An email being circulated by Jean-Marc Leger of Leger Marketing Research today touting their (claimed) prowess in "calling" the recent Canadian federal election:
"Dear (Joe Blow), We are proud to share our company's success with you. For the 10th consecutive election, Leger Marketing has obtained the most accurate results in the country. Our survey results published in the Canadian media last Saturday were as follows: CP 36%, LPC 27%, NDP 20%, BQ 8% and GP 9%. Official results are: CP 38%, LPC 26%, NDP 18%, BQ 10% and GP, as shown on the following link <http://www.legermarketing.com/publipostage/election/publi_elect_EN.htm> <http://www.legermarketing.com/publipostage/election/publi_elect_EN.htm> The elections are an occasion to measure the efficiency of a polling firm's research methods. We are proud to have obtained, once again, a perfect score. Now, you can image the reliability and quality of the studies we conduct for our clients. Best regards,
Jean-Marc Leger
President
Leger Marketing 507, Place d'Armes, suite 700
Montréal, Canada H2Y 2W8
514-982-2464 www.legermarketing.com <http://www.legermarketing.com> "
Yes, I sure can "image the reliability and quality"!!
Sheesh, if they can't even spell right in a press release claiming accuracy....
this one's being circulated this afternoon with lots of guffaws!!
(by the way, it might be seen as mean to publicly kick a guy around over a spelling mistake. BUT...since he is so arrogant as to boast about his claimed accuracy and reliability when in reality he is far from telling it straight or even the whole story - it's deserved. If Leger's "accuracy" is that 38% is the same as 36% - or that just because the actual result added up to 100 and his results luckily added up to 100, that's 'perfect' - he should at least make sure his spelling and grammar are right.)
Friday, October 17, 2008
Saturday, October 11, 2008
Moderating in Halifax - why some facilities are not suitable for good research!
I moderated at a facility in Halifax a few weeks ago and I have never been there before - my usual, Nucleus, was booked. First omen of bad to come - taxi driver didn't know where the address was. It's that out of the way. Arriving, I saw it was located on a small industrial street of little consequence in a bland office building that looked like a typical bank building. Spanking new building located in a lowe end area, at the crossroads of some highways and thoroughfares. You would have to know it was there to find it.
For such a new facility, they really skimped on the equipment - in an ok sized room they had an older style 17 inch TV and a no-name cheap DVD player that didn't work most of the time, set high on an industrial AV stand. Like - no clue about how people typically view TV content, and a very un-compelling experience/environment in which to test ads.
But the major problem was the respondents. Now, a good moderator can get great stuff from just about any group. Not every group is comprised of "A" type, highly articulate and highly aware respondents - if they are, the recruiting firm is just sending pros. Humanity is not made up of only those type of respondents - and a good researcher wants a real representation of the consumer market. The problem is that an out of the way, poorly accessible focus group location creates it's own specific biases - first, only people who can get there, only people with cars, perhaps a tilt towards people who live within reasonable proximity - and since the area was lind of low end commercial, not everyone will even want to go into the area at night.
Lesson learned. Facilities in out of the way, off the mainstream locations have built in biases that limit or even eliminate their usefulness for qualitative research. And facilities need to have up to date AV equipment that allows for a viewing experience as close as possible to the typical home experience.
In Halifax, there's some good ones, and one that's not.
For such a new facility, they really skimped on the equipment - in an ok sized room they had an older style 17 inch TV and a no-name cheap DVD player that didn't work most of the time, set high on an industrial AV stand. Like - no clue about how people typically view TV content, and a very un-compelling experience/environment in which to test ads.
But the major problem was the respondents. Now, a good moderator can get great stuff from just about any group. Not every group is comprised of "A" type, highly articulate and highly aware respondents - if they are, the recruiting firm is just sending pros. Humanity is not made up of only those type of respondents - and a good researcher wants a real representation of the consumer market. The problem is that an out of the way, poorly accessible focus group location creates it's own specific biases - first, only people who can get there, only people with cars, perhaps a tilt towards people who live within reasonable proximity - and since the area was lind of low end commercial, not everyone will even want to go into the area at night.
Lesson learned. Facilities in out of the way, off the mainstream locations have built in biases that limit or even eliminate their usefulness for qualitative research. And facilities need to have up to date AV equipment that allows for a viewing experience as close as possible to the typical home experience.
In Halifax, there's some good ones, and one that's not.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
