Question 1

How do shared assets reduce duplicate commissioning across regions?

Accepted Answer

Shared research assets reduce duplicate commissioning across regions by giving all teams visibility into existing studies so they don't inadvertently reinvent the wheel. Many organizations enable this through a global knowledge portal or research repository that all regional teams can access. For example, if one country or business unit has already run a customer survey or focus group, teams elsewhere can find that report in the shared repository and reuse those insights instead of funding a similar project from scratch. This practice prevents significant wasted budget and time on redundant work while also promoting consistency — everyone is building on the same methodologies and findings. In short, shared assets break down silos and ensure each new study truly adds fresh value rather than duplicating what's been done elsewhere.

Question 2

What practices ensure SMB surveys capture decision-makers rather than employees?

Accepted Answer

To have your SMB (small and mid-sized business) survey reach actual decision-makers rather than random employees, be very deliberate in sampling and screening. First, source your sample from channels likely to include owners or executives - for instance, use a panel or email list that allows you to target respondents by job title (owners, CEOs, managing directors) or select by role in the business. Next, use screening questions at the start of the survey to confirm the person's decision-making authority. You might directly ask something like, "Are you the primary decision-maker for purchasing X at your company?" and disqualify those who say no. You can also design the survey in a way that signals it's for decision-makers: include a few questions about budgets, strategy, or other high-level topics that an ordinary employee wouldn't confidently answer. Non-decision-makers often self-select out when they see the content isn't relevant to them. By combining targeted outreach and strong screeners, you increase the odds that your respondents are the people in charge (and that the insights you gather reflect the views of true business decision-makers).

Question 3

What evidence links in-product telemetry to willingness-to-pay survey metrics?

Accepted Answer

Companies are finding a clear link between in-product telemetry (how people actually use the product) and willingness-to-pay survey results. For example, users who heavily engage with a product's features often report a higher willingness to pay, while those with light usage tend to have lower price expectations - showing that usage intensity correlates with perceived value. Several analyses that match individual usage data with survey responses confirm this pattern, providing evidence that real behavior aligns with what customers say about paying. By combining these insights, firms can price more confidently: if both telemetry and surveys indicate a segment finds high value (high usage, high stated WTP), the business can justify premium pricing, whereas a mismatch - say high usage but low stated WTP - alerts them to dig deeper (maybe the product is essential but budget constraints exist). Overall, using telemetry and WTP data together gives a more nuanced, evidence-backed foundation for pricing decisions than relying on either alone.

Question 4

How do we prevent late legal reviews from derailing local approvals for stimuli?

Accepted Answer

To prevent last-minute legal reviews from derailing local approvals, involve the legal team early and set clear guidelines so compliance issues are caught well before final sign-off. For example, instead of waiting until a campaign stimulus is ready to launch in a local market, legal advisors should review key claims and content during the development phase. This might involve creating a checklist of common legal watch-outs or getting preliminary legal sign-off on concepts before they reach local approvers. By front-loading the legal review process and communicating any requirements to local teams in advance, you minimize late surprises; another tactic is maintaining a repository of pre-vetted stimulus elements (such as pre-approved phrases or imagery) that local markets can use confidently. Overall, integrating legal checkpoints earlier in the timeline and aligning on standards globally ensures local market approvals won't be upended by last-minute legal concerns.

Question 5

Can UXR benchmarks expose revenue risk before major redesign investments?

Accepted Answer

Yes - well-chosen User Experience Research (UXR) benchmarks can highlight revenue risks long before you sink resources into a major redesign. By measuring current user pain points, drop-off rates, and task completion failures, UXR benchmarks often reveal where frustrated users are quietly abandoning a product or purchase. Those friction points translate to lost revenue opportunities: for example, if research shows 30% of users give up during checkout due to confusion, that indicates a significant revenue leak. Identifying these issues through UXR metrics (like low task success rates or poor usability scores on critical flows) provides an early warning system. It means you can quantify the cost of inaction and target the redesign to fix high-impact problems, mitigating revenue loss before it grows.

2Europe

Why choose Us

Features and attributes

What is 2Europe?

Reviews

Recognition

Services and Expertise

Market Research FAQs with Expert Insights

How do shared assets reduce duplicate commissioning across regions?

What practices ensure SMB surveys capture decision-makers rather than employees?

What evidence links in-product telemetry to willingness-to-pay survey metrics?

How do we prevent late legal reviews from derailing local approvals for stimuli?

Can UXR benchmarks expose revenue risk before major redesign investments?