In the first installment of a
two-part series, the author draws on his years of client-side experience to
walk readers through his process of selecting a new research supplier. The
second installment will address onboarding.
In my former role
as consumer insights leader, there were several times when we brought on new
suppliers (usually referred to as partners) and I'd like to share the process I
used when selecting them. For the sake of this article, I'll assume that the
partner being brought on is working on something of a sizable magnitude, like a
customer satisfaction program or a brand and communications tracking study. All
of these steps may or may not be necessary if the partner is not engaging in
work that touches many internal customers but they are still good tools to have
available.
Bringing on new
partners is a great opportunity in many ways. I always looked forward to new
perspectives, tools, techniques and meeting new, smart people. But perhaps what
I looked forward to most was the chance to interface with experts on the
supplier side who, in the beginning stages of the relationship, are somewhat
naïve about the business but ready and excited to apply their knowledge. This
naïve optimism can lend itself to breakthroughs in consumer learning.
Situation analysis
The first step in
selecting a new research partner is to do your own evaluation of the current
state of business. If a new partner is being brought in to revamp an existing
workstream, ask yourself: What value is the current program providing to the
organization? Have the key questions changed over time? What decisions is this
work impacting? What is working well that we don't want to lose in transition?
What are we missing?
As the insights
leader, you are likely the best person to evaluate where and how a program
could be stronger. With your understanding of strengths and weaknesses of
methodologies, you are also in the best position to know what aspects of the
current work need bolstering and what methods might improve the outcome of the
work.
Your later
stakeholder discussions around these questions will vary by group. The insights
team may be concerned with methodology, data collection and partner
responsiveness while internal clients may focus on delivery of insight, clarity
of the information or actionability of the results. It's better to have a solid
POV on strengths and weaknesses of the current scenario going into the
selection process (i.e., prior to formally reaching out to the stakeholders)
than to be totally open, if for no other reason than you can test and build
your hypotheses as you go.
Developing needs, objectives and selection criteria
The next step is to
investigate, interrogate, articulate and gain alignment with key stakeholders
in terms of what you're trying to accomplish with the work in question. Key
stakeholders usually consist of:
- · the internal consumer insights team;
- · key internal clients (include key executives that use the output of the work or see the output consistently); and
- · key external clients.
I would typically
make sure I covered several points with the key stakeholders, including
objectives of the work, desired outcomes and selection criteria for the new
partner. If replacing one partner with another, I also tried to understand what
the stakeholders thought was working and what could be improved. Here are some
questions I would use to facilitate the discussion:
Objectives
Why are we doing
this work? What do we miss if we don't have it? How is this moving the brand or
business forward? What is in-bounds for this work vs. out-of-bounds? What must be
learned? Are there strategic changes coming in the business that will impact
this work at a later time?
Desired outcomes
What decisions are
being directly informed by this work? What is the risk level of these
decisions? Is anything getting in the way of the team's ability to make the
decisions they would like to (i.e., missing information, information that isn't
clear, information that's difficult to interpret, etc.)? Is there something in
what we're doing now that we don't want to lose? Some dynamic we have with the
current supplier we want to avoid in the future?
Despite working
together every day, these more strategic and reflective discussions with
stakeholders could elicit new information or perspectives. These talks are
critical and were always well worth the time.
Criteria for
selection
When it comes to
evaluating potential partners, consider including the following criteria:
methodological savvy, analytical sophistication, innovation, service levels,
people, communication of results, ability to synthesize insights across studies
and expertise in the category or industry. Typically, some criteria are more
important than others and should be weighted more heavily in making the final
selection.
You can use your
selection criteria and weights to develop a scorecard. For some really large
projects, several stakeholder teams may contribute to the scorecard.
Final internal
alignment
Once you summarize
and synthesize the feedback, you should be able to precisely articulate the
objectives of the work; what decisions you expect the work to influence and
how; and what the selection criteria is for the new partner company. It is wise
to get sign-off on this document, as it will drive your request for proposal
(RFP) and will be what key stakeholders take away from your discussions. These
documents are also crucial for the future. If needed, you can share this with
new stakeholders, showing the key criteria and the selection process.
The search
I always liked to
solicit proposals from a spectrum of potential partners. This can help you
crystallize your objectives and criteria and help you see what you are missing
now and - just as importantly - what you have today that is better than you
might have thought.
This spectrum can
be defined in several dimensions so you'll have to pick the most relevant
dimension for the situation. I would advise having at least two suppliers that
will view your situation somewhat similarly and bring similar tools and
approaches. This can elicit some good thinking and help keep bids competitive.
Some of the
dimensions I used in the past were boutique suppliers vs. large, more general
suppliers; newer firms vs. more established firms; methodologically innovative
vs. traditional; and current suppliers vs. new-to-our-company suppliers.
Developing the RFP
You will use the
material you developed in the previous steps to create your RFP. I'm sure there
have been great articles written on RFP development so I will simply offer some
of my experience on this point, rather than relay best practices.
I liked to allow
some room for creativity on the part of the potential partner. I always looked
forward to seeing how different partners would approach the work and solve the
puzzle. The more I imposed or stipulated in the RFP, the less creative thinking
I might see. On the other hand, if the RFP's requirements are too loose or
vague, you won't see good thinking either; guardrails keep people from driving
all over the road.
I would typically
allow for one round of questions prior to having potential partners present
in-person or deliver the proposal. I usually did this discussion via phone so
that if something wasn't clear in the RFP, we could address it prior to a lot
of work being done on the supplier's part. I would do everything I could to
ensure I gave each potential partner the same information.
One valuable lesson
we learned through doing this is that the questions asked by the potential
partner say a lot about them. Often we would get a feel for the level of
engagement we were engendering and some idea as to how the potential partners
approached problem-solving.
There is an
opportunity during presentations for the potential partners to give you
perspective on the work ahead, especially if it's new to you. (Of course, you
have to signal that you are open to their perspective.) They can help set your
expectations about the work so you can in turn better set internal
expectations.
In-person presentations
I would only invite
in potential partners that we believed to be the strongest to avoid wasting
anyone's time. The two main things we would look for in the presentation were
the quality of the approach and thinking and some sense for the culture fit
between teams.
Another question
worth asking is which supplier team members would be working on the day-to-day
business. It is nice when suppliers have wonderful presenters but you really
need to know who is going to be working with you and your internal clients.
Prior to beginning
a new relationship, I would advise you talk to other clients of your finalists.
After all, it's always smart to check references. Client cultures and
situations can be fairly different so a variety of perspectives can be
illuminating.
A winner emerges
After seeing the
presentations, use your selection criteria and weighted scorecard to make your
decision. There may be some close calls but if the team uses the criteria
faithfully, a winner emerges.
Stay tuned for part two of this
series where I will discuss onboarding and how client-side researchers can
manage the process to ensure high-quality work from research partners.
By Scott Aaron
Scott Aaron is a principal at
Insights for Innovation, a Cincinnati research company. He can be reached at
scott.aaron@gmail.com. This article appeared in the May 20, 2013, edition of
Quirk's e-newsletter.
Article ID: 20130526-1
