《GreenBook:2023年GRIT商业与创新报告(英文版)(178页).pdf》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《GreenBook:2023年GRIT商业与创新报告(英文版)(178页).pdf(178页珍藏版)》请在三个皮匠报告上搜索。
1、Greenbook research Industry trends report2023 GRIT Business&Innovation Reportrestech,reimaginedTheres more to life than baby-sitting research studies and scrubbing IDs.With innovative products like dtect,were focused on taking the hard work out of your research,so that you can focus on growing your
2、business.5Foreword6Executive Summary8Design,Methodology,and Sample14Industry Structure30Evolving Insights Audience44Unmet Needs62Meeting Project Goals78Skills and Strategies86AI in Everyday Life100Caution:AI at Work116AI at Work128Innovation Strategy140GRIT Top 50 Most Innovative Suppliers148GRIT To
3、p 25 Most Innovative Buyers152Business Outlook164Final Thoughts165Appendix:Sample Compositioncontentscontacts:LEONARD F.MURPHY Chief Advisor for Insights and Development(770)985-4904 lmurphygreenbook.orgLUKAS POSPICHAL Managing Director(212)849-2753 lpospichalgreenbook.orgGREENBOOKNew York AMA Commu
4、nication Services Inc.234 5th AvenueNew York,NY 10001WWW.GREENBOOK.ORG/GRIT1 Answer Specific Questions Choose Summary Length Tailor Content To Your Audience Get Customized Formatting GDPR,SOC2,and HIPAA CompliantLearn MoreCut Report Writing Time By 80%Move To A New Level of IDI and Focus Group Repor
5、t Writing with QuillitQuillit is a report generating tool developed by Civicom for Marketing Researchers.Your Project Success IsOur Number One PrioritycoMMentarIes29A Permanent Pivot or Temporary Transition?A Post-Pandemic Review of the Insights Industry Matilda Sarah,Displayr43Retool Research Proce
6、sses to Maintain Organizational Influence Rick Kelly,Fuel Cycle61Elevating the Researcher Experience:Its Time to Fix the Failings and Foster Success Reed Cundiff,Sago77Project Success Unleashed:The Power of Human Connections to Drive Insights Forward Reid Searls,NAILBITER85The Shifting Landscape of
7、Market Research Skills Steve Male,The Logit Group99Navigating the Uncertain Path of AI:Cautious Optimism and the Future of Insights Professionals Laura Pulito,Recollective Inc.115Revolutionizing Survey Data Quality in the Age of Artificial Intelligence Steven Millman,Dynata127Artificial Intelligence
8、 at Work:Navigating the Revolution Thibault Cousot,Behaviorally139Technology and Insights:A Transformative Year in Review Gera Nevolovich,Hotspex,Michael Lancor,Procter&Gamble147The GRIT Top 50 List Signals Our Industrys Direction Gary Ellis,Remesh151Innovative Buyers Take Risks,Push Boundaries,and
9、Collaborate Ruchika Gupta,Borderless Access163One Boom Ends;Another Boom Begins?Greg Matheson,Quest Mindshare3Welcome to the 31st edition of the Greenbook Research Industry Trends Report,informed by data collected in July of this year.This edition is the annual GRIT Business&Innovation Report,focuse
10、d on documenting and interpreting the dynamics that drive change in the insights and analytics industry,as well as the key role innovation plays in its evolution.In the spirit of innovation,weve introduced new topics(or improved them from past waves)to ensure GRIT covers the latest drivers of change
11、 in insights and analytics.So what topics do we get into?Well,we discuss perennial favorites such as Industry Structure,Evolving Insights Audience,Unmet Needs,Meeting Project Goals,Skills and Strategies,Innovation Strategy,and Business Outlook.Together,these discussions provide a robust view of how
12、the business and work of insights are taking advantage of new opportunities while meeting novel(and ongoing)challenges.All have been refreshed,and there are some real surprises in our findings that you wont want to miss.Of course,we also reveal the much-anticipated GRIT Top 50 Most Innovative Suppli
13、ers and GRIT Top 25 Most Innovative Buyers lists.Its a chance to celebrate the insights professionals who move the industry forward with new solutions to demanding challenges.Its also a chance to look at the composition of the lists with respect to service offerings and industries to gain insight in
14、to the pockets of supply and demand for innovation that are most characteristic of where the industry is now.Wherever the industry is now,its in the middle of sorting out appropriate roles for artificial intelligence.Some insights professionals seem to have closed minds,others zealously(and seemingl
15、y uncritically)advocate for it,but most are in the middle,cautiously optimistic.We couldnt cover a topic this rich in one section,so we introduced three new sections:AI in Everyday Life,AI at Work,and a deep analysis of the perceived criticisms attributed to those who might object to using AI for pr
16、ofessional work called Caution:AI at Work.To our knowledge this is the deepest dive yet to understand all the ins and outs of how insights professionals,both at work and in personal life,are adapting to this new wave of technological disruption.No matter your role or experience level,you are sure to
17、 find something intriguing and helpful to you in the 2023 GRIT Business&Innovation Report.Although much of the design,analysis,and writing for our GRIT Reports are done by the Greenbook team,GRIT continues to be a“coalition of the willing,”and our commentary providers,sample partners,advertisers,and
18、 especially our research partners make it all possible.Special thanks go out to Forsta,Q Research Software/Displayr,Idea Highway,and Gen2 Advisors.As always,without their generous contribution of time,energy,and expertise we simply wouldnt be able produce this report.Enjoy!Leonard F.MurphyExecutive
19、Editor&Producer,Greenbooklmurphygreenbook.org(770)985-4904Foreword5BuyerSupplierBad surveysSupplierBuyerCode writing,software developmentKnowledge management across areasMiscellaneous common tasksReport writingInsight development,creationFact-checkingPrimary research execution51%52%38%40%34%40%35%38
20、%25%32%22%28%19%27%To better understand survey fraud,we did not use Forstas standard data cleaning tools and procedures and let all the surveys through.Despite targeting the insights industry,we received a fair amount of fake surveys,many of which were easily identified because they were AI-assisted
21、.Not only that,but these fakes appear to advocate for greater adoption of AI.2023 GRIT BusIness&InnovaTIon RepoRTAI adoption in the workplace is most expected to have a major positive impact on code writing and software development.Buyers and suppliers are less confident in its ability to help with
22、insights creation,fact-checking,and primary research execution.How random are fake surveys?Visualization byGRIT Most Innovative Buyers LeaderboardWhere AI will have major positive impact on work8%30%40%18%32%54%31%37%66%16%20%61%My company has track record offering AI-enabled products My company wil
23、l strongly advocate for employee adoption of AIUltimately,AI solutions will help humanity more than hurt itI trust those who train AI solutions to be honest,impartial,and wiseEXECUTIVE SUMMARY16 T26 T38 T48 T5106www.GreenBook.orG/GrITData analysis revenue is significant tor other supplier typesData
24、analysis provides highest revenueData analysis is a significant roleof doing thingsCollaborate with businessQuickly adopt new analytical toolsMaintain a separate,dedicated budget for innovationBuyerSupplier61%62%51%55%21%56%50%32%Research or insights groupMarketingAnalyticsExecutive teamProduct mana
25、gement/R&DBuyerGeneralistSpecialist15%13%10%32%29%19%11%15%15%50%57%39%202320212022SupplierBuyerData analysis is the primary roleBoth buyers and suppliers dedicate staff to focus on innovation,but buyers are more likely to create a separate budget for insights innovation while suppliers are more lik
26、ely to focus on quickly adopting new tools.On the buyer-side,56%work in an insights group or marketing,and most of them say their groups are key decision influencers for methodologies and suppliers.Most generalist and specialist suppliers agree,but also name analytics,executives,and product manageme
27、nt or R&D.Specialists are even more likely to name executives and product management/R&D as influencers.Although still a distinct specialty,data and analytics skills have become more essential to mainstream insights work and more integrated into project work.Since 2021,data analysis as a primary buy
28、er role increased by half and the percentage of suppliers with a data and analytics revenue stream has grown,even though fewer suppliers say it is their main source of revenue.GRIT Most Innovative Suppliers LeaderboardInvestment when innovative focus is keyWho influences methodology and supplier sel
29、ection?Mainstreaming data and analyticsWhere AI will have major positive impact on work8%30%40%18%32%54%31%37%66%16%20%61%88%88%84%62%63%53%48%61%63%42%69%81%44%61%76%16 T26 T38 T48 T5107GRIT sample follows the industry as it evolves by enabling participants to reach out to their networks rather tha
30、n imposing strict definitions.desIGn,MethodoLoGy,and saMpLeThank you for making the GRIT Report the most comprehensive and actionable guide for insights and analytics professionals.Thats how we greet people as they enter the GRIT survey.Those simple words guide the design and execution of the GRIT p
31、rocess,but also belie the sophistication that has evolved over many years of producing the now-biannual reports on the insights and analytics industry.As our industry evolves and we learn more about it,the GRIT process adapts to its expanding scope while remaining true to our ideals of delivering co
32、mprehensive and actionable information.For example,although the“GRIT”name has endured since its inception,its literal meaning has had to evolve with the industry it tracks:the“Greenbook Research Industry Trends”report looks beyond research in order to comprehensively document and track important tre
33、nds.To provide insights professionals with the most comprehensive and actionable information,the GRIT process balances several design principles:z Research should follow the evolution of the industry rather than assumptions about the evolution of the industry.z Understanding the health of the indust
34、ry requires understanding the perspective of those who spend money on insights as well as those who earn money from it.z Topics must be tracked over time;snapshots are interesting but lack the context that makes them meaningful.z GRIT should provide reliable and relevant facts,and it should also rai
35、se questions and stimulate conversation.Here are some highlights that provide context for how to think about and understand the report.The GRIT Business and Innovation Report aims to provide comprehensive and actionable guidance for professionals working in insights,research,and analytics.This secti
36、on provides context for you to get the most of this report.THE ESSENCE OF GRIT8www.GreenBook.orG/GrITThe survey has two main,but overlapping,paths:one for buyers of insights services and one for suppliers.GRIT has enough sample to analyze buyers and suppliers independently so we can report on what i
37、s unique to their experiences and perspectives.DATA COLLECTION FOLLOWS THE INDUSTRYThis GRIT Report is based on analysis of data collected from June 5 through July 17,2023 via an online survey of professionals who work in one or more areas of research,analytics,and insights.Participants were recruit
38、ed by Greenbook via a variety of methods,including GDPR-compliant opt-in email lists and various social media channels.Our efforts were supplemented by GRIT partners and anyone who received an invitation and subsequently invited members of their network to take the survey.In other words,the recruiti
39、ng is driven by current relationships within the industry rather than by preconceived ideas of who we think is in the industry,and this enables the research to adapt to emerging industry trends.Within the GRIT survey,each type of professional is guided through one of two major but overlapping paths:
40、one for“buyers”and one for“suppliers.”(There are also paths for industry participants who do not fall into either category,but they do not see any questions that are not also seen by buyers or suppliers.)What GRIT calls“buyers”are also known as“clients”or“brands;”these are insights professionals wit
41、hin a company or organization that exists primarily for some other purpose than to provide insights offerings to others outside their organization.In contrast,a supplier company or organization exists primarily to offer insights work and services to other external organizations.Based on responses to
42、 questions early in the survey,participants self-select into one path or another.Topics and perspectives differ across these two major segments,so some of the survey must be tailored for each independently.Although our approach is designed to cast a broad net across the industry,it includes safeguar
43、ds to ensure that respondents actually participate in insights,either as suppliers,producers,or users.Despite very minimal requirements,a surprising number of participants fail to qualify out of thousands who enter the survey,and many more are removed based on more than a dozen flags that we evaluat
44、e.In reality,some of these might be qualified insights professionals,but we cant include anyone who doesnt pay enough attention regardless of who they are.A CLEAN AND ROBUST SAMPLEAfter rigorous data cleaning,the current GRIT analysis is based on 2,100 completed surveys segmented into three distinct
45、 populations:buyers(n=332),suppliers(n=1,753),and others(n=15).Please note that these represent populations of insights professionals,not populations of companies.When you see a result from the data,you should think of it as representative of the experiences of individual insights professionals who
46、identify as buyers or suppliers according to our definitions,not as a proportion of buyer companies or supplier companies.Except as an indication of overall participation,the total sample size is irrelevant because almost every analysis in this report is segmented by buyer and supplier populations o
47、r by sub-segments of them.For two reasons,aggregating across these segments does not make sense.First,there is no defensible way to determine what the proportion of“buyer”professionals should be relative to“supplier”professionals.Second,generally speaking,it is not very useful to know aggregate resu
48、lts across buyers and suppliers 91,9194971,4221,9194971,4221,8653551,429811,8653551,429811,4973301,1671,4973301,1672,1444711,6732,1444711,6731,5833121,227441,5833121,227442,9426471,9903052,9426471,9903051,5333311,182201,5333311,182203,9309812,9493,9309812,9491,2603299311,2603299312,8808442,0362,8808
49、442,0361,1,2,0983661,6151172,0983661,6151171,071274769281,071274769283,2428752,325423,2428752,325421,3232541,002671,3232541,002672,7014022,275242,7014022,27524985232731222,1003321,753152,1003321,7531501,0002,0003,0004,000201415W115W216W116W217W117W218W118W219W119W220
50、W120W221W121W222W122W223W1All participants Buyer Supplier Other industry participantSample sizes can vary depending on the question so we document them wherever feasible.because they have different business models and objectives,and aggregating them washes out important differences.After all,if you
51、knowingly mix hot water with cold,is it right to report that water is characteristically tepid?Over the years,sample sizes for buyers collected in the fall range from about 230 to 350,while in the spring they range from over 330 to just under 1,000.For suppliers,spring waves have yielded from about
52、1,600 surveys to nearly 3,000,while fall waves range between about 730 and 1,200.These fluctuations do not represent industry trends per se because they are likely due to process circumstances,such as limitations on recruiting resources,rather than changes in the market.As far as the GRIT Report is
53、concerned,these variations in size mainly impact the granularity of the analyses.We can always report on trends within buyer and supplier segments,but we can drill down deeper when the sample is larger.The proportion of buyers to suppliers doesnt matter because we dont aggregate them.GRIT SAMPLE SIZ
54、E TREND YEAR-ON-YEARWithin the report,we always give the sample sizes that apply to each chart and table,except in the few cases when space does not allow for it.Sample sizes may deviate from the totals reported in this introduction due to a few factors.First,some questions in the survey would not a
55、pply to certain types of people and are not asked of them.For example,if someone does not have a formal innovation program,they were not asked who manages it.Of course,those on the buyer path are not asked about revenue they earned from selling services or any other supplier-specific questions.Altho
56、ugh they might earn some revenue from insights-related services,that is not our focus as far as they are concerned.Second,in order to manage the average survey length,non-core sections were randomly assigned to qualified participants and not asked of others.For example,the Innovation Strategy sectio
57、n was randomly assigned to 65%of buyer and 50%of supplier participants,and so on.Further,in some analyses the sample sizes appear smaller because we exclude people who answered“dont know”from the report in order to understand the distribution of people who do know.The resulting sample sizes are docu
58、mented throughout the report.10www.GreenBook.orG/GrIT6%12%16%16%19%31%18%14%14%13%10%30%0%50%100%Buyer(n=332)Supplier(n=1,753)2 years or less 3 to 5 years 6 to 10 years 11 to 15 years 16 to 20 years More than 20 yearsGRIT data are weighted to account for wave-to-wave process differences that can lea
59、d to artifacts,but do not use variables that represent trends we need to track.GRIT results are strongly influenced by those with the most experience and responsibility,and those with fresh perspectives are also included.PARTICIPANT WEIGHTING ADJUSTS FOR REPRESENTATIVENESSRecruitment to the GRIT sur
60、vey is partly driven by networking with active industry participants,not by a strict,pre-determined sampling plan.This enables the survey population to reflect the industry as it evolves,although it runs the risks of attracting people who do not participate in the industry or skewing the sample in u
61、nanticipated ways.We address the former risk via light screening and heavy flagging,and we address the latter by weighting participants.Devising a weighting scheme is tricky because,in a trends report for a dynamic industry,the topics we measure are expected to change.This makes it easy to choose ta
62、rget weights that would completely defeat the purpose of looking at trends because they could make something that changed look the same as it did before,and that flattening would ripple through the rest of the data(ok if they were flat,they wouldnt be ripples,but thats also the point).To minimize th
63、e risk of undermining the measurement of trends,we choose target variables that would not be expected to change due to industry forces but that could vary due to differences in the data collection process across waves.The net effect is to stabilize the sample,resulting in greater resolution regardin
64、g industry-driven trends and minimization of artifacts.Although one of our principles is transparency,we do not publish details of the weighting scheme because we think the risk of someone using it to“game the system”is greater than the risk of alienating the audience by not sharing it.All the resul
65、ts in this report are weighted except where noted.EXPERIENCED INSIGHTS PROFESSIONALS DRIVE GRIT RESULTSPerspectives in the GRIT Report are strongly influenced by those who know best and balanced by those who bring a fresh outlook.Most of our buyers and suppliers have more than 10 years of experience
66、 working in insights,analytics,or research,and fewer than 10%of buyers and 20%of suppliers have 2 years or fewer(results are weighted).More than 60%of buyer and supplier participants make or influence strategic decisions,while fewer than 15%have no formal influence.YEARS IN ROLE RELATED TO INSIGHTS,
67、ANALYTICS,OR RESEARCH1112%50%24%14%37%30%23%11%0%50%100%Buyer(n=332)Supplier(n=1,753)Make decisions Influence decisions Member of a team Do not formally influenceThe most significant change is the addition of a new battery on AI;other changes concerned streamlining he survey experience.ROLE IN STRAT
68、EGIC DECISIONS SIGNIFICANT REVISIONS TO KNOW ABOUTBecause the GRIT survey tracks trends,we try to keep it consistent from wave to wave,but we place more value on getting complete and accurate information on the current state of the industry than we do on tracking for the sake of tracking.If we were
69、measuring changes in KPIs to determine bonuses,wed be more conservative about revisions,but were not doing that(and we wouldnt recommend that practice,anyway).We made several improvements this wave.The most significant changes are:z Added a new question sequence on AI and generative AI to the survey
70、,resulting in three new report sections:AI in Everyday Life,Caution:AI at Work,and AI at Work.z Simplified our question about what percentages of projects meet,exceed,or fall short of objectives from a constant sum to a single closed-end response z Changed our“supplier skills and initiatives”to a ma
71、xdiff from a rating(and got exactly the same results)z Removed some questions that were not core to the analysis to streamline the survey experienceTHE BIG PICTUREThe 2023 GRIT Business&Innovation Report provides you with comprehensive and actionable insights regarding industry trends.We always posi
72、tion these insights as“highly directional”versus“scientifically precise;”after all,this is the Greenbook Research Industry Trends Report not the Greenbook Certified Financial Assessment of the Insights Industry.Understanding the sample composition and noting the sample sizes in each table and chart
73、empower you to make your own assessments of trends,to separate fact from hypothesis,and decide which are meaningful for you.GRIT research follows the industry,and as the industry continues to transform and the definitions of key stakeholder groups expand,we will keep a keen eye out for opportunities
74、 to ensure the GRIT sample universe adapts to the entire industry.12www.GreenBook.orG/GrIT36%36%36%37%36%36%36%37%44%21%14%12%29%44%21%14%12%29%43%22%20%11%22%43%22%20%11%22%70%29%29%27%39%70%29%29%27%39%57%29%37%23%31%57%29%37%23%31%53%27%26%11%17%28%53%27%26%11%17%28%50%34%32%27%26%37%50%34%32%27%
75、26%37%0%50%100%20W120W221W121W222W122W223W1Data analysts(buyer role)Full service research Field services Qualitative research Strategic consulting TechnologyField services and full service research were a single type in 20W1.Qualitative research was introduced as a separate type in 22W2.Since the in
76、itial shock of the pandemic,data and analytics has generally increased as a significant buyer role and as an important revenue stream in each supplier segment.Industry structureGRIT breaks down the insights and analytics industry structure by the roles filled by insights professionals on the buyer-s
77、ide and sources of revenue,services used for positioning,and service offerings on the supplier side.Over the past few years,weve traced how buyer roles and supplier service portfolios have adapted to the challenges of the pandemic and how theyre evolving coming out of it.The influences of the pandem
78、ic,however salient,occur in the context of other trends,such as advances in technology,evolving philosophies about managing the insights function,and the dynamic of competition across supplier types.In 20W1,the eve of the pandemic,data analysis was a significant role just over one-third of buyer-sid
79、e insights professionals and a significant source of revenue for a similar proportion of full/field services providers,technology providers,and strategic consultancies.(Of course,it was significant for all data and analytics providers.)When the pandemic hit,data analysis became a more significant ac
80、tivity on the buyer-side while suppliers had to“stick to the knitting”as they used to say in the 80s,and focus on their core revenue streams.Since that initial shock,data and analytics has generally increased as a significant buyer role and as an important revenue stream in each supplier segment.The
81、 seeming ubiquity of data and analytics will be one of the themes as we discuss industry structure from the perspective of our five buyer roles and six“big bucket”supplier types.The industry structure is evolving in response to challenges and opportunities,such as greater sustained interest in data
82、and analytics given impetus from the pandemic and the emergence of new enablers.After the initial shock of the pandemic,industry participants are emerging with new identities and testing the boundaries outside of their defining expertise.OVERVIEWDATA&ANALYTICS AS SIGNIFICANT BUYER ROLE OR SUPPLEIR R
83、EVENUE SOURCE:GRIT WAVE(BUYER,SUPPLIER TYPE)14www.GreenBook.orG/GrIT52%25%23%52%25%23%57%19%24%57%19%24%56%20%24%56%20%24%0%50%100%21W1(n=875)22W1(n=389)23W1(n=332)Insights group Marketing All others60%32%7%57%36%7%0%50%100%22W2(n=222)23W1(n=286)Yes,all of them Yes,some of them None of themThe pande
84、mic seems to have convinced some buyers to focus their insights staffs on in-house research,research outsourcing,or data analysis instead of strategic insights consulting or VoC.BUYER PERSPECTIVEThe buyer-side perspective of the GRIT participant is mainly driven by those in a formal insights group,a
85、nd the marketing perspective is also significant.However,one-quarter of them are not in either of these groups.Despite the fact that more than 40%of them are not in a formal insights group,nearly 60%say that all insights professionals are part of one.This apparent contradiction suggests that many bu
86、yer-side professionals who engage in insights,research,or analytics as part of their jobs dont necessarily define their roles in terms of insights.DEPARTMENT OR FUNCTIONAL AREA:GRIT WAVE(BUYER)PROFESSIONALS IN FORMAL INSIGHTS GROUP:GRIT WAVE(BUYER)Despite a decline,strategic insights consulting cont
87、inues to be the most common primary role.Prior to the pandemic,more than one-third of buyer-side insights professionals said that the primary role played by insights professionals at their company was strategic insights consulting,peaking at 44%in 19W1.The proportion was declining even before the pa
88、ndemic,but it seems to have stabilized in the low 30%s over the past two years.Voice of the Customer(VoC)seems to be a fluid role that ebbs and flows according to whether the organization can afford to invest in it.Prior to the pandemic,it was typically on par with strategic insights consulting(39%i
89、n 19W1),but plummeted to its all-time low as the pandemic hit(16%),then became a common role again as companies found their footing in the new reality.Currently,it accounts for just over 20%of buyer roles,similar to in-house researcher.In-house researcher has also had its ups and downs,usually in ta
90、ndem with VoCs downs and ups.It surged to greater importance as the pandemic hit(from 14%to 33%)and has maintained a strong presence despite some volatility.Prior to the pandemic,very few identified data analysis as the primary role filled by their insights professionals(5%).When companies found the
91、ir footing by 21W2,the percentage claiming data analysis as a primary role doubled(10%)and has remained in the low teens,now reaching 15%.Research outsourcing tends to be a supporting role:it has never accounted for more than 10%as a primary role.Similar to VoC and in-house researchers,it seems to b
92、e sensitive to the ups and downs of the overall business that can change the economics of how insights work is conducted.For example,when the pandemic hit,in-house researcher increased as a primary role,but,paradoxically,so did research outsourcer.Some businesses took more work in-house,and some gre
93、w more reliant on suppliers.1544%6%39%6%3%44%6%39%6%3%36%24%28%3%6%36%24%28%3%6%37%14%40%5%2%37%14%40%5%2%36%33%16%5%10%36%33%16%5%10%33%20%30%10%7%33%20%30%10%7%33%21%25%14%5%33%21%25%14%5%30%20%27%13%9%30%20%27%13%9%32%32%20%10%6%32%32%20%10%6%34%25%22%15%4%34%25%22%15%4%0%50%100%19W1(n=543)19W2(n
94、=173)20W1(n=221)20W2(n=152)21W1(n=338)21W2(n=251)22W1(n=389)22W2(n=229)23W1(n=332)Strategic insights consulting In-house research Voice of the Customer(VoC)Data analysis Research outsourcingPandemic-driven outsourcing may be more literal“outsourcing”rather than“partnering,”denying the opportunity to
95、 build the kinds of relationships that ensure that deliverables align with the needs of the business.PRIMARY ROLE OF INSIGHTS PROFESSIONALS:GRIT WAVE(BUYER)In 21W2,the average number of significant roles taken on by insights staff peaked at 3.2.It has declined somewhat to 2.7,but it is still half a
96、role more than before the pandemic(2.2).Strategic insights consulting has been a significant role for at least 60%since the start of the pandemic,although it has declined somewhat from its peak at the height of it.VoC has followed a similar pattern,peaking in 2021,but declining more sharply to its c
97、urrent low of 54%.In-house researcher has been a significant role for at least 50%throughout the pandemic,but is also down from its peak in 21W2.Data analysis also peaked in 21W2 at 70%,but its rise was much more dramatic at least 26%more than in any prior wave.Although it,too,has fallen from its hi
98、gh,its still above pre-pandemic levels and performed by about half of insights staffs.Research outsourcing has been an outlier.It was only significant for 26%of insights staff before COVID-19,shot up 20%at the start of the pandemic,and peaked at nearly double its original level in 22W2.Its currently
99、 in the mid-40%s,similar to where its been since 20W2.The sustained significance of the research outsourcer role parallels the sustained renaissance of the full service research supplier segment.In Unmet Needs,we discuss the hypothesis that pandemic-driven outsourcing may have been more characterize
100、d by literal“outsourcing”than by“partnering,”denying suppliers the opportunity to build the kinds of relationships that enable them to ensure that their deliverables align with the needs of the business.ALL SIGNIFICANT INSIGHTS PROFESSIONAL ROLES:GRIT WAVE(BUYER)20W120W221W121W222W122W223W1In-house
101、research43%62%50%70%52%65%63%Strategic insights consulting57%67%68%67%60%63%61%Voice of the Customer(VoC)60%61%69%71%67%64%54%Data analysis36%44%43%70%57%53%50%Research outsourcing26%46%40%45%51%47%46%Average number of roles2.22.82.73.22.92.92.7n=3522729332Darker green indicates higher pe
102、rcentage;yellowish,middle percentage;and darker red,lower percentage.16www.GreenBook.orG/GrITBuyer staffs that act primarily as data analysts are unlikely to perform other roles aside from in-house research,but those focused on other activities are more likely to say they also act as data analysts.T
103、he service that is most important for positioning may or may not match their strongest revenue stream.A supplier that opens doors with brand consulting may make more money from the full service research that results from it.Within each primary role,about half of buyer-side insights professionals say
104、 that in-house research is a significant role for them,but data analysts perform the fewest roles,on average.Compared to others,data analysts and research outsourcers are less likely to act as strategic consultants or VoC.Data analysts are also less likely to perform research outsourcing,whereas res
105、earch outsourcers are much more likely to also perform data analysis.ALL SIGNIFICANT INSIGHTS PROFESSIONAL ROLES:PRIMARY ROLE(BUYER)Strategic insights consultingIn-house researchVoice of the Customer(VoC)Data analysisResearch outsourcingIn-house researcher49%54%46%51%Strategic insights consultants 5
106、4%45%14%28%Voice of the Customer(VoC)43%51%26%26%Data analysts40%46%33%57%Research outsourcers39%52%50%29%Average number of roles1.72.01.81.11.6n=Black cells match the role that defines the primary role.Darker green indicates higher percentage;yellowish,middle percentage;and darker red,lo
107、wer percentage.SUPPLIER SEGMENT TRENDSTo understand the structure of the supplier side of the insights and analytics industry,GRIT breaks it down along four aspects:most important source of revenue,service most important to positioning,all sources of revenue,and all services offered.The revenue sour
108、ces indicate what they do to earn their money,and the services are a proxy for understanding what opens the door to those opportunities.A supplier classified as full service research in one GRIT wave may be classified completely differently in another if they change which services they emphasize or
109、if market demand shifts.Also,the service that is most important to their positioning may or may not match their strongest revenue stream.For example,a supplier that opens doors with its brand strategy consulting may make more money from the full service research that results from it than from the co
110、nsulting itself.Keeping these nuances in mind may help you to navigate these results.Our story will begin in late 2020,when COVID-19 first laid waste to the insights and analytics industry as we knew it.While it may seem more logical to begin before the pandemic so that we can understand its impact,
111、such comparisons are difficult due to GRITs historical idiosyncratic view of suppliers.Prior to 20W2,GRIT considered full service research and field services to be a single type of supplier,and GRIT did not consider qualitative research to be a distinct specialty until 22W2,a mere three-quarters of
112、a century after its invention and a mere half century since it came into common use.1740%Full serviceresearch4%Field services11%Qualitativeresearch16%Strategicconsulting18%Technology11%Data&analytics32%32%16%13%7%32%32%16%13%7%27%35%21%14%3%27%35%21%14%3%45%25%15%15%45%25%15%15%52%15%18%15%52%15%18%
113、15%49%18%20%12%49%18%20%12%0%50%100%19W1(n=2,036)20W1(n=1,615)21W1(n=2,325)22W1(n=2,275)23W1(n=1,753)Full or field service Strategic consulting Technology Data&analytics OtherAfter full service research dropped to the second largest supplier segment just before the pandemic,it has far-and-away been
114、the most populated segment since then.However,if we retrofit our later results,we can compare how suppliers were distributed by main source of revenue before and after the pandemic hit.In 2019,about one-third of supplier-side insights professionals identified as working for full/field service provid
115、ers,and a similar amount identified as employed by strategic consultancies.One year later,on the eve of the pandemic,strategic consultancies pulled ahead(35%to 27%)and technology providers became a clear third(21%,up from 16%).In 21W1,a year into the pandemic,the need for external research project m
116、anagers had increased while the interest in outsourcing strategic insights work had declined.The percentage of supplier-side insights professionals identifying as full/field service shot up from 27%to 45%and has remained at least that high ever since.Strategic consultancies fell by 10%,to 25%,and ha
117、ve since continued to fall.Technology providers have gradually risen from 15%to 20%,while data and analytics providers consistently occupy the lower teens.SUPPLIER TYPE/HIGHEST REVENUE:GRIT WAVE(SUPPLIER)To include field services and qualitative research suppliers in the story,we need to begin in 20
118、W2 and retcon the results we just reported.Perennially,insights professionals from full service research suppliers are the most common type of GRIT participant,comprising around half of all suppliers in fall GRIT waves and about 40%in spring.Fields services providers had doubled during the pandemic,
119、but in the current wave have returned to the levels of about two years ago(4%).Qualitative researchers were introduced as a“big bucket”type last year and are about as common as data and analytics providers.It is unclear how they categorized themselves in previous waves because some identify with ful
120、l service research and strategic consulting,but others seem to come from a technology background,and this makes it impossible to come up with an assumption that enables their evolution to be traced.SUPPLIER TYPE/HIGHEST REVENUE(SUPPLIER)18www.GreenBook.orG/GrITAny way you look at it,the technology p
121、rovider segment,technology providers,and technology-based services are growing.GRIT also breaks down some supplier types by employee size(our“benchmarking”segments used in other reports).Before the pandemic,smaller technology providers outnumbered larger ones,12%to 9%,but now the percentage of large
122、r ones is twice the proportion of smaller ones.In that time,the proportion of large technology providers has crawled up from 9%to 12%while the percentage of smaller technology providers has halved.It could be that smaller technology providers grew into larger ones while larger ones grew greater reve
123、nue streams from other areas,or it might be that technology providers of all sizes grew other revenue streams and migrated to other segments.As well see,those who are currently in the technology segment are exploring different positionings and new services,and those in other segments are leveraging
124、technology to grow their existing revenue streams.Any way you look at it,the technology provider segment,technology providers,and technology-based services are growing.SUPPLIER TYPE/HIGHEST REVENUE:GRIT WAVE(SUPPLIER)20W121W122W123W1Full service research(20 or fewer emp.)5%6%9%7%Full service researc
125、h(21 to 500 emp.)17%26%26%27%Full service research(more than 500 emp.)5%7%6%5%Field Services N/A6%10%4%Qualitative research N/A N/A N/A11%Strategic consulting(20 or fewer emp.)7%7%5%6%Strategic consulting(21 to 500 emp.)20%11%7%9%Strategic consulting(more than 500 emp.)8%6%2%2%Technology(100 or fewe
126、r emp.)12%6%8%6%Technology(more than 100 emp.)9%10%10%12%Data&analytics(100 or fewer emp.)6%7%5%5%Data&analytics(more than 100 emp.)8%8%10%6%Other3%0%1%0%n=1,6152,3252,2751,753Darker green indicates higher percentage;yellowish,middle percentage;and darker red,lower percentage.There are no prior data
127、 for qualitative research providers.SUPPLIER REVENUE SOURCE TRENDSEach supplier segment has a role for data and analytics to play.It is a common secondary revenue stream for full service research,field services,and technology suppliers and significant for many qualitative research suppliers and stra
128、tegic consultancies.Qualitative research,full service research,and data and analytics services are also significant secondary revenue streams for each supplier type.As discussed in previous GRIT Reports,field services are a unique revenue stream.Few suppliers in other segments develop it into a sign
129、ificant source of revenue,although technology providers have been testing the waters out.Also,a significant cohort of field services providers have developed their technology capabilities into their main source of revenue and migrated to that segment without a complementary influx of new segment mem
130、bers.19Technology services support core service offerings in every segment,but,outside of the technology segment,suppliers dont seem to market it independently from those core services.Strategic consulting seems like a difficult revenue stream to support unless it is your main focus.Its a common sec
131、ondary source of revenue for full service research suppliers,significant among qualitative research suppliers,but not as common among the other segments.Technology services may complement another core service offering,such as full service research,in any segment,but it is mainly technology providers
132、 who consider it to be a stand-alonesource of revenue.Outside of that segment,suppliers dont seem to license their technology to customers separately from their core services,at least not enough to call it a significant revenue source.Data and analytics has momentum as a significant revenue stream f
133、or full service research,field services,and technology providers,as well as strategic consultancies.Strategic consultancies and technology providers are also growing full service research,and technology providers are developing field services revenue streams.This latter case may be due to former fie
134、ld services providers developing technology revenue to the extent that they migrate out of the segment,just as any increase in the significance of a revenue stream within a segment might represent growth among legacy segment members or new migrants.In fact,the lone regression we see is the decline o
135、f technology revenue within field services,and this would be consistent with the theory of field services providers migrating to the technology segment.ALL SIGNIFICANT REVENUE SOURCES:SUPPLIER TYPE(SUPPLIER)Full service researchField servicesQualitative researchStrategic consultingTechnology Data&an
136、alyticsFull service research26%29%32%29%27%Data&analytics34%32%27%26%37%Strategic consulting33%7%25%18%19%Qualitative research30%23%23%28%22%Technology 12%14%16%9%12%Field services14%19%4%20%11%Black cells are the defining service for the supplier type.Darker green indicates higher percentage;yellow
137、ish,middle percentage;and darker red,lower percentage.Green border indicates increased at least 10%since 21W1;red border,decreased at least 10%.20www.GreenBook.orG/GrITHalf of full service research providers position themselves simply as“full service research,”although that practice has declined dra
138、stically over the past three years as suppliers try to carve out identities that are more unique.In most segments,many suppliers are striving to establish their identity outside of their defining service category,but those who derive their main revenue from technology seem to gravitate toward that t
139、heme for positioning.SUPPLIER POSITIONING SERVICE TRENDSAlthough suppliers within a segment share their common major revenue stream,that service is not always the one that opens doors for them.Within each segment,suppliers are diverse with respect to which service best positions them.Full service re
140、search suppliers are the most homogeneous.Half position themselves simply as full service research,although that percentage has dropped drastically over the past three years.Strategic insights is their next most common positioning(11%),but nearly as many say that more than one service is equally mos
141、t important(10%).However,full service research suppliers name seventeen other services as key to their positioning,each of which accounts for less than 5%of the segment.Strategic insights consultants are also more homogeneous as 49%of them simply say“strategic insights consulting”is their most impor
142、tant service.Mirroring full service research suppliers,10%say full service research is most important,and nearly as many say that more than one service is equally most important(9%).Brand strategy(6%)is a distant fourth,and thirteen other services are mentioned by fewer than 5%.Like full service sup
143、pliers,strategic consultancies have also been toning down their positioning as full service researchers.Qualitative research suppliers are more fragmented in their positioning messages,and the services emphasized across different factions demonstrate the need to make qualitative research more specia
144、l in some way.The most common service for positioning is qualitative data collection platforms,but this is only the case for 19%.Next come full service research and“more than one”(11%each),followed by moderating and interviewing(10%),offline qualitative data collection(9%),and strategic insights con
145、sulting(8%).A couple of factions mention online communities,quantitative data collection platforms,and industry-focused research as most important(6%each),and seven more services are cited by fewer than 5%.Some position themselves around core qualitative research capabilities,but others emphasize te
146、chnology or strategy.Among field services suppliers,the leading positioning service is also a platform,this time for quantitative data collection(17%).Next,13%say more than one is equally important,12%say offline quantitative data collection,and 10%say sampling.These are followed by full service res
147、earch(9%),recruiting and pre-recruiting(7%),and industry-focused research(6%).Seven more services are named by 5%or fewer.Their greatest revenue might get booked under field services,but there are many paths to it.Technology providers tend to position themselves around the type of technology solutio
148、n they offer rather than the insights that are achieved;the“means”rather than the“end.”In other segments,many suppliers are striving to establish their relevance outside of their defining service category,but those who derive their main revenue from technology seem to gravitate toward that theme for
149、 positioning.The leading positioning among technology providers is“more than one equally important”(17%),followed by quantitative data collection platform(13%),platform for basic or advanced analytics(11%),and online communities(10%).Other factions cite platforms or tools to collect and analyze unst
150、ructured data(9%),qualitative data collection platforms(8%),and DIY surveys(7%).Twelve other services are mentioned by fewer than 5%,and many of them seem to be attempts to accent their technology capability with a message that hits closer to home for insights professionals,such as brand strategy an
151、d CX/UX consulting.21“Quantitative data collection platforms”is decelerating as a positioning theme among technology providers who may be figuring out it does not differentiate them very well,particularly with increased competition from other segments.For data and analytics suppliers,the leading ser
152、vice for positioning is quantitative data collection platforms(17%),which may be an attempt to differentiate from other suppliers in their segment.Full service research and“more than one equally important”are next(10%),tied with analytical services,one that directly references the segment identity.T
153、hese are followed by industry-focused research(8%),and data services(6%).Fourteen other services are mentioned by five percent or fewer.SERVICE MOST IMPORTANT TO POSITIONING:SUPPLIER TYPE(SUPPLIER,AT LEAST 10%OF ANY SEGMENT)Full service researchField servicesQualitative researchStrategic consultingT
154、echnology Data&analyticsFull service research50%9%11%10%3%10%Strategy/strategic insights11%0%8%49%2%4%Qual data collection platform1%5%19%1%8%4%More than one equally most important10%13%11%9%17%10%Quant data collection platform4%17%6%2%13%17%Quant data collection(offline)3%12%0%1%0%2%Basic/advanced
155、analytics platform/tools2%0%0%1%11%5%Analytical services3%0%1%3%2%10%Sampling(offline)1%10%0%0%0%2%Online communities(MROC)2%1%6%0%10%1%Moderating/interviewing(offline)1%5%10%1%0%0%Darker green indicates higher percentage;yellowish,middle percentage;and darker red,lower percentage.Green border indic
156、ates increased at least 3%since 21W1;red border,decreased at least 3%.There is no tracking data for qualitative research providers from 21W1.Its not clear whether the potpourri of positioning reflects attempts by data and analytics providers to expand their capabilities and grow or an influx of prov
157、iders from other segments who have successfully introduced data and analytics services.The impression we get is that this segment has a hard core of suppliers dedicated to data and analytics surrounded by an ever-changing cast of suppliers in transition.We touched on the momentum of some of these po
158、sitionings earlier,in particular the deceleration of full service research as a positioning for the full service research and strategic consulting segments.It is also becoming less popular among technology providers and data and analytics providers.It might be that some of these suppliers realize th
159、at they need a more refined positioning to stand out from the plethora of full service research providers.Fewer are saying that multiple services are equally important to positioning among technology providers,strategic consultancies,and data and analytics providers.It could be that some suppliers a
160、re finding it difficult to send a clear message if they are juggling too many concepts in their communications and choosing to find one niche service which can make them stand out from the crowd.Its worth mentioning the acceleration of quantitative data collection platforms as a positioning in full
161、service research,data and analytics,and field services as it decelerates among technology providers.Technology providers may be figuring out that it does not differentiate them very well,particularly with increased competition from other segments who need a new wrinkle to break free from their packs
162、.22www.GreenBook.orG/GrITAmong the services GRIT classifies as“research”services,full service and analytical services are the most common,offered by majorities in each supplier segment but one.Among data and analytics and field services providers,industry-focused research is gaining traction.Technol
163、ogy suppliers have increased focus on platforms and tools for the collection and analysis of unstructured data which may differentiate more effectively than the decelerating online quantitative data collection positioning.It also represents an exciting new opportunity for the insights industry overa
164、ll.SERVICE MOST IMPORTANT TO POSITIONING:SUPPLIER TYPE(SUPPLIER,LESS THAN 10%OF ANY SEGMENT)Full service researchField servicesQualitative researchStrategic consultingTechnology Data&analyticsPlatform/tool for unstructured data0%0%0%0%9%3%Qual data collection(offline)1%5%9%1%0%2%Industry-focused res
165、earch2%6%6%3%1%8%Recruiting/pre-recruiting(offline)0%7%0%0%1%0%DIY surveys0%2%2%0%7%3%Brand management/strategy1%0%0%6%1%1%Data services1%5%2%0%1%6%Marketing comm/advertising/PR0%0%1%4%0%0%DIY sample access1%1%0%0%4%0%Product development/innovation2%0%1%3%3%3%Technology for noncon/passive measuremen
166、t0%0%0%1%3%0%Research/analysis of unstructured data1%0%1%1%1%3%Customer/user experience(CX/UX)1%1%0%0%2%2%Applied neuroscience/biometrics1%0%2%0%0%0%Syndicated data and/or reports0%0%0%1%0%0%Secondary research0%0%0%0%0%1%n=695842Darker green indicates higher percentage;yellowish,middle pe
167、rcentage;and darker red,lower percentage.Green border indicates increased at least 3%since 21W1;red border,decreased at least 3%.There is no tracking data for qualitative research providers from 21W1.SUPPLIER SERVICE OFFERING TRENDSAmong the eight services GRIT classifies as research services,full s
168、ervice research and analytical services are the most common as they are offered by majorities in most segments.As the exceptions,full service research almost hits a majority among data and analytics providers(49%)and analytical services falls just short among qualitative researchers(46%)and well sho
169、rt among field services providers(35%).Industry-focused research is offered by majorities in three segments(full service research,qualitative research,and data and analytics),and data services are also offered by at least half of three supplier types(full service research,field services,and data and
170、 analytics).No other service is offered by a majority in any segment.23Data services is growing within full service research and data and analytics.Since the last GRIT wave,analytical services is growing among full service research,technology,and data and analytics,but declining among field services
171、 and strategic consultancies.Data services is growing within full service research and data and analytics,as is syndicated data and reports.No other services are growing in multiple segments.For three research services,growth is unique to full service research suppliers:secondary research,research/a
172、nalysis of unstructured data,and applied neuroscience/biometrics.Full service research suppliers lead all segments in offering secondary research and applied neuroscience/biometrics,and is second to strategic consultancies in research/analysis of unstructured data.Possibly,services regarding researc
173、h/analysis of unstructured data incubate within the data and analytics segment,then migrate to be integrated into full service research or leveraged for strategic work.Most of the growth among research services appears to be driven by full service research providers,and several services are declinin
174、g in other segments.Full service and secondary research are declining in three segments:field services,strategic consultancies,and data and analytics.Data services are declining among field service providers and strategic consultancies.Applied neuroscience/biometrics is falling among strategic consu
175、ltancies,technology providers,and data and analytics providers.Industry-focused research is declining among strategic consultancies,and research/analysis of unstructured data is declining among field services.RESEARCH SERVICES OFFERED:SUPPLIER TYPE(SUPPLIER)Full service researchField servicesQualita
176、tive researchStrategic consultingTechnology Data&analyticsFull service research92%53%68%65%58%49%Analytical services67%35%46%53%58%65%Industry-focused research52%45%57%47%44%52%Data services50%60%33%29%48%59%Secondary research41%23%31%37%11%15%Research/analysis of unstructured data40%24%39%44%36%30%
177、Syndicated data and/or reports 36%18%17%23%23%31%Applied neuroscience/biometrics20%4%12%8%5%9%Other research services1%1%2%0%2%1%n=695842Darker green indicates higher percentage;yellowish,middle percentage;and darker red,lower percentage.Green border indicates increased at least 3%since 2
178、2W1;red border,decreased at least 3%.There is no tracking data for qualitative research providers from 22W1.24www.GreenBook.orG/GrITAll five offline field services are growing within the full service segment;all but sampling,which is declining,are growing in the field services segment.Among offline
179、data collection services,moderating/interviewing is offered by majorities of full service research,field services,and qualitative research providers,as well as strategic consultancies.Offline quantitative data collection is offered by majorities in full service research,field services,and data and a
180、nalytics providers.Offline qualitative data collection is offered by majorities in full service research,field services,and qualitative research providers.Two offline field services are offered by majorities of field services providers but not of any other segment:recruiting/pre-recruiting and sampl
181、ing.All five of these services are growing within the full service research segment.All but sampling,which is declining,are growing in the field services segment.The only other service that is growing within a segment is recruiting/pre-recruiting,which is growing within data and analytics.Regarding
182、declining services,fewer strategic consultancies and technology providers offer moderating or interviewing.Sampling is less frequently offered by technology and data and analytics providers,and recruiting/pre-recruiting is declining among strategic consultancies.OFFLINE DATA COLLECTION OFFERED:SUPPL
183、IER TYPE(SUPPLIER)Full service researchField servicesQualitative researchStrategic consultingTechnology Data&analyticsModerating/interviewing65%56%66%53%30%34%Qualitative data collection(offline)60%62%74%48%36%47%Quantitative data collection(offline)59%69%43%41%38%51%Recruiting/pre-recruiting47%66%4
184、6%24%38%31%Sampling46%73%34%28%43%36%n=695842Darker green indicates higher percentage;yellowish,middle percentage;and darker red,lower percentage.Green border indicates increased at least 3%since 22W1;red border,decreased at least 3%.There is no tracking data for qualitative research prov
185、iders from 22W1.Regarding our five consulting services,most in each segment except field services offer strategy or strategic insights consulting.Half or more offer product development or innovation consulting among full service research,strategic consultancies,and data and analytics providers.Most
186、full service research suppliers and strategic consultancies offer brand management or brand strategy consulting,and most strategic consultancies offer consulting on marketing communications,advertising,and/or PR.Strategy or strategic insights consulting is growing in each segment except qualitative
187、research,in which a majority offer it,and field services.Product development or innovation consulting is growing among data and analytics providers,but no segment is increasingly offering brand management or strategy consulting,customer or user experience(CX/UX)consulting,or marketing communications
188、,advertising,and/or PR consulting.It could be that these three are not sufficiently general enough,like strategic insights consulting,to be widely adopted,but they also not may not be highly correlated enough with any of these segments to spur rapid growth.25Since last year,three technology services
189、 are growing within the technology segment:basic or advanced analytics,online qualitative data collection,and collection or analysis of unstructured data.CONSULTING SERVICES OFFERINGS:SUPPLIER TYPE(SUPPLIER)Full service researchField servicesQualitative researchStrategic consultingTechnology Data&an
190、alyticsStrategy/strategic insights81%44%64%93%61%70%Product development/innovation61%31%46%66%47%50%Brand management/strategy55%26%42%75%35%42%Customer or user experience(CX/UX)49%25%49%47%33%36%Marketing communications/advertising/PR46%27%45%57%25%36%Other consulting services6%2%6%9%3%3%n=695841872
191、67302192Darker green indicates higher percentage;yellowish,middle percentage;and darker red,lower percentage.Green border indicates increased at least 3%since 22W1;red border,decreased at least 3%.There is no tracking data for qualitative research providers from 22W1.Although most strategic consulta
192、ncies offer almost all of our consulting services,most technology providers offer only four of eight technology services:online quantitative data collection,basic or advanced analytics,online qualitative data collection,and DIY surveys.In each segment except strategic consultancies,most offer online
193、 quantitative data collection.Most full service research and data and analytics providers offer platforms or tools for basic or advanced analytics,and most field service and qualitative research providers offer online qualitative data collection.No other technology service is offered by a majority o
194、f any segment.Since last year,three services are growing within the technology segment:basic or advanced analytics,online qualitative data collection,and collection or analysis of unstructured data.Of these,only collection or analysis of unstructured data is growing in another segment(full service r
195、esearch).DIY surveys and platforms or tools for nonconscious or passive measurement are also growing within the full service research segment,and the latter is also increasing among data and analytics suppliers.No other services are growing in any segment,but there are several cases of reduced offer
196、ings.Full service research suppliers are less likely to offer online quantitative data collection compared to last wave,data and analytics providers are less likely to offer platforms or tools for basic or advanced analytics,and technology providers less likely to offer DIY sample access.Aside from
197、strategy or strategic insights consulting,all consulting services are declining among field services providers.Customer or user experience(CX/UX)and marketing communications,advertising,and/or PR consulting are declining among strategic consultancies and technology providers.26www.GreenBook.orG/GrIT
198、TECHNOLOGY SERVICES OFFERED:SUPPLIER TYPE(SUPPLIER)Full service researchField servicesQualitative researchStrategic consultingTechnology Data&analyticsOnline quantitative data collection57%71%54%37%73%62%Basic or advanced analytics53%23%37%42%63%56%Online qualitative data collection48%54%71%39%66%49
199、%Collection or analysis of unstructured data37%21%38%34%45%38%Online communities(MROC)33%27%39%16%33%19%DIY surveys29%24%26%14%60%27%Nonconscious or passive measurement22%9%9%15%16%11%DIY sample access18%37%14%7%29%18%n=695842Darker green indicates higher percentage;yellowish,middle perce
200、ntage;and darker red,lower percentage.Green border indicates increased at least 3%since 22W1;red border,decreased at least 3%.There is no tracking data for qualitative research providers from 22W1.Seven of the eight offerings are becoming less common among field services providers,and a slightly dif
201、ferent seven have declined among strategic consultancies.One of these,DIY surveys,is also less common among data and analytics suppliers.There are a lot of cases of technology offerings becoming offered less frequently within a segment,but this phenomenon doesnt indicate that the tide of technology
202、services is ebbing.In some cases,such as with the dramatically smaller field services segment,the percentage offering these services declined because many of them grew enough in other areas to migrate to a different segment,such as technology.In other cases,these technologies have become integrated
203、into other services and no longer stand alone.In some cases,the percentage offering technology services declined because many grew enough in other areas to migrate to a different segment.In other cases,these technologies have been integrated into other services and no longer stand alone.27With more
204、pressure to get more insights from existing data,data analysis increased as a primary role as the challenges of the pandemic dovetailed with methodological advances.Suppliers seem to be evaluating whether it is best to differentiate on their core service area or to make their core service implicit a
205、nd differentiate on something closer to the end client,such as“CX/UX consulting.”THE BIG PICTUREOn the buyer side,the pandemic obviously shook things up,and it seems like some of the changes are permanent.There seems to be a hard core one-third of staffs that focus on strategic insights consulting,d
206、own from pre-pandemic highs.In response to the pandemic,in-house research strengthened its position as a primary role at companies that found it more effective to conduct their own research and make use of DIY tools,and many have maintained this model.With more pressure to get more insights from exi
207、sting data,data analysis also increased as a primary role as the challenges of the pandemic dovetailed with methodological advances.As significant,but not always leading roles,in-house research,research outsourcing,and data analysis increased for more insights staffs after the pandemic hit,and busin
208、esses still seem to be comfortable with those models.The average number of significant roles peaked during the pandemic,then declined,though not to pre-pandemic levels.These roles may have been performed outside the recognized insights staff before the pandemic,and they have either been added to exi
209、sting roles or perhaps the larger organization has become more integrated with respect to activities that result in insights.On the supplier side,the major observation is similar to previous GRIT Reports:no matter what the primary revenue source,data and analytics need to be part of the portfolio.Th
210、is mirrors the increased buyer-side focus on data analysis,products of the pandemics mandate to find ways to repurpose data and the increased accessibility of these capabilities.Technology providers are growing,and more suppliers of other types are offering technology services as part of their core
211、offerings.Part of this segments growth is driven by demand for technology,but part is driven by diversification into other areas.However,much of their positioning is dependent on the technology they offer,not on the end result of it.They face increased competition from other segments for“traditional
212、”technology services,and it remains to be seen as to whether they can differentiate from their technological brethren by offering value-added services,such as industry-focus”to“quant data collection.”Or,perhaps,long-term growth will depend on developing and popularizing new platforms,such as those t
213、hat collect or analyze unstructured data.At a more general level,suppliers seem to be evaluating whether it is best to differentiate on their core service area such as positioning a full service research provider on“full service research”or to make their core service an implicit capability and diffe
214、rentiate on something closer to the end client like positioning“qualitative research”as“CX/UX consulting.”The trend seems to be away from generic positioning e.g.,“full service research“compared to“CX/UX consulting”and less complexity,such as de-coupling positionings that combine multiple services w
215、hich may not be easily understood as a unit.Buyers and suppliers are evolving in response to challenges and opportunities,and the industry structure continues to change.28www.GreenBook.orG/GrITGRIT CommenTaRya perManent pIvot or teMporary transItIon?a post-pandeMIc revIew oF the InsIGhts IndustryMat
216、ilda SarahVP Marketing+Co-Founder,DisplayrEmail:|Website:Twitter:displayrr|LinkedIn: the insights and analytics industry is surely no stranger to sudden curveballs,it faced a doozy of one with the global pandemic.Thrown into a topsy-turvy world,buyers zeroed in on something tangible data.What insigh
217、ts could be gleaned from existing data sets?What methodological advances could be used to extract something vital?How could they push suppliers to add more offerings in terms of data analysis?This demand has fueled both an expansion and repositioning on the supplier side.Technology has facilitated t
218、he option to diversify service offerings,and bringing more specialized roles onto the team has allowed for greater flexibility and competitiveness.buyer perspective:tell me about the dataThe buyer side of the insights industry has undergone a discernible shift in focus.Pre-pandemic,insights professi
219、onals primarily dealt with strategic insights consulting.Since the onset of the pandemic,there has been a marked increase in data analysis as the primary role of insights and analytics firms.However,this does not necessarily represent a back-to-basics shift so much as a desire to ground and refocus
220、analytics on the substantive data.supplier perspective:squeezing more out the dataOf course,the supplier and the buyer perspectives closely mirror one another.The pandemic brought new challenges with data collection piling pressure upon companies to extract more insights from existing data sets and
221、learn how to repurpose data.This was made evident by companies strengthening their in-house research teams or increasing their reliance on outsourcing research.For those with in-house teams,this also involved integrating methodological advances into their data analysis processes.buyer perspective:ke
222、eping roles fluid and dynamicThose who adjusted best to the pandemic are those who quickly adapted roles to meet changing demands.The Voice of the Customer(VoC)role plummeted during the pandemic but has bounced back.Meanwhile,the role of in-house researcher surged to greater prominence as companies
223、found it more effective to conduct their own research,often utilizing DIY tools.These adaptations signify a fluidity within businesses,illustrating their capacity to pivot roles based on current challenges and requirements.Industry perspective:pivoting to the niche or merely a natural evolution?Our
224、industry seems to be undergoing a significant repositioning phase.We see a marked shift away from generic positions like“full service”toward specialized niches.Attempts to reposition core services-like“qualitative research”as“CX/UX consulting”better align them with what end clients need.Suppliers re
225、alize they need to refine their positioning to stand out,and technology that facilitates deeper and more granular analysis provides a natural evolution for them.Businesses are now more inclined to dig deeper into their data in search of actionable insights,and this reverberates throughout the suppli
226、er side.Suppliers that acknowledge the need to offer specialized services as well as to remain fluid are more likely to thrive in a saturated market.Some changes brought on by the pandemic seem permanent,such as the strengthening of the in-house research and the increased buyer-side focus on data an
227、alysis.Other adaptations,like repositioning certain services in a way that resonates more with the end client may or may not stay the course.However,what remains clear is the industrys resilience and capacity to adapt to new challenges and seize fresh opportunities.29Buyers may have an more up-close
228、-and-personal view of how deliverables are used and commissioned,but suppliers have a diverse view from multiple perspectives.evoLvInG InsIGhts audIenceSince 20W1,the last GRIT wave before the pandemic,weve asked buyer-side insights professionals how different functional areas collaborate on insight
229、s and what role they have in selecting methodologies,partners,and suppliers.We also ask suppliers for their perception of how different functional areas at their clients engage with insights work and deliverables as well as which ones are involved in supplier selection.It can be tempting to think th
230、at the buyer-side view of how insights work is conducted and who influences related decisions is more accurate than the supplier perception because who knows better than the people who work there?In this context,however,that might not be the case.The buyer-side view represents the aggregate view acr
231、oss all insights work,and when they say that more than one functional area is involved as collaborators,users,or decision influencers,they might each be involved with different types of projects.This point of view is heavily influenced by the insights group,which is 56%of the buyer-side sample.On th
232、e other hand,the supplier-side view represents the perspectives of each supplier segment and may better represent the breadth of who uses particular kinds of deliverables and who decides on particular types of services.While we know that the insights or research group is likely to be an important ga
233、tekeeper,it might only be for traditional research at some buyer organizations,and other kinds of services may be sold directly into other functional areas.For buyers and for each supplier type,most say that the research or insights group is a decision-maker or key influencer.A majority of buyers al
234、so say that marketing is a key influencer,but none of the other four functional areas are considered to be key decision influencers by a majority.The GRIT buyer perspective is heavily influenced by the insights and marketing groups,and they only consider their two groups to be key influencers.Wherea
235、s buyers see an average of just under three decision influencers,almost all supplier types see nearly four or,in the case of data and analytics providers,more than four(4.4).Outside of insights and marketing,each functional area is recognized as a key decision influencer by a majority within at leas
236、t three types of suppliers.It may be that the insights group and marketing are gatekeepers for all types of insights but underestimate the influence of other functional areas on those decisions.It might also be there are significant amounts of insights work being commissioned by others of which they
237、 know very little.Depending on whether looking from the perspective of the buyer or a type of supplier,the level of engagement and decision influence across various internal functional areas differs.Although the insights group is the most important gatekeeper for traditional research,there are hints
238、 of other“gates”for insights work,and some of these may lead into silos.OVERVIEW30www.GreenBook.orG/GrITFor buyers and all supplier types except field services,GRIT has one pre-pandemic measurement and three after the onset of the pandemic.PRIMARY DECISION-MAKER/KEY INFLUENCER IN SELECTING METHODOLO
239、GIES/PARTNERS:BUYER,SUPPLIER TYPE BuyerFull service researchField servicesQualitative researchStrategic consultingTechnology Data&analyticsResearch or insights group88%92%68%81%84%84%89%Marketing62%61%59%60%68%51%55%Analytics48%61%50%58%64%60%74%Executive team42%65%71%76%73%79%87%Product management3
240、2%47%48%58%45%62%68%R&D22%41%52%54%37%55%66%Others7%11%10%26%9%20%21%Average(excl.“others”)2.93.73.53.93.73.94.4n=17150101Darker green indicates higher percentage;yellowish,middle percentage;and darker red,lower percentage(“others”not included).The patterns of who is considered to be in t
241、he audience for insights work differ across the perspectives of buyers and different types of suppliers and have evolved throughout the pandemic years.In Unmet Needs,we discuss how some buyers perceive that different insights silos have emerged in their organizations,giving rise to conflicting intra
242、-organizational interpretations of their markets.The potential fragmentation of insights work from the overall business perspective is worth pondering as you consider these results.BUYER PERSPECTIVEGRIT asks about the level of involvement different internal functional areas have with insights work a
243、nd insights deliverables:actively collaborate and work with deliverables,create new insights from deliverables,receive deliverables,or are not involved with insights.We first asked this in 2020,which was also our last report before the pandemic,so we dont have a lot of insight into what equilibrium
244、might look like historically.Now we have three waves of data from after the pandemic hit,and trends might be emerging.If we look at anyone who is involved in insights regardless of whether they collaborate on the initial work,we find that not much has changed since before the pandemic.The percentage
245、s who say that the insights group,marketing,analytics,product management,and R&D are engaged has not changed by more than 5%since before the pandemic,and none of those groups changed by more than 6%in any year after the pandemic.The involvement of the executive team,however,has decreased.In our init
246、ial measurement just prior to the pandemic,60%were involved in creating new insights from deliverables.That number did not change in the first year of the pandemic as buyers were finding their footing,but it dropped by 8%in the next year and another 9%since last year.Executives are not losing intere
247、st in insights per se,but some may be losing interest in traditional research.In Business Outlook,we discuss a slowdown in research budgets,and in Unmet Needs,well encounter some buyers and suppliers who feel estranged from the business leaders.31Although most areas are as likely to create new insig
248、hts as pre-pandemic,marketing,product development,and executives are less likely to actively collaborate on the work that produces the deliverables.In last years GRIT Business&Innovation Report,one of our themes was that the job of creating insights was being decentralized,with the insights group as
249、 the hub for providing the source material while those who were closer to the business issues took more responsibility for developing insights.It appears that insights development gained a stronger voice in more places within the organization,but,relatively speaking,theres been a kind of hush from e
250、xecutives lately.Once the pandemic hit,the role of the analytics group did not change,and neither did the involvement of product management or R&D.Marketings role in developing insights,however,jumped 11%,from 78%to 89%,but might be slowly declining since then.ACTIVELY COLLABORATES OR CREATES NEW IN
251、SIGHTS:GRIT WAVE(BUYER)20W121W122W123W1Change since last yearChange since 20W1Research or insights groupN/A81%81%84%+3%N/AMarketing78%89%83%82%-1%+3%Analytics73%72%68%73%+5%0%Product management69%66%62%65%+3%-4%R&D56%55%57%51%-6%-5%Executive team60%60%52%43%-9%-17%Others19%11%9%16%+7%-3%Average(excl
252、.“others”)2.22.82.72.5 n=424623285137 Insights group was not asked in 20W1.Green highlighting represents increases of 10%or more;red highlighting,decreases of 10%or more.Looking at those who are most engaged those who actively collaborate on insights work-and recalling that this perspective is stron
253、gly influenced by the insights group,it appears this work may be increasingly centralized within insights groups,as we observed last year.The biggest change once the pandemic hit was the increased involvement of marketing,up 8%from 58%to 66%.Currently,however,each functional area,aside from insights
254、 and R&D,is less involved than before the pandemic:marketing is down 11%;executive teams,11%;product management,10%;and analytics,8%.Although R&D has not become less engaged,the insights group is more than twice as likely to collaborate on insights work(75%to 35%).Its safe to say that the insights g
255、roup is increasingly the center of developing materials from which others develop insights.In Industry Structure,we note that in-house research has become a more central function for insights professionals during the pandemic years while strategic insights consulting became less likely to be conside
256、red a primary role.This is consistent with the idea that insights groups are taking responsibility for building the fact-base from which insights can be developed,at least as far as traditional research is concerned.They may also generate insights themselves,but enabling others throughout the organi
257、zation seems to have become a more significant role.32www.GreenBook.orG/GrITACTIVELY COLLABORATES ON INSIGHTS/DELIVERABLES:GRIT WAVE(BUYER)20W121W122W123W1Change since last yearChange since 20W1Research or insights groupN/A70%70%75%+5%N/AMarketing58%66%62%47%-15%-11%Analytics48%49%43%40%-3%-8%R&D36%
258、30%33%35%+2%0%Product management42%39%35%32%-3%-10%Executive team32%27%25%21%-4%-11%Others9%5%5%9%+4%0%Average(excl.“others”)3.44.24.04.0 n=424623285137 Insights group was not asked in 20W1.Green highlighting represents increases of 10%or more;red highlighting,decreases of 10%or more.If theres any d
259、oubt about the centralization of initial insights work within insights or research groups,at least from a heavily insights group point of view,their role as primary decision-makers for methodologies and partners or suppliers has grown from 57%before the pandemic to 70%today.Our theory has been that
260、the pandemic forced a stronger division of labor,including more project management roles for full service research providers,a greater need for insights groups to coordinate those activities with internal requirements,and a realization that those closest to the front lines need to be able to generat
261、e and apply insights and have the means to do so readily available.PRIMARY DECISION-MAKER IN SELECTING METHODOLOGIES/PARTNERS:GRIT WAVE(BUYER)20W121W122W123W1Change since last yearChange since 20W1Research or insights group57%67%75%70%-6%+12%Analytics19%23%24%14%-10%-5%Marketing17%23%17%13%-3%-4%Exe
262、cutive team20%17%10%13%+3%-7%R&D10%6%8%7%-1%-2%Product management12%9%6%4%-1%-8%Others3%2%2%2%0%-1%Average(excl.“others”)0.81.41.41.2 n=424623285137 Green highlighting represents increases of 10%or more;red highlighting,decreases of 10%or more.33Its possible that R&D and product management have insi
263、ghts needs that fall outside of the insights groups traditional purview.If we consider decision influence in addition to decision-making,we find that the insights group became even more influential when the pandemic hit and maintained that level of influence to the present time.Marketing has been up
264、 and down and is currently up.The influence of the analytics and executive teams are down somewhat,and the influence of product management and R&D are well below pre-pandemic levels.Weve already discussed the integration(or disintegration)of insights and analytics groups that may have resulted in a
265、perception that internal analytics groups have less influence,as well as PRIMARY DECISION-MAKER/KEY INFLUENCER IN SELECTING METHODOLOGIES/PARTNERS:GRIT WAVE(BUYER)20W121W122W123W1Change since last yearChange since 20W1Research or insights group81%89%89%88%0%+8%Marketing56%66%54%62%+8%+7%Analytics53%
266、52%54%48%-6%-5%Executive team48%46%37%42%+5%-6%Product management42%35%27%32%+4%-10%R&D34%29%29%22%-7%-13%Others11%6%5%7%+2%-4%Average(excl.“others”)2.33.22.92.9 n=424623285137 Green highlighting represents increases of 10%or more;red highlighting,decreases of 10%or more.The other big shift was the
267、reduced influence of the analytics group as a primary decision maker.Although never more than 24%,that peak was reached in the pandemic years,but fell 10%in the past year to 14%.The growth of data analysis as key function for insights professionals is a related trend reported in Industry Structure.I
268、t may reflect greater but by no means complete integration of analytics with traditional insights work with analytics becoming absorbed into a central insights function.In other cases,however,it may represent the complete siloing of analytics from traditional insights,leaving the insights group with
269、 no visibility into the decisions made by analytics.the possible delegation of insights work from executive teams to those closer to the front lines.The reduced influence by product management and R&D may be explained by the centralization of initial insights work within the insights and research te
270、ams coupled with their possibly increased responsibility for coordinating external research suppliers.However,another theory is that R&D and product development teams increasingly have needs that fall outside of the core expertise of traditional insights teams.For example,those responsible for digit
271、al products may depend on real-time insights that are supported by less traditional suppliers.They might also have more need for insights that are generated in non-traditional ways,such as CX/UX work or web analytics.Perhaps similarly,the relative volatility of decision influence by the marketing fu
272、nction may be related to the digital sphere.In the digital world,market research and marketing happen virtually simultaneously and may be considered as distinct from traditional work.From the perspective of those who are part of an insights group,marketing might not be a consistent presence in decis
273、ions related to traditional research.34www.GreenBook.orG/GrITStrategic consultancies may be working more closely with marketing,which might explain their diminished presence from the buyer perspective.More than any functional area,marketing is much more inclined to develop new insights from delivera
274、bles from strategic consultancies than from technology providers.SUPPLIER PERSPECTIVELooking at engagement with insights and decision-making by supplier type may give us a more granular view of what happens on the buyer-side.Its reasonable to assume that different services are more likely to be used
275、 by certain types of buyers and that the target decision-maker would differ depending on the type of offering.Unlike for buyers,GRIT doesnt ask suppliers for who actively collaborates in insights work,only whom they perceive to create new insights from deliverables,only receive deliverables,or is no
276、t part of the audience.Although there is a range,most supplier-side insights professionals in each segment say that the research or insights group and the analytics team work with deliverables to create new insights.Except technology providers,most in each segment say the same for marketing teams.Qu
277、alitative research and data and analytics suppliers are somewhat less likely to say that the insights group creates new insights than those in other segments,and qualitative researchers and field services suppliers are somewhat less likely to say that the analytics team is involved.Of all segments,s
278、trategic consultancies are most likely to say that marketing creates new insights from their deliverables(64%),followed by data and analytics suppliers(55%).Barely half of qualitative research(52%),full service research(51%),and field services suppliers(50%)agree,and only a minority of technology su
279、ppliers(44%)see marketing as engaged to this extent.In fact,of these six areas,strategic consultants say that 3.8 create new insights from their deliverables,on average,and data and analytics providers say an average of 3.7 do this.In the other four segments,the average is half an area lower for thr
280、ee of them(3.3)and only 3.1 for field services providers.In addition to the insights,analytics,and marketing groups,most strategic consultants say that product management(54%)and the executive team(57%)create new insights from deliverables and just under half say R&D does this(46%).Most data and ana
281、lytics providers say the same for those two groups plus R&D(62%).For five of the six areas,most qualitative research providers say that they create new insights from their deliverables;product management(43%)is the exception.Just under half of full service research providers claim product management
282、 develops new insights from their deliverables(48%),while fewer make the same claim for the executive team(43%)and R&D(41%).Half or most field services providers say that insights,analytics,marketing groups,and R&D create new insights,but only 44%agree for product management and only 33%do for the e
283、xecutive team.While technology providers are among the leading segments who see insights groups and analytics create new insights,they are the only segment where only a minority say this about marketing.In fact,marketing is the group least likely to create new insights from technology deliverables,w
284、hile product management,R&D,and the executive team cluster around 50%.35Compared to before the pandemic,product management and analytics are much more likely to work with deliverables from strategic consultancies.Overall,active engagement with strategic insights consultants increased among five func
285、tional groups.CREATES NEW INSIGHTS/DELIVERABLES:SUPPLIER TYPE(SUPPLIER)Full service researchField servicesQualitative researchStrategic consultingTechnology Data&analyticsResearch or insights group82%78%71%86%78%73%Analytics64%57%51%68%64%69%Marketing51%50%52%64%44%55%Product management48%44%43%54%5
286、3%54%Executive team43%33%56%57%47%57%R&D41%51%53%46%48%62%Others15%4%27%22%20%27%Average(excl.“others”)3.33.13.33.83.33.7n=3374394117150101Darker green indicates higher percentage;yellowish,middle percentage;and darker red,lower percentage(“others”not included).In the past year,four segments reporte
287、d increases in active use of their deliverables by buyer-side insights professionals in multiple functional areas.More analytics professionals created new insights or deliverables based on work from strategic insights consultants,full service research providers,and field services providers.More mark
288、eting professionals followed suit with deliverables from strategic insights consultants,field services providers,and data and analytics providers.R&D also became more engaged with deliverables from the same three supplier types.Product management teams have gotten more engaged with the work delivere
289、d by strategic insights consultants,full service research providers,and data and analytics providers.Engagement among insights groups increased with respect to strategic consultancies and field services suppliers.Among executive teams,engagement increased with deliverables from data and analytics pr
290、oviders and decreased with field services deliverables.Overall,active engagement with strategic insights consultants increased among five functional groups and with field services and data and analytics across four of them,although it also decreased for one group with field services.Six of the incre
291、ases since last year also represent increases from when GRIT first started measuring this:full service research deliverables among analytics;field services among research and insights groups and R&D;strategic consultancies among analytics and product management;and data and analytics among R&D.There
292、 is one decline since 20W1:engagement with technology is lower among marketing.36www.GreenBook.orG/GrITCREATES NEW INSIGHTS/DELIVERABLES:SUPPLIER TYPE(SUPPLIER)Full service researchField servicesStrategic consultingTechnology Data&analyticsResearch or insights groupAnalyticsMarketing Product managem
293、entExecutive teamR&DDarker green indicates higher percentage;yellowish,middle percentage;and darker red,lower percentage.“”indicates an increase of at least 10%since last year;“”,a decrease of at least 10%.Green border indicates an increase of at least 10%since the first time measured;red border,dec
294、rease of at least 10%.First measurement 20W1(pre-pandemic)except for field services(20W2).Including anyone else who receives insights deliverables,data and analytics claim the widest audience,an average of 5.3 out of six areas,and field services providers perceive the narrowest(4.4).Strategic consul
295、tants(5.0),technology(4.9),full service research(4.9)and qualitative research providers(4.7)are between.CREATES NEW OR RECEIVES INSIGHTS/DELIVERABLES:SUPPLIER TYPE(SUPPLIER)Full service researchField servicesQualitative researchStrategic consultingTechnology Data&analyticsResearch or insights group9
296、4%80%85%91%89%93%Executive team88%76%87%93%88%96%Marketing84%72%75%80%79%90%Analytics81%63%76%77%82%85%Product management81%83%73%87%80%87%R&D66%70%74%70%71%81%Others29%14%47%40%40%48%Average(excl.“others”)4.94.44.75.04.95.3n=3374394117150101Darker green indicates higher percentage;yellowish,middle
297、percentage;and darker red,lower percentage(“others”not included).Three segments show a number of changes within these six areas from last year.Most notably,among data and analytics providers,engagement with deliverables increased among marketing,product management,R&D,and the executive team.It was r
298、elatively stable among the other two groups,insights and analytics,which already had high levels of engagement.Field services providers perceived more of their clients to create new deliverables since last year among insights,marketing,and R&D.In this case,the changes may be driven by how the field
299、services segment changed since last year.As we discuss in the Industry Structure section,the field services segment is half the size as last year.Overall,these suppliers are more likely to emphasize data collection platforms and industry-37The audience for data and analytics deliverables grew since
300、last year and since the pandemic among executives,product management,and R&D.The executive team is the most likely decision-maker for data and analytics services and much more likely to be a decision-maker for it than for any other type of service.focused research,and that may have necessitated diff
301、erent kinds of relationships with buyers.Strategic insights consultants report higher engagement over last year among insights groups and marketing.Since last year,more strategic consultancies have grown revenue from data and analytics,technology,and full service research.This could mean that they a
302、re reaching new audiences or that suppliers originally in another segment,like full service research,have grown their consulting services,bringing their customers along with them into this segment.Increased engagement with field services deliverables among research or insights groups and R&D also re
303、present a longer term change versus 21W1.For data and analytics,increased engagement in the last year among executive teams,product management,and R&D is also an increase over 20W1,the pre-pandemic wave.Other changes from last year wash out when compared to initial measurements.CREATES NEW OR RECEIV
304、ES INSIGHTS/DELIVERABLES:SUPPLIER TYPE(SUPPLIER)Full service researchField servicesStrategic consultingTechnology Data&analyticsResearch or insights groupExecutive teamMarketingAnalyticsProduct managementR&DDarker green indicates higher percentage;yellowish,middle percentage;and darker red,lower per
305、centage.“”indicates an increase of at least 10%since last year;“”,a decrease of at least 10%.Green border indicates an increase of at least 10%since the first time measured;red border,decrease of at least 10%.First measurement 20W1(pre-pandemic)except for field services(20W2).With respect to primary
306、 decision-makers for methodologies and partners or suppliers,the insights group is most commonly cited in each segment except data analytics providers.The insights group is named by a majority of full service research(62%),qualitative research(53%),and technology providers(51%).The most common decis
307、ion-maker from the perspective of data analytics providers is the executive team(55%).Although it is the second most frequently named in each other segment,the executive team is never mentioned by as many as 40%,and it is only mentioned by 29%in full service research and 23%in field services.Marketi
308、ng and analytics groups are also on the radar as primary decision-makers for both qualitative research and data analytics providers(above 20%).Marketing is also on the radar for strategic consultants(24%),and analytics teams are on the radar for technology(23%),qualitative research(20%),and data and
309、 analytics providers(24%).Product management and R&D are not significant decision-makers in any supplier segment.38www.GreenBook.orG/GrITDecision responsibility for field services is becoming more concentrated with the research and insights group.PRIMARY DECISION-MAKER IN SELECTING METHODOLOGIES/PAR
310、TNERS:SUPPLIER TYPE(SUPPLIER)Full service researchField servicesQualitative researchStrategic consultingTechnology Data&analyticsResearch or insights group62%49%53%45%51%47%Executive team29%23%35%38%38%55%Marketing17%10%21%24%11%24%Analytics17%13%20%11%23%24%Product management13%4%15%12%11%16%R&D9%3
311、%14%8%15%16%Others3%7%3%6%7%2%Average(excl.“others”)1.51.01.61.41.51.8n=3374394117150101Darker green indicates higher percentage;yellowish,middle percentage;and darker red,lower percentage(“others”not included).Not much changed since last year relative to decision-making roles about methodologies an
312、d suppliers.It seems that field services providers see decision-making for their services becoming more concentrated among insights groups,and data and analytics providers are getting more attention from executive teams.However,decision-making for field services among insights groups is not as conce
313、ntrated as decision-making for data analytics is among the executive team.These two trends basically represent the same changes since our initial measurements.Although we dont see a big increase among insights groups regarding field services,we see decreases in the other groups,which amounts to the
314、same implication.PRIMARY DECISION-MAKER IN SELECTING METHODOLOGIES/PARTNERS:SUPPLIER TYPE(SUPPLIER)Full service researchField servicesStrategic consultingTechnology Data&analyticsResearch or insights group Executive teamMarketingAnalytics Product managementR&DDarker green indicates higher percentage
315、;yellowish,middle percentage;and darker red,lower percentage.“”indicates an increase of at least 10%since last year;“”,a decrease of at least 10%.Green border indicates an increase of at least 10%since the first time measured;red border,decrease of at least 10%.First measurement 20W1(pre-pandemic)ex
316、cept for field services(20W2).39Every functional area except marketing either was a key influencer on data and analytics services already or increased since last year.Decision authority for field services is consolidating within the insights group,and influence from the executive team has also grown
317、 during the pandemic,suggesting increased strategic scrutiny on data.In addition to the primary decision makers,at least two other decision influencers are included in each segment.Data and analytics providers see the most departments involved in decisions(4.4 on average)and field services providers
318、 see slightly fewer than the rest(3.5).Compared to other segments,the decision group for data and analytics providers is much more likely to include the executive team(87%),analytics(74%),product management(68%),and R&D(66%).The research or insights group at least influences decisions for 80%in each
319、 segment except field services where only 68%cite them.It could be that the insights groups is more likely than others to hire full service research providers who in turn,may hire the field services providers.Other functional areas may be more likely to contract directly with field services than wit
320、h an intermediary when they have needs.In addition to the research or insights group,majorities in each segment also consider the executive team,analytics,and marketing to be involved in decisions,although probably not always the same decisions.Product management is considered an influencer by most
321、data and analytics(68%),technology(62%),and qualitative research providers(58%).R&D is also an influencer for majorities of these(66%,55%,and 54%,respectively)plus field services providers(52%).PRIMARY DECISION-MAKER/KEY INFLUENCER IN SELECTING METHODOLOGIES/PARTNERS:SUPPLIER TYPE(SUPPLIER)Full serv
322、ice researchField servicesQualitative researchStrategic consultingTechnology Data&analyticsResearch or insights group92%68%81%84%84%89%Executive team65%71%76%73%79%87%Analytics61%50%58%64%60%74%Marketing61%59%60%68%51%55%Product management47%48%58%45%62%68%R&D41%52%54%37%55%66%Others11%10%26%9%20%21
323、%Average(excl.“others”)3.73.53.93.73.94.4n=3374394117150101Darker green indicates higher percentage;yellowish,middle percentage;and darker red,lower percentage(“others”not included).If we look at changes in decision influence since last year,we see that executives are growing not just as decision-ma
324、kers for data and analytics services,but also as influencers.From the data and analytics perspective,influence also increased among research or insights groups,product management,and R&D.Even though weve seen that marketing and R&D are becoming less likely to make decisions about field services,more
325、 of them are becoming influencers.Technology providers also report that the executive teams influence is growing.The increased influence in data and analytics provider decisions among insights and research groups,the executive team,product management,and R&D also represent a longer term increase ove
326、r 20W1.Despite a lack of change since last year,decision influence on field services has increased among executive teams since 21W1.40www.GreenBook.orG/GrITRecall how buyers,heavily influenced by insights groups,reported a decline in executive team influence.In this light,the increased engagement ex
327、ecutives have with data and analytics providers may indicate a shift away from traditional research.In Unmet Needs,we discuss how some insights professionals on both the supplier and buyer sides feel estranged from executives,and this apparent shift may explain why.PRIMARY DECISION-MAKER/KEY INFLUEN
328、CER IN SELECTING METHODOLOGIES/PARTNERS:SUPPLIER TYPE(SUPPLIER)Full service researchField servicesStrategic consultingTechnology Data&analyticsResearch or insights groupExecutive team AnalyticsMarketingProduct managementR&DDarker green indicates higher percentage;yellowish,middle percentage;and dark
329、er red,lower percentage.“”indicates an increase of at least 10%since last year;“”,a decrease of at least 10%.Green border indicates an increase of at least 10%since the first time measured;red border,decrease of at least 10%.First measurement 20W1(pre-pandemic)except for field services(20W2).The ris
330、e of data and analytics throughout multiple functional areas is the clearest demonstration of buyer-side professionals outside of the insights group taking initiative to directly engage suppliers.41Even though the pandemic has concentrated decision-making within the insights group,the number of func
331、tional areas that work with deliverables has not declined.The rise of data and analytics throughout multiple functional areas is the clearest demonstration of buyer-side professionals outside of the insights group taking initiative to directly engage suppliers.THE BIG PICTUREGRIT first began trackin
332、g the breadth of the audience for insights in 20W1,aka the eve of the pandemic.As is the case for many things that have changed since then,it is not always clear which are due to the pandemic,which were accelerated due to the pandemic,and which would have happened anyway.As is also the case with man
333、y things,its not clear that these distinctions matter.From the buyer perspective,the insights group increased its power as the gatekeeper for insights methodologies and suppliers since the pandemic began.Before the pandemic,57%said they were a primary decision-maker,but this jumped to 67%when the pandemic started and still sits at 70%.At the same time,four areas became somewhat less influential,le