In marketing, the root of the market lies in demand, and demand is born of people. Therefore, we should pay attention to "people" from beginning to end, especially market research.

Some people may say that "people" are hard to say, sometimes they lie, sometimes they are selfish, true or false. But isn't there a simpler idea for us? We are "people" ourselves. As a market researcher, you don't have to completely break away from the concept of "people" to fight against seemingly objective positions.

At this time, some people may question whether your research is objective if you add more of your own ideas.

Yes, as a market researcher, we must look at the facts objectively and present them. But what is the truth? If you always isolate yourself on the other side, I'm afraid this so-called fact is just a dark mystery.

Here, I must emphasize the importance of facts. In order to see the facts clearly, we must "find a way" to regard ourselves as "people" on the same side in some cases and as independent bystanders on the other side in some cases. This "method" is exactly what this paper tries to summarize.

1. Don't have any ideas until the user has made any comments or is unclear about the user's comments.

We might as well compare ourselves. The host doesn't know yet. Even if you are a worm in your stomach, you can't know everything.

Therefore, we need open questionnaires to attract our hosts to try to talk about their ideas, even if it is only a little. This is the so-called qualitative stage.

2. Take the user's text feedback and try to understand this "person" instead of these data.

When the questionnaire was collected, we saw what the "host" wrote in words. There are two problems:

First, the large number of open questionnaires means that there are many hosts and different tastes;

Second, based on the different backgrounds or personalities of the hosts, the use of characters may be different (written differently), and because of our own background, the way we "look" is different from the way the hosts express it (the way we look), which will inevitably lead to the lack of information transmission (the most vivid metaphor is that relay gestures often lead to ironic results).

At this time, we can appear on the same side as "people".

Look at the words left on the paper and imagine what that "you" wants to say. It seems that you can read something at this time. However, it must be explained that "you" at this time can only be the person behind the text, and there should be no self-existence that affects judgment.

Case sharing:

Two players at the same time said that your game was too expensive. Please take a good look at their achievements, their roles, their income/occupation and other background information. You may find one intermediate, one advanced, one meat shield, one magician, one student and one blue collar.

We try to substitute, if you are an intermediate meat shield, what kind of situation will you face in this game? Because of the rules of the game, you often play PK with advanced players, and the result is that you often lose (too depressed) when playing PK. In the final analysis, it is because your role is only intermediate, and then you will think, "I practice advanced, so I am not afraid to play PK with advanced players." Finally, I spent a lot of money to upgrade, only to find that I can never catch up with the advanced level. At this time, a questionnaire just popped up, and you said without hesitation, "This game is too expensive."

Another character, if you are a senior magician, because of your high level and strong attack, many people choose you as a copy. Copies are simple for you, but the pages on your mobile phone are always complicated and huge. At the end of the night, the traffic is used up by half. On the third night, your teammates call you, and you want to join your allies with the traffic outside the package. Two weeks later, at the end of the month, it was found that the phone bill was spent 100 yuan by excess traffic. At this time, you received a questionnaire, and you said indignantly, "This game is too expensive."

The above example is to show that when you understand the people behind the text, you will find that the former's "money-consuming" root is probably the lack of sense of accomplishment in playing games, while the latter's "money-consuming" root is probably the networking reaction of the page, which may not be the same thing at all.

3, listen to the user, rather than talking to him, it is better to understand his words.

Someone may have read it carefully, and I used "may" to draw a conclusion. To put it bluntly, this substitution is just a "guess", and you have no evidence to prove that this assumption is correct.

That's right. I don't remember any famous person saying "make bold assumptions and be careful to verify". If the front is how to make bold assumptions with "substitution", the back is how to carefully verify with "substitution".

After having some general ideas, as a market researcher, my heart is full of excitement and curiosity. No one wants to know whether their assumptions or ideas are correct more than we do. Be careful at this time and put away our excitement and curiosity. This preconceived emotion will become an obstacle for us to discover the facts.

There is only written contact in front, and then you may wish to communicate face to face with users by telephone, interview, on-site test and other forms. It may be painful and difficult for users to dig themselves thoroughly with almost harsh serial questions (there are skills here, and the price of asking questions must not be that users are bored), so your "sense of substitution" becomes very important. Only by making users feel that you exist as a "person" on the same side will they be willing to do the hard work of digging themselves.

Case sharing:

There are several different brands of milk bottles with the same capacity and different materials on the desktop.

Ask a stay-at-home mother from a low-and middle-income family to finally choose one of the two and give reasons. The two alternative bottles are: high-end brand PP material and general brand glass material. In the end, she chose the glass material of the general brand. She told us that PP material is not good for children. She is a stay-at-home mother and can take care of glass material, which is safer.

After several links, we added the following content: "In order to thank you, we will give you an extra gift, please choose one to take away." As a result, she chose high-end brand PP material.

At this time, you try to replace the role of full-time mother in low-and middle-income families, and it seems that you can understand her behavior better. This high-end brand may still be trustworthy, and the root cause may not be the material, but the price.

With this idea, ask her "give it away?" Or BB? I'll gift-wrap it for you. It might be better to add a handle if BB is used. "

At this time, she said to me, "thank you, then help me add a handle." The high-end brand is exquisite, so I will give BB a try. " (expression relaxed and cheerful)

"If you have tried, you can come back and visit!"

She blinked hard and raised her mouth. "Ha ha, well, let's try it first ~ ~ ~". Speaking of which, you know!

4. Instead of looking at each number individually, it is better to read it together and read a "person" completely.

From the breadth of open questionnaires to the depth of dialogue with users, we have been piecing together and supplementing materials. "Substitution" not only helps us to understand "people", but also helps us to describe possible problems. The popular understanding is "preparing dishes for the table". Whether this dish can be served or not, and whether the materials are finally made into this dish, we have to continue to "carefully research."

Come to the quantitative questionnaire stage, put your materials in order and send them to users, so that they can decide what they want. After the feedback from users came back, we entered the stage of data cleaning, analysis and interpretation.

Let's talk about "interpretation" first.

What was sent to us was a bunch of figures and a bunch of charts. Our task is not to tell you what this number is, but what it stands for.

The first thing to do is to gather the relevant figures of each hypothesis and see if they can be strung together (commonly known as "evidence chain"). If so, good, the hypothesis holds. If not, then study where the hypothetical loophole is, and maybe find a new conclusion.

The second thing is to connect the numbers related to the chain, such as behavior path, attitude trajectory and demand satisfaction process, from the user's point of view to see if the image of "person" can be completely described. If you can, then another conclusion has emerged. If not, check where the contradictions or omissions are, and you may find that the user classification method is wrong, and another subdivision dimension may be more effective.

For a simple example, if you have users' preferences for skin elements, colors, styles and themes, and connect them in series and add appropriate sub-dimensions for comparative analysis, you will find that users of different ages have different social immersion experiences and overall style preferences are also different. By analogy, we will find that the social immersion experience may be projected to more preferences in other fields.

Some people may ask, there seems to be no "substitution" here. In fact, the two things you have done have already been replaced. To sort out the evidence chain and sketch the image person, you need to know the proportion of options and the person who fills in the options before you can do it well.

The above is what Bian Xiao shared for you about the real purpose of analyzing and interpreting data. For more information, you can pay attention to Global Ivy and share more dry goods.