FEATURE25 September 2012
Four executives from InSites Consulting make the case for empowering community participants to become co-researchers. Part one of a two-part feature.
There will always be a gap between the information a consumer shares and how researchers understand it. Whether cultural, generational or knowledge-based, these gaps might make it difficult for researchers to put things in the right context. But research participants can help us close the gap. By becoming co-researchers, they can help us uncover insights that would otherwise have been out of reach.
Today, many consumers are already collaborating with brands within online customer communities. We empower them to start their own discussions and enable them to share (un)solicited feedback. However, the roles between researcher and researchee are still separate and distinct. For truly successful collaboration, we need to start down the path of convergence.
Participants as ‘co-moderators’
MROCs allow us to build an ongoing connection with research participants. After an introductory period, we have gained their trust and participants know their way around a community. Even members that were not familiar with communities before learn quickly how the community works, what the role of the community manager is and what is expected of them. And even without formally introducing the role of ‘co-moderator’ we often already see certain members start behaving as moderators in those parts of an MROC where respondents can talk off-topic and start new discussions.
Clearly, the potential is there but there are various ways to introduce co-moderators into a community. We have identified two types of co-moderators:
By role
The participant is endorsed as a co-moderator within the MROC, perhaps within a specific community room. The co-moderator is encouraged to start discussions by themselves and to moderate, summarise and report back to the moderator on discussions that take place.
By mission
In this instance, the co-moderator is given a secret assignment. Instead of being ‘responsible’ for one room, the mission for this co-moderator is to join an already existing discussion and stimulate the conversation to keep the topic active. After, as in the case of the previous example, the co-moderator summarises the discussion and reports back to the moderator.
In a study with Campbell’s we observed that working with co-moderators increases the general engagement levels within an MROC. The conversation can become even more open as it is peer-to-peer, with consumers speaking the same language. Also the findings are summarised from a consumer’s point of view, not that of a researcher’s. This brings a different perspective to the analysis.
Overall, co-moderating is perceived to be very rewarding for both the co-moderator and other participants. One participant told us: “How interesting that you used a couple of the other members to help you and ask us questions too. It’s a great idea, they know where we are coming from, and they understand what we are talking about so it’s easier to talk to them.”
Anouk Willems and Thomas Troch are senior research innovators, Annelies Verhaeghe is head of research innovation and Tom De Ruyck is head of research communities at InSites Consulting