Question 1

How should we segment adopters beyond simple age or income tiers?

Accepted Answer

To segment adopters beyond basic demographics, use behavioral and attitudinal factors that actually drive adoption — things like usage patterns, motivations, tech affinity, or lifestyle needs. For instance, rather than grouping users by age, you might segment by their level of tech enthusiasm (e.g. early tech adopters vs. cautious adopters), the specific use cases they're interested in, or the problems they hope the product will solve. Survey data or customer interviews can reveal categories like "convenience-driven multi-taskers," "value seekers," or "pragmatic innovators," which cut across age and income lines. You can also analyze product analytics or purchase behavior to cluster adopters based on how they interact with the product (frequency, feature usage, etc.). The goal is to identify meaningful segments defined by mindset and behavior — factors that influence adoption — so your targeting and messaging can be tailored to what truly differentiates one group from another, beyond just their life stage or income bracket.

Question 2

How risky are idioms and humor in cross-market concept testing?

Accepted Answer

Idioms and humor are risky in cross-market concept testing because they often don't translate well and can cause confusion or offense. A catchphrase that's hilarious and engaging in one language may lose its meaning or impact when translated, since it likely relies on local references or values not shared elsewhere. Even humor styles differ--sarcasm or wordplay might be appreciated in one culture but fall completely flat in another. If a concept's appeal hinges on a joke or idiom, you risk very skewed feedback internationally: people might dislike it not because the idea is bad, but because the expression doesn't resonate. It's generally safer to test a more universal version of the concept across markets, or be ready to adapt the creative language per locale if the core idea is strong.

Question 3

Will longer copy outperform short hooks for high-consideration categories?

Accepted Answer

In high-consideration categories (think expensive or complex purchases), longer informative copy often outperforms a short hook alone because buyers need more details to make a confident decision. For products like financial services or enterprise software, a quick catchy slogan might grab attention initially, but prospects typically have questions and seek substance--features, benefits, comparisons, and proof points--before they commit. A short hook without follow-up information can leave serious buyers unsatisfied, whereas a well-crafted long-form piece can educate and build trust. However, "longer copy" only works if it's engaging and well-structured: it's wise to lead with an attention-grabbing summary and then provide rich details in a scannable format (clear headings, bullet points, visuals) so readers can easily digest it. In practice, combining a strong initial hook with in-depth content is the winning approach for high-consideration offerings.

Question 4

When are innovation tournaments effective in strengthening the pipeline?

Accepted Answer

Innovation tournaments — structured competitions where many ideas vie and the best win support — are most effective when a company needs fresh ideas early in the innovation process and is prepared to back the winners. They work best when you want to cast a wide net and tap diverse perspectives internally or even externally, energizing people to contribute solutions. For example, if your future product roadmap has gaps, a well-run innovation challenge can surface a wealth of concepts, out of which a few high-potential ones rise to the top for development. This approach can invigorate the pipeline with creative options leadership alone might not have considered. Timing and follow-through are critical: a tournament should be held at the fuzzy front-end of innovation (when strategy is still malleable), and management must commit resources to refine and implement the winning ideas. If you hold a contest after decisions are mostly made, or fail to act on the winners, it will backfire by breeding employee skepticism. When done right — early, inclusively, and with genuine support for outcomes — innovation tournaments can significantly boost the quality and originality of ideas feeding into your product development pipeline.

Question 5

What are the challenges for research with professionals in regulated industries?

Accepted Answer

Research with professionals in heavily regulated industries comes with unique hurdles like access barriers, compliance constraints, and heightened confidentiality requirements. For example, recruiting participants such as doctors, financial advisors, or legal experts can be difficult — they have limited time and often need managerial or legal approval (and NDAs) to take part in a study. Researchers also must craft questions carefully to avoid sensitive or off-limits topics (for instance, healthcare studies must steer clear of patient-identifiable information), ensuring professionals don't feel they're violating any regulations by responding. Moreover, these professionals can be guarded about sharing data or candid opinions due to compliance fears or reputational risk if information leaks. To navigate these challenges, research teams typically coordinate with compliance departments, provide clear confidentiality assurances, and use appropriate incentives that respect industry ethics, so that busy experts are willing and able to contribute meaningful insights.

ase Market Intelligence Limited

What is ase Market Intelligence Limited?

Services and Expertise

Market Research FAQs with Expert Insights

How should we segment adopters beyond simple age or income tiers?

How risky are idioms and humor in cross-market concept testing?

Will longer copy outperform short hooks for high-consideration categories?

When are innovation tournaments effective in strengthening the pipeline?

What are the challenges for research with professionals in regulated industries?