CapsuleBlog

Research bias

Congrats to Seventh Generation, which just topped the list of the USA brands perceived as the most green in the ImagePower Global Green Brands Survey. An impressive sample of 9000 consumers were interviewed in eight countries for the poll, and most of the others on the list don't really come as a surprise: Whole Foods, Tom's of Maine, Burt's Bees, Trader Joe's, The Walt Disney Company... wait. The Walt Disney Company?

If this was a survey of brands which produce the most princess backpacks and lunchboxes per year, Walt would have been numero uno; however, my assumptions of consumer perceptions of the greenest brands and Disney just don't jive. I had to look into this, and found that the official deck at slideshare gives the impression that consumers were provided with a list of brands to rate on a scale of greenness, rather than being freely able to nominate any brand. Aha. That makes sense.

I don't want to rain on Disney's parade, and a quick scan of their corporate citizenship initiatives certainly shows that they are talking the talk. Just goes to show though how important it is to look behind the scenes when it comes to interpreting any research study.

Image by roboppy on flickr

When it comes to actually designing research studies, it's essential to consider bias issues vigilantly throughout the planning process, whether the study is qualitative or quantitative (or a mixture of both). It can be especially challenging in qualitative research, when you're dealing with data-gathering methods that involve direct conversation with your sample such as focus groups and interviews. This is where the facilitator's experience is vital - he or she must be able to think on the spot, directing discussion to avoid bias wherever possible and gather optimal data.

Want to know more? We recommend an excellent book on the topic: Design Research Methods and Perspectives by Brenda Laurel, available here.

Really, what is sustainable? How long are we talking? Are we talking years, decades or lifetimes? Many lifetimes, I hope.

A couple weeks ago I dinged Cameron Diaz for not being authentic in her sustainable behaviors. Since that time, I've been finalizing a speech for the Green Salon in Cincinnati next week and find the need to clarify. If what Cameron Diaz does is wrong, what is right? Which leads us back to the question of what is sustainable anyway? And, if we combine integrated marketing with sustainability to make, "Sustainable Integrated Marketing", what do we have now? An oxymoron?

We, as purveyors of design, brand, and marketing provide the catalyst for a consuming public. Our livelihoods are typically based on causing an accelerated consumption. Perhaps we must refocus to the right kind of consumption. This would fit with two of the three biblical words of the sustainable movement (reduce, reuse, recycle). But how do we (the collective we) address the need to reduce consumption and the use of resources?

This has perplexed me for some time. It has led me to thinking about this particular problem from a different perspective. You’ve likely seen Freakonomics and learned of the connection between crime rates falling nationally and Rowe v Wade? This is not intended to jump into the middle of that debate, but rather to notice the unexpected connection between socioeconomic patterns. Combined with the idea that not all historic reference points are correct, just because they’re historic, remember the line, “Adam Smith needs revision.”

With this in mind, take a leap with me on this theory.

Use better materials but accelerate consumption.

One: The economic engine of consumption is hard to turn off, but not as hard to accelerate. We know more about how to accelerate than we do about how to decelerate.

Two: The United States is a consumption-driven society, but the social structures in China, India and other nations are more production-driven. The patterns are there and these societies are moving in that direction as a middle class develops and consumption becomes the primary driver. It’s important that developing nations continue to develop, but knowing what we now know about sustainability, perhaps they can be encouraged not to make the same mistakes as the developed world.

Three: The more we use, the faster we burn through the planetary oil reserves and are required to find new more environmentally-friendly sources of energy.

Four: As humans, we learn from what we consume. If we knew what oil would do to the planet as an energy source, we may have changed directions back when it became the dominant source. We know more now and hopefully would apply our collective learning.

Five: The effort to push us to more consumption may just have the opposite effect. This might not be the immediate effect, but it could happen as we become more disgusted with ourselves. The result being a big consumption push, oil reserves find their end and we come together to find new energy sources.

There it is. Flying right in the face of REDUCE. Give it some thought and argue against it. I’d like to hear the perspectives.

Extraordinary Experience? Thinking about what is sustainable and when we are going to make real progress.

I ask this because I’ve been wondering: when does a landfill become as economically valuable as an oil field in our global society? Or when does a plastic water bottle (now known as waste) achieve its true value in the petroleum it contains?

Aaron Keller

We witnessed a stunning waste

Aaron walked into the office this morning holding a mysterious Blackberry-sized box.

"BRING THIS PHONE INTO ONE OF OUR STORES AND TRADE FOR A FREE BLACKBERRY CURVE" it screamed. He informed us that it appeared every house in his neighborhood had been slammed with the promotion. The box contained a retail display unit of a Blackberry 8830, courtesy of Verizon. A retail display unit is a mock phone - it looks exactly like the real deal, feels the same, weighs the same, and probably takes almost as much material and energy to construct as a working model. How many people actually still believe in the "this phone is free!!!" concept? I think most of us long ago cracked onto the fact that you simply pay for them over the duration of the contract, disguised in other fees.

So. What is Aaron now supposed to do with this thing? Seeing as it is mixed media and cannot be simply placed in his home recycling bin, is he supposed to try to locate an adequate recycling facility and bring it there? Do you think he appreciates for this imposition on his time?

This got his attention, sure. Long enough to bring it into Capsule, dump it on my desk, and suggest we rant about it. But, unlike a two year old child, we expect Verizon to be aware that there's a difference between positive attention, and the opposite. Inspiring feelings of admiration, trust and energy in your consumers is preferable to anger, inconvenience and eye-rolling, yes?