Question 1

How are loyalty programs adapting to subscription models in CPG?

Accepted Answer

Consumer packaged goods (CPG) brands are evolving their loyalty programs to complement subscription models by focusing on continuous engagement and exclusive perks for subscribers. Rather than just rewarding one-off purchases with points, companies are incentivizing the ongoing relationship — for example, subscribers might earn loyalty benefits like bonus products every few months, special discounts, or early access to new flavors and products as long as their subscription stays active. Brands also use data from these subscriptions to personalize the experience: if the program knows you get a monthly snack box, it might tailor recommendations or add freebies that fit your taste profile, enhancing loyalty through a personal touch. This shift recognizes that with subscriptions, loyalty is about retention and lifetime value, so programs are adapting from transactional rewards to making the customer feel like a member of an exclusive club that grows more rewarding the longer they stick around.

Question 2

Does higher vendor awareness always signal real pipeline potential?

Accepted Answer

Not necessarily. High awareness of a vendor or supplier brand is a positive sign, but it doesn't always translate into genuine sales pipeline opportunities. It's possible for a company to have strong name recognition--perhaps due to marketing buzz or a legacy reputation--yet still not see a boost in qualified leads or intent to buy. True pipeline potential comes when awareness is coupled with interest and fit: the target customers know you and also see you as relevant to their needs. If awareness is "empty" (people have heard the name but don't understand the offering or don't consider it for themselves), then pipeline might remain flat. In short, awareness opens the door, but you need engagement and a compelling value proposition to convert that visibility into real sales opportunities.

Question 3

Does a high SUS score guarantee conversion or adoption improvements?

Accepted Answer

A high System Usability Scale (SUS) score indicates users find the product easy to use, but it doesn't guarantee higher conversion rates or adoption on its own. Usability is just one factor in a product's success — albeit an important one. A product might score well on SUS (meaning people had a smooth experience in testing) yet still struggle to win users if, for example, it lacks a compelling value proposition, is priced too high, or isn't marketed effectively. Conversely, some products with only average usability still gain huge adoption because they offer unique must-have features or benefits. That said, a high SUS is generally a good sign as it removes friction: users are less likely to drop out due to frustration. Think of SUS as one dimension: it improves the odds of conversion and satisfaction, but you also need desirability, demand, and good marketing for conversion and growth. In practice, treat a strong SUS score as necessary but not sufficient — use it alongside metrics like conversion funnel drop-off, retention rates, or NPS to get a full picture of likely adoption.

Question 4

How can we gain more transparency into provenance/licensing in training datasets?

Accepted Answer

Achieving transparency in training data provenance and licensing for AI models requires both industry standards and technical tools. One step is to push for detailed data provenance documentation: developers should provide datasheets that explain what data sources were used to train models and under what licenses. In fact, some ethics guidelines and upcoming laws (like the EU's AI Act) are starting to require companies to disclose training dataset origins. Technically, new methods can embed metadata or watermarks into datasets to help track their origin and usage rights. For example, projects are exploring blockchain ledgers or digital fingerprints that tag data, so any model built from it carries a traceable record. Another practical approach is favoring curated, open-license datasets where provenance is clear from the start. In short, greater transparency will come from providers sharing source details and from using verification technology to audit what went into model training.

Question 5

How do we encourage stakeholders to use portals before asking for new studies?

Accepted Answer

The best way to get stakeholders using a research portal is to make it their fastest path to answers - in other words, show that checking the portal is easier than commissioning a new study. This starts with keeping the portal well-organized and up to date, so users trust that a quick search will surface relevant past insights. Some companies integrate the portal into everyday workflows, for example by embedding links to it in project request forms or team chat bots, nudging people to look there first. Highlighting success stories can help too ("Look how Product X team saved time by finding existing data in the portal"). The key is to demonstrate value: when stakeholders see that the portal saves them effort and provides credible information on demand, they naturally turn to it instead of reflexively asking for new research.

OpenSurvey Incorporated

What is OpenSurvey Incorporated?

Recognition

Services and Expertise

Market Research FAQs with Expert Insights

How are loyalty programs adapting to subscription models in CPG?

Does higher vendor awareness always signal real pipeline potential?

Does a high SUS score guarantee conversion or adoption improvements?

How can we gain more transparency into provenance/licensing in training datasets?

How do we encourage stakeholders to use portals before asking for new studies?