 |
DecisionTrend Research uses both "top-down" and "bottom-up" research designs to most effectively pursue project goals. From a top-down perspective, market acceptance of a technology product or service is not random,
but includes important determinants. These determinants are modeled in a paradigm that guides problem definition and research.
From a bottom-up perspective, we use two research methodologies for obtaining decision-maker input on advanced technologies, some of which may not be predetermined. For small numbers of decision makers, we use the
innovative Qsq Methodology. For larger numbers of people, we use quantitative methodologies.
Deciding whether Qsq Methodology or a quantitative survey methodology is most suitable for a project depends on a number of factors, including type of product or service, level and number of decision-makers, project questions,
and so on. We facilitate the process by discussing how to choose the best approach for a project.
Paradigm for Market Acceptance
Most DecisionTrend Research projects incorporate a paradigm for advanced technology market acceptance. This top-down paradigm helps frame problem definition and focuses the research and analysis. It is based on our own
research as well as being grounded in theory on technology adoption and organizational learning.
Read More: About the Paradigm
Qsq Methodology
A hybrid approach that combines qualitative interviewing with directional quantitative analysis. It is an excellent methodology for technology markets where there is little or no history of customer technology acceptance and
adoption dynamics. It is focused on the decision-maker (hence, it is a bottom-up design that can capture information that top-down approaches might miss). Even with sample sizes as low as 25 to 30, which are not amenable to
traditional statistical hypothesis testing, directional results can be obtained. Yet high levels of detail and specificity are provided.
Using a structured script in a conversational setting, Qsq Methodology provides detailed, open-ended questions, as well as closed-ended questions and coding protocols suitable for quantitative analysis. Telephone interviews are
supported by a web-based presentation of the solution. This makes it a perfect approach for conducting research at widely dispersed sites and internationally.
Quantitative Methodologies
These include both telephone and web-based survey methodologies that are well-suited to identified and mature technology markets where there are numerous decision-makers. Typically consisting of closed-ended questions, some
open-ended free response questions are possible. The major advantage of quantitative methodologies is statistical hypothesis testing, particularly if the survey is a random sample from a known population. In practice, true random
sampling is seldom achieved, though procedures can enhance validity, and therefore, confidence in study results. The disadvantages are that scripted questions often fail to capture subtleties and decision-maker insights.
DecisionTrend Research has much experience with quantitative studies, working with excellent fielding partners to conduct telephone-based studies, and can host web-based studies or work with a client's preferred hosting provider.
Choosing the Best Approach
What is the most appropriate methodology for a project? The answer isn't an easy one, and really depends on the particulars of the project, such as project goals and the type of decision-makers and their characteristics. All of this and more will
influence what methodology is used.
DecisionTrend Research has experience with numerous types of challenging projects. We've developed the following table that compares the two methodologies offered by DecisionTrend Research and two other popular approaches. We've made professional judgments about the suitability of each along a number of dimensions.
The following chart compares methodologies and DecisionTrend Research practice area applications, with our suitability judgments. In our view, the Qsq Methodology provides from good to excellent results in all applications, and is equal to or ahead of
other qualitative approaches in most. It compares favorably with quantitative methodologies, and, indeed, combines some of the best of both the qualitative and quantitative approaches.
|
