We owe you great deal for your exc. work and contribution
to the mankind.
How I wish there are more people like you in this world.

I sincerely appreciate your contribution to this world.

Sincerely,

mike

My definition of qual (something I am still working on) is roughly
a) if it is a process that when two trained practictioners use the same technique, with the same tools and assumptions produce the same answers, then it is quant – i.e. it derives its value from the data
b) If a is not true, but it is based on a proper methodology and approach, it is qual, the result is based on the data and the interpretation of the researcher
c) if it is not a) or b) it is meta physics and should be put to one side.

Quant can be scaled up, the people can be replaced with other trained individuals.

Qual is harder to scale because the best people can leave and form a new company. If you look at the history of great qual companies (The Research Business and Leapfrog for example) this is how they started.

The fact that there are no billion dollar qual companies is a function of qual, not of quallies.

I think that you are more than correct. Quallies are either entirely based on the central importance of their own brain or trying to build systems based on ‘client service’ which are essentially ‘client flattery’. Neither of these are going to lead to growth although the ‘client flattery’ model is growing fast.

Best,

Dan
(Worldwide Strategic Planning Director, Publicis)

Good points, as usual.

I haven’t really got my head around communities. And I say that because I haven’t seen evidence that they can scale through technology. And that’s what I’m keen on – using technology, rather than people, to scale these operations. Digital is on the fast track of evolution, not analogue.

And don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying the quant. industry has it right. In fact it’s because there’s so much scope for improvement, and increasing recognition of this, that folks there seem increasingly motivated to experiment. I don’t see the same compelling mindset among quallies. Spring/MESH are among the exceptions.

Also in terms of quant changes I am not sure what these game changing innovations are. Sure there has been a movement to online panels but it wasn’t exactly the research industry driving the web! All we did is take our offline panel ideas and push them online and again it has taken 10 years or so to get any decent interactive surveys.

Finally I would say that a lot of the real innovations I have seen recently are quali / quant (for want of a better word) which would describe much of what Brainjuicer and MESH are doing (admit to bias here!).

Another friend of Surindas!

Cheers
Steve