Not Panels, It's Engagement!

With planning and 2008 in mind I have been considering more what our Core Competence actually is. Panel? Management? Quality? Relationships? Surveys?

It could be! Naturally, one feels advantages and competencies in these areas but actually it is probably more the combination of research, Interactive and technical elements that is closer to the mark since this creates the infrastructure, the innovation and the ways of doing. Yes, that is resilient and future proof.

I asked the question so it is only fair that I provide a perspective. To some extent I am not sure about the detail as this will come by the end of December but I can say this much. And it won't surprise you when I say it is about engagement:

- the quality paradigm is expanded to consider a world where the role and scope of the Access Panel is slightly changing: engagement in quality
- the need for innovation is clear, as well as to dabble in different areas because it is not clear which way the world is going: engagement in a vision
- a need for urgent positioning from an operational panel to a strategic platform: engagement in positioning

I read the other day that yet another company claims to have an automated system to detect poor quality responders. This clearly is to be encouraged as long as it is done properly. As I said at ESOMAR however the global perspective teaches us that no automated system is smart enough alone to detect patterns. You just cannot write it that way. It's good to know that only the human eye can really provide the final sign off.

And this leads me to talk about panel duplication. You have to continually upgrade the de-duplication systems. Lead fraud is out there and an automatic and manual system is recommended based on what I see in parts of Asia.

Zhende ma? = Really

At the end of the year i give myself a small window to consider what I am doing, where we have come from in the past year before sweeping that away for the new year. And I had one thought which made me think because it describes a great deal about how things have changed.

Back in 2004 when I was based in Sydney we conducted one of the *first* studies on on-line qre design which had a direct comparison of different layouts and resulting data quality and comparison. I have since seen this repeated in a number of areas. My point here is that we haven't asked the participants what they think works! Anyone remember them? And thus of course I won't share with you all of 2008 but I will share that direction.

*first* clearly doesn't necessarily mean a global first - but first in the rather limited world that I live in.

What are you planning for 2008? Where do you see the panel paradigm going? Will the technologies and architectures come of age so we start talking about research outcomes as opposed to 'you can do this, you can do that'?....

Yes, just as I said before - this article confirms that the virtual world is the real world for a select few (not the other way around). That is where some of the researcher interest must come from.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/web/australians-unleash-true-selves-online/2007/11/30/1196394603400.html