There’s still more to do!
Make verbatim analyses more effective and efficient.
Our approach to dealing with open questions in quantitative studies lacks consistency. On the one hand we require them, in order to achieve a better understanding of abstract evaluation levels, while on the other hand we frequently find ourselves stuck halfway in their analysis.
Open questions can be found at central, sensitive points in the interview – for example, with questions concerning optimisation or when justifying KPI evaluations. And there’ a reason for this: To obtain a deeper understanding of abstract evaluation levels, we require the written word. At the same time, when analysing open nominations we are left standing at the halfway point if we do away with an elaborate analytical interlinking with their counterparts: Quotes are coded, enumerated and listed; individual citations are presented as representative of a group opinion. Our case study on the individual and societal challenges of our time reveals the level of knowledge potential that exists in open nominations, and how this can be rendered useful by way of a simple tool and smart analyses.
Publication download (published in Planning and Analysis, edition 2, 2012)Overview / all topics
No worries about being replaced by AI
Members of planung & analyse's platform of corporate market researchers (PUMa) are generally positive about AI tools and believe they could make...Go to publication
Saying what is important
One of the central tasks of market research is to say what is important. The second part of the series on preference...Go to publication
What is important? Best practice: methods of relevance analysis
The way we ask what is important already defines what we hear or overhear. Dr. Anita Petersen and Sven Slodowy from (r)evolution...Go to publication