Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

I'll give you my opinion for what it's worth

I'll give you my opinion for what it's worth 56 Management Research News Volume 14 Number 4/5 1991 Sharon Miller and Karen Nunwick, Focus on Research The incentive is described as a thank you for partici­ pation; however it is undoubtedly the tool around which The purpose of this paper is to explore the views of all future market research will be conducted - more of a ba­ those involved in the giving and receiving of incentives - rometer for response rates. It should however be a respondents, interviewers, field office staff, researchers planned response rather than a reaction in desperation and buyers of research. when the fieldwork fails. The findings are based on both qualitative and quan­ The practice of giving incentives for qualitative inter­ titative research amongst the groups of people listed. views and not quantitative interviews should change and merge as account is taken of the total image of market re­ They began with five commonly held beliefs about in­ search as viewed by the respondent. The incentive should centives and have used these as the basis for their re­ be more prevalent as the industry begins to take account search: of the value of the public relations exercise that market research interviewers conduct each time they interview * An incentive is a thank you for participation or in the the public. case of groups, a payment to cover out of pocket expenses - it is not a bribe to entice participation. Incentives are not to make interviewers lives easier but are an intrinsic part of the market research strategy * Qualitative interviews always require an incentive bringing professionalism from the buyer through the re­ but quantitative interviews only do so on rare occa­ search agency to the members of the public. sions. Respondents do not participate in market research * Pressure to give an incentive or larger incentive is simply out of avarice. The incentive forms only a part of interviewer-led to make their job easier. the total research experience - a minor but very import­ * If the practice of giving incentives grows, respond­ ant part. ents will participate for what they are being given and opinions will be biased. The reaction against the possibility of soaring costs is understood but felt to be exaggerated. If the industry * If incentives become the norm on all surveys, costs acts now in accordance with the recommendations below will soar resulting in reduced profit margins for the there should be a controlled and unified approach to in­ research agency. centives for the benefit of all those involved. There was a general acknowledgement amongst all The issue of incentives should not remain an internal industry personnel interviewed that it is becoming more struggle between interviewers and researchers. The im­ and more difficult to secure respondent participation. Re­ plications of the use of incentives affect all those who sponse rates on the National Readership Survey bear wit­ come into contact with market research and the authors ness to this, having fallen from 74% in 1982 to 67% in 1987, firmly believe the time has come to open up the debate! and in London from 67% to 55% over the same period. Finally, they put forward the following recommenda­ What is slightly alarming however, is the general ac­ tions: ceptance among research agencies that response rates will continue to fall until at some time in the future, it will * The industry should acknowledge the many roles of be necessary to pay for participation. the incentive Britain is no longer an island and we should look to * The industry should look at what is happening in our colleagues overseas and the lead they have set in the other countries and learn from their experience. adoption of incentives. * There should be a more standardised approach to From research conducted in Europe and the States, incentives across the industry to overcome the it would appear that not only are incentives larger, but the major discrepancies that exist at present, and to practice of giving them appears to be more widespread avoid interviewers' constant demands for higher in­ centives. across different types and length of survey. * A working party should be set up within the Market The industry in Britain has perhaps been lucky so far in playing on the goodwill until it runs out, an immediate Research Society to investigate further the issue of stance should be taken to ensure that it continues. incentives and to make formal recommendations to the industry. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Management Research News Emerald Publishing

I'll give you my opinion for what it's worth

Miller, Sharon; Nunwick, Karen
Management Research News , Volume 14 (4/5): 1 – Apr 1, 1991
Download PDF
1 page

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/i-ll-give-you-my-opinion-for-what-it-s-worth-eSDAD7H4I0
Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © Emerald Group Publishing Limited
ISSN
0140-9174
DOI
10.1108/eb028145
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

56 Management Research News Volume 14 Number 4/5 1991 Sharon Miller and Karen Nunwick, Focus on Research The incentive is described as a thank you for partici­ pation; however it is undoubtedly the tool around which The purpose of this paper is to explore the views of all future market research will be conducted - more of a ba­ those involved in the giving and receiving of incentives - rometer for response rates. It should however be a respondents, interviewers, field office staff, researchers planned response rather than a reaction in desperation and buyers of research. when the fieldwork fails. The findings are based on both qualitative and quan­ The practice of giving incentives for qualitative inter­ titative research amongst the groups of people listed. views and not quantitative interviews should change and merge as account is taken of the total image of market re­ They began with five commonly held beliefs about in­ search as viewed by the respondent. The incentive should centives and have used these as the basis for their re­ be more prevalent as the industry begins to take account search: of the value of the public relations exercise that market research interviewers conduct each time they interview * An incentive is a thank you for participation or in the the public. case of groups, a payment to cover out of pocket expenses - it is not a bribe to entice participation. Incentives are not to make interviewers lives easier but are an intrinsic part of the market research strategy * Qualitative interviews always require an incentive bringing professionalism from the buyer through the re­ but quantitative interviews only do so on rare occa­ search agency to the members of the public. sions. Respondents do not participate in market research * Pressure to give an incentive or larger incentive is simply out of avarice. The incentive forms only a part of interviewer-led to make their job easier. the total research experience - a minor but very import­ * If the practice of giving incentives grows, respond­ ant part. ents will participate for what they are being given and opinions will be biased. The reaction against the possibility of soaring costs is understood but felt to be exaggerated. If the industry * If incentives become the norm on all surveys, costs acts now in accordance with the recommendations below will soar resulting in reduced profit margins for the there should be a controlled and unified approach to in­ research agency. centives for the benefit of all those involved. There was a general acknowledgement amongst all The issue of incentives should not remain an internal industry personnel interviewed that it is becoming more struggle between interviewers and researchers. The im­ and more difficult to secure respondent participation. Re­ plications of the use of incentives affect all those who sponse rates on the National Readership Survey bear wit­ come into contact with market research and the authors ness to this, having fallen from 74% in 1982 to 67% in 1987, firmly believe the time has come to open up the debate! and in London from 67% to 55% over the same period. Finally, they put forward the following recommenda­ What is slightly alarming however, is the general ac­ tions: ceptance among research agencies that response rates will continue to fall until at some time in the future, it will * The industry should acknowledge the many roles of be necessary to pay for participation. the incentive Britain is no longer an island and we should look to * The industry should look at what is happening in our colleagues overseas and the lead they have set in the other countries and learn from their experience. adoption of incentives. * There should be a more standardised approach to From research conducted in Europe and the States, incentives across the industry to overcome the it would appear that not only are incentives larger, but the major discrepancies that exist at present, and to practice of giving them appears to be more widespread avoid interviewers' constant demands for higher in­ centives. across different types and length of survey. * A working party should be set up within the Market The industry in Britain has perhaps been lucky so far in playing on the goodwill until it runs out, an immediate Research Society to investigate further the issue of stance should be taken to ensure that it continues. incentives and to make formal recommendations to the industry.

Journal

Management Research News – Emerald Publishing

Published: Apr 1, 1991

There are no references for this article.