Would we then be in a better position to combine our basic scenarios in any number of combinations, e.g. a stockbroking soccer Mom, eco-friendly industrialist, etc.?
Note: Start reading from the bottom, with the original posted question:
I agree. I think almost every ethnographic project I've worked on has turned up a nascent/implicit segmentation, whether intended or not. I think this is because this type of research is really good at understanding what makes different types of users/consumers tick, and we're naturally looking for (and good at finding) the types. That said, I've rarely had the luxury of following it up with quantification, because in most bureaucratic/political situations I've been involved with, quant is the dog and qual is the tail. You don't tailor quant research to fleshing out qual insights, you do qual to illuminate categories that were previously established via surveys or a priori demographic/income-based thinking. Putting together a good package and using it properly is as important as what parts you use.
Marc wrote: Hello Matthew,
One buzz phrase worth talking to Google about is "behavioral segmentation." I've done a number of field projects in which we:
- found patterns of behavior from our field research
- looked for characteristics of people (demographic, something about the life choices they've made, etc.) which correlate to those patterns
- requested further, quantitative research to validate those patterns and those correlations
- wrote a set of implications for product strategy and design, and worked with product groups to shape both design and marketing around the characteristics.
A watered-down example: people who bought high-end kitchen appliances. Some people really use all they can do. Some bought them for prestige (though they wouldn't say that if you asked them), and hardly touch them except to way, cook frozen pizza. Some use them a lot, but take no advantage of their high-end features. These were *much* more useful segments to guide design and marketing than say, "suburban, income > $100k."
There are other examples about how people learn to use appliances and how they become incorporated into people's habits (or not). And, for medical software, how different roles in the hospital needed different interfaces, and how all of them cared about different qualities than the people who made the purchase decision on behalf of the hospital. The guiding insights came from qualitative research. The "So What" came through facilitated collaboration between the people who did the research and the people who shape the products or services.
This message doesn't give you much "how to," but hopefully these examples help. Behavioral segmentation is becoming a hot topic, and it's one of the reasons I'm seeing advertising agencies and marketing firms become more open to qualitative research methods.
Cheers,
Marc
From: anthrodesign@yahoogroups.com [email] On Behalf Of xmjh1 Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 9:26 AM To: anthrodesign@yahoogroups.com Subject: anthrodesign Ethnography and "customer segmentation"
Hi all,
Does anyone knows of interesting ways that ethnography or qualitative research have been used in the past for the purposes of developing a deeper, richer "customer segmentation"?
Many ad agencies seem to come up with these frustratingly simplistic and shallow segmentations of a company's "target customers" that offer little real direction for groups like merchandising managers.
I'm wondering if others can provide instances of the ways that qualitative research, perhaps in conjunction with quantitative research, has been used to help companies develop a richer view of their customers.
Cheers, Matthew