Question 1

When should win-loss learnings update personas and segmentation?

Accepted Answer

Win-loss analysis learnings should feed into your buyer personas and market segmentation whenever they reveal a meaningful shift in who buys and why. If repeated win-loss reviews show, for instance, that a new customer type (maybe mid-market firms in a certain industry) is emerging with different priorities, it's a signal to update your personas. You want your sales and marketing collateral to reflect reality, so periodically--perhaps annually or after major market changes--compare persona assumptions to win-loss findings. Also, if a particular segment consistently shows higher win rates or losses, refine how you define that segment or alter your strategy for it. Basically, whenever win-loss data uncovers traits or motivations not captured in your current personas or segments, it's time to refresh them so you stay aligned with the actual market dynamics.

Question 2

Do experimental designs always assume more sample is always better?

Accepted Answer

No — good experimental design is about the right sample size, not simply the biggest sample size. While having more respondents generally increases statistical power (making it easier to detect a true effect), it doesn't mean "more is always better" in every situation. Once you have enough sample to reliably detect the differences or effects you care about (determined by a power analysis), piling on more data yields diminishing returns and can even be counterproductive. Extremely large samples might flag tiny differences as "significant" even if they're not practically meaningful, which can be misleading. There's also the reality of cost and time: testing on 10,000 people when 1,000 would have given a clear answer is inefficient and could divert resources from other tests. In some cases — like medical trials or any test involving inconvenience to participants — ethics dictate using the minimum sample necessary to achieve valid results, to avoid exposing more people than needed. So, an experiment should recruit enough participants to be robust and credible, but not so many that you're just inflating numbers. The goal is to determine an optimal sample size based on expected effect size and confidence levels, rather than assuming that a bigger N inherently makes for a better study.

Question 3

When is face-to-face interviewing most effective?

Accepted Answer

Face-to-face interviewing is most effective when research requires deep personal engagement, trust-building, or direct observation that other modes cannot easily provide. In-person interviews excel for sensitive topics where a trusted rapport helps participants open up, and they allow researchers to pick up on non-verbal cues like body language or facial expressions that enrich the data. This method is ideal when the environment or context is important — for example, conducting interviews in a shopper's home or at a store can reveal unspoken behaviors and reactions that might be missed remotely. Face-to-face is also valuable for reaching audiences with limited internet access or for complex tasks that benefit from on-site guidance. While in-person fieldwork can be more costly and time-intensive, it often yields richer insights and more nuanced understanding when these conditions make it the best fit.

Question 4

How are in-depth interviews adapting to hybrid schedules and dispersed teams?

Accepted Answer

In-depth interviews (IDIs) have evolved to accommodate hybrid schedules and dispersed teams by leveraging technology and flexible formats. Many IDIs are now conducted via video conferencing instead of in-person, making it easier to involve participants and stakeholders who are geographically spread out_x000D_. Interviewers also schedule sessions at non-traditional hours to fit interviewees' varied work-from-home or hybrid workday availability. Furthermore, digital tools are used to enhance remote interviews — screen sharing, digital whiteboards, or recording sessions for team members who can't attend live. Some researchers break interviews into shorter chunks or use diary studies followed by a brief live interview, which aligns better with the fragmented schedules of remote workers. Overall, IDIs are becoming more creative and accommodating: the core depth remains, but the delivery flexes around the new normal of where and when people work.

Question 5

How is inflation affecting consumer price sensitivity across categories?

Accepted Answer

High inflation generally makes consumers more price-sensitive, but the impact isn't equal in every category - it varies by how essential the product is and whether shoppers can find alternatives. In everyday necessity categories like groceries or household goods, many people are trading down to cheaper brands or smaller pack sizes as prices rise_x000D_. Shoppers who used to be brand-loyal might switch to store brands because they're watching every dollar. In discretionary categories (say electronics or dining out), inflation can lead consumers to postpone purchases or cut back frequency altogether, displaying very high sensitivity (since they can live without that new gadget or restaurant meal). On the other hand, truly premium or luxury categories sometimes see a smaller effect - higher-income buyers in those areas may absorb price hikes with less change in behavior, so sensitivity there remains lower. Overall, inflation has tightened budgets and put price front-and-center in purchase decisions for most households, but exactly how much demand shifts depends on the category's necessity and the availability of substitutes.

Emprica Consulting Ltd

What is Emprica Consulting Ltd?

Services and Expertise