Question 1

Does the path-to-purchase always start with brand awareness?

Accepted Answer

No, the path to purchase doesn't always start with conscious brand awareness; consumers often enter the journey at different points. Many buying journeys begin with a need or problem, not a particular brand: a person realizes they need a solution (say, a safer car seat or a new software tool) and then researches options, encountering brands during that search rather than starting with one in mind. In some cases, the first touchpoint is a recommendation or online review; for example, a friend's suggestion or a top result on Amazon might introduce a product before the shopper has any prior awareness of the brand. With the non-linear, digital-heavy consumer journey today, factors like search engines, social media, and influencers can drop a brand into the consideration phase directly. Brand awareness is helpful, but it's not a universal starting line--often the trigger is need or discovery, so marketers must be present where those triggers happen, not just rely on preexisting awareness.

Question 2

How should we adapt pricing research for markets with cash economies?

Accepted Answer

Adapting pricing research for cash-dominant markets means mirroring how people actually handle money day to day. In cash economies, consumers think in terms of immediate out-of-pocket cost, so frame survey questions or experiments around scenarios like "Would you pay X in cash right now for this product?" rather than abstract pricing or long-term payment plans. Use price points that make sense locally — common round numbers or typical small purchase sizes — because many shoppers operate within those practical limits (like only carrying a certain amount of cash). It also helps to gather qualitative insights by observing or interviewing shoppers: you might find they routinely bargain or save up over time for larger buys, which affects their price sensitivity. With that knowledge, you can adjust your research design to be realistic (for example, including a bargaining element in a hypothetical purchase scenario or using visuals of local currency for context). The goal is to align the research with everyday cash behaviors so that what people tell you about pricing matches what they'd actually do with money in hand.

Question 3

How can transformation research better support change fatigue management?

Accepted Answer

Transformation research helps prevent change fatigue by making employee feedback continuous and actionable during a major change. Instead of a one-time survey at the end, run frequent pulse surveys throughout to gauge how people feel — whether they understand the changes, how stressed they are, etc. Break down responses by team or department to find where fatigue or frustration is building. Then act quickly: if one group is overwhelmed by too many new initiatives at once, pause a less critical project for them or add support; if many employees say they don't understand why the change is happening, immediately step up communication about the vision and reasons. In the next pulse, check if those adjustments helped (did stress indicators improve, do more people get the "why"?). The key is to respond in near real time to what you learn. By continually listening and adapting, you catch early warning signs of fatigue and course-correct on the fly. This approach keeps people more engaged and the transformation on track without burning everyone out.

Question 4

How do I measure ROI from competitive intelligence programs?

Accepted Answer

Measure the ROI (Return on Investment) of competitive intelligence by linking its insights to tangible results - showing that decisions guided by intel led to revenue gains, cost savings, or risk avoidance that exceed the program's cost. For example, if the intel team uncovers a competitor's weakness or an emerging trend and your company capitalizes on it (launching a feature or entering a niche first), the resulting sales bump or market share gain can be attributed in part to the intelligence program; likewise, if a report warns of a rival's price cut and you adjust strategy to keep key customers, the revenue preserved is a direct benefit from intelligence. Companies often track improvements in win/loss rates, faster strategic pivots, and avoided bad investments, then compare business outcomes with vs. without those insights to quantify how the competitive intelligence efforts add financial value.

Question 5

When should sensors complement surveys rather than replace them?

Accepted Answer

Use sensors to complement rather than replace surveys whenever you need objective behavior data plus the personal context behind it. Sensors (from wearables, smartphones, IoT devices, etc.) excel at capturing what people do — heart rate spikes, foot traffic patterns, dwell time — but they can't tell you why. For example, a sensor might show a customer lingered in a store aisle for 5 minutes; a follow-up survey is needed to know if they were engaged by a display or frustrated searching for a product. The two methods work best together whenever behavior alone is insufficient: sensors provide accurate, continuous measures at scale, and surveys supply the motivation or satisfaction insights. Completely replacing surveys would mean losing the "why" behind actions, so it's usually better to combine them for a fuller picture.

InsightsNow

Why choose Us

Features and attributes

What is InsightsNow?

Services and Expertise

Published on Greenbook

Elusive Search for the Silver Bullet – Emotion Measurement

Looking at the Consumer Experience

Keeping The View On The Wider Landscape Of Human Experiences

Research Resources

Market Research FAQs with Expert Insights

Does the path-to-purchase always start with brand awareness?

How should we adapt pricing research for markets with cash economies?

How can transformation research better support change fatigue management?

How do I measure ROI from competitive intelligence programs?

When should sensors complement surveys rather than replace them?