh, the importance
of these features. These features
came from our literature review, and the three most common features
were minimizing food waste, minimizing food preparation time, and adding vitamins and minerals
as desired. The participants
from the focus group mentioned that they would like
to control portions, uh, less food wastage, cook food in less time
for busy nights, and add things
to improve the food. Rest, I’ll pass it on to Juhi
to discuss our rest of the results. [Juhi]
Thanks, Ankita. Next,
respondents were asked what matters to them the most
about 3D food printer. The three most important concerns
that emerged from our data are taste of food, food quality,
and cost. The results showed
nine out of ten millennials consider taste of food a most important consideration
for 3D food printer. They seemed to be worried
that the printed food would not taste as good
as the traditional cooked food. The second important concern
was food safety, which was reported
by around 89 percent of the millennials. In general,
they were worried that the 3D printed parts
used during printing may not be safe
to use for food, or that the high heating during printing
may release some chemicals making the food unsafe to eat. They were also concerned that if the 3D food printer
is not easy to clean and maintain, it can lead to growth
of harmful bacteria and thus making the food unsafe. Thirdly,
almost 85 percent of the millennials showed concern
regarding the cost of the unit. Females were found to be
more worried about cost than ma- males. 91 percent of the females
rated this as important compared to only 78 percent
of males. Respondents were further asked about their intent to purchase
a 3D food printer. Here, the population was found
to be almost equally divided with 49 percent showing interest
in buying it. Out of 49 percent,
higher proportion of males were found to be interested
in buying a 3D food printer. 63 percent of males were likely to purchase
a 3D food printer in comparison
to only 40 percent of females. Eight out of ten millennials
considered cost as an important factor in their decision to purchase
a 3D food printer. Respondents who showed interest
in buying a 3D food printer were also asked
about the maximum amount they would be willing
to spend on it. Majority of the respondents
were willing to spend between dollar hundred
to dollar five hundred, while almost 23 percent said they could spend
between dollar five hundred to dollar one thousand. Respondents thought that if the price
is below dollar hundred, it won’t be good
and will not serve the purpose. On the other hand,
if the price is too high, they won’t be able to afford it. The quotes we collected
from our focus group conceptualizes this perfectly. Now I will pass it on to Anj
to wrap it up. [Anj]
Thank you, Juhi. So to summarize
a few of our main findings, based on our study sample,
our results indicate that while a large proportion
of GTA millennials are aware of 3D printing, only a small proportion
of these respondents knew about 3D food indicating a poor level of awareness
regarding 3D food printing technology. In addition,
while nearly half of respondents were interested
in purchasing a 3D food printer, we found that male millennials are more likely to be interested
in purchasing this technology. This is consistent
with previous findings which indicate that males are more likely
to adopt novel technologies. We also found that millennials preferred
the attributes of 3D food printing that are most in line
with their generational values. Millennials
are more environmentally friendly than previous generations, convenience is an important part
of their lifestyle, and they’re health conscious. They desire a 3D food printer
that tracks caloric intake, that adds vitamins and minerals
to their food, and that minimizes food waste. The 3D printer should be user friendly,
low maintenance, and ideally,
print a wide variety of food products. And, most importantly, taste is of utmost importance
to millennials. Millennials want 3D food
to be the same quality and taste as that of traditional
food products. Food safety
is also an important factor, as they are concerned
about how food is processed, and whether or not it is safe
for consumption. So in conclusion,
through this study, we have been able to gain
a better understanding of millennials knowledge and attitudes
towards 3D food printing, which may aid in increasing the interest
and adoption rates of this technology. Researchers and developers
of 3D food printers should consider incorporating
the features and attributes that millennials desire
in a 3D food printer which will be vital in encouraging
the success of this technology by helping to develop a product that meets this generations
wants and needs. Also, as there are considerable concerns
regarding 3D food printers, and knowledge levels
of this technology are low, it is imperative
that effective communication regarding details of this technology,
its potential benefits, as well as
addressing areas of concern, will be essential
for successful product marketing. And so this concludes
our presentation on 3D food printing. Uh, we would now like
to open up the floor to any questions. Thank you very much. [audience applause] [man]
Thanks, guys. Good job. Um, I just had a question
about your, uh, when you were asking participants
about the cost and what they’d be willing to pay. Um, ’cause I know
to get decent 3D printer can be upwards
of a few thousand. Um, so I was just wondering
if you provided them some sort of anchor to base their estimations on, or if it was just, like,
whatever they thought off the top of their head
kinda thing? [Tracey] I, I could just add
maybe a little bit of qualitative data. When we had the focus groups, uh, people were suggesting
that if the technology, and they were thinking
more in the future, say eight to ten years from now,
hopefully it’ll be at that time, but in the future,
when the technology is able and the printer can offer multiple items
that it can prepare that they could see, uh,
paying for the item which was similar priced to say a microwave
or something like an oven if it did have
multiple functionality. If it was something
that was quite simple that could only extrude chocolate or, um, sugar
to make the decorative designs then they would be okay
at a lower price level. And, um, yeah,
they would probably be, uh, available soon. [man]
Very, very interesting presentation. I’m so relieved to see
that Star Trek had it right. Uh, any of you who watched the old Star Trek series
and the replicators. Um, going on that issue
of the printer, have any of you bought
a, a printer for your computer recently? And they’re really cheap,
the printers are. It’s the cartridges
that, that kill you. Did that come up at all
in, in the questions? [Jason]
Uh, yeah, it did during our focus group. Um, again, the initial cost
of the printer is a one time fee. However, people were concerned
about the maintenance fee, as well as the fee of the cartridges
and the food within them. So, um, what it’s,
what’s hypothesized or theorized is that, uh, eventually
you’ll be buying these cartridges just like you buy
your regular printer cartridges. You’ll be buying them
from a grocery store, however. They won’t be filled with ink.
They’ll be filled with food. And so the cost of those is, is something, again,
that did come up. However,
we didn’t put that in our survey. Uh, the question that we asked
about, uh, the cost was just for the unit itself. So that’s something
that definitely we, we would like to look at,
uh, in the future. [man] Hi.
You said eight to ten years? Um, the way technology
is advancing these days, is there anyway you perceive
that as being quicker, um, for the price to go down to a level that many of us
would be willing to buy than eight to ten years? [Jason] Um, yeah.
I mean, as, as technology becomes more widely known, there’s gonna be more companies
getting involved with it in terms of research
and development. Uh, so yes,
that’s kind of the, the cycle
of these sort of technologies. Uh, currently now, though,
it’s still very new, so all the printers on the market
are over 1,000 dollars, and they’re all very different
from each other. Um, again,
they share similarities in terms of the whole 3D printing,
uh, aspect, but they all produced
different products. Um, and some of them are,
are specialized. Some of them
are more for the average person. For example,
NASA is building a 3D printer that’s designed to work in space. Right? Which is very different
than what, uh, you or I are gonna, uh, probably buy
in the next ten years or so. So that figure of ten years
is more, um, uh, it’s something that commonly came up
in the literature, however, for one of us
to have one of these at home, Um, an- and sort of, like, the example
I gave at the beginning, where you can just push a button
and have any meal you want, um, that will likely take
more than ten years. [man]
Okay, thank you. [Jason]
It’s lunchtime coming up, right? Everyone’s hungry? [Josephine] Thank you.
Thanks, guys. Thank you very much. [audience applause] So, can I have Stefanie
and Amelia come up for a minute? So I just wanna thank
all the student groups, uh, for their presentations. I think, uh, given the questions
and the comments that, uh, they were insightful,
and again, stimulating discussion. So we are
just about to have a break, but, um,
I do have a few students here who wanna say, uh,
a few more words before we break. [Stefanie] Hello.
So we just wanted to let you know that we do have surveys
for our forum. Um, they’re located on your tables
in the paper version, and it’s also online using Q-Fi, um, which you can find the link to that
using the USBs, um, that we’ve given to you
in your welcome package, as well as at the back side
of your program. [Amelia]
And before we break for lunch, um, the students will be, uh, lingering around
their poster presentations to further discuss their al-
their projects with you. Um, all of the students
are very excited to share
their major research projects. So I encourage you
to take a walk around and check out
all of the poster presentations. [Josephine]
So apparently no one’s gonna get up ’till the teacher has spoken. You can get up
and go look at the presentations while we set up lunch,
thank you.

Danny Hutson

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *