Research Processes: Mary Roach

Many planners will tell you that there has been a definite push-back against planners coming from a traditional background (aka studied it in college, came from another agency, etc) in favor of folks with experience in other fields, such as anthropologists, librarians, and even neuroscientists. Being a kid who studied advertising in undergrad (and for a while in grad school even) I'm not necessarily on the top of the list for some of these companies, so I decided to look to other disciplines to see what I could learn from their experiences and bring to my own.

Enter Mary Roach, author of Stiff, Spook, and Bonk. (Despite the nice ring to it, this is actually three separate books on alarmingly different topics: cadavers, the after-life, and sex.) Each book is a candid, science-based discussion of various topics related to these items in a variety of interesting angles. Having read and greatly enjoyed both Stiff and Bonk within the last two months, I started to get curious about Mary's approach to research. After deciding to email her, I was shocked to get an email back within 20 minutes with her home phone number (and having read Bonk, I have to say it was strange to have her husband pick up the phone--I felt I knew things about him I really really shouldn't.)

 She claims her research methods are best described as "random, chaotic, and ineffective" but given her success, I beg to differ. Throughout our conversation I learned a number of lessons that have helped to form her research approach:

1. The broadest source isn't necessarily the best. Though in the beginning Mary attended conferences to get the lay of the land, she ultimately found that they weren't as useful as getting in and interacting with the people who are actually doing the research, preferably as they complete research for a related project. These people would explain what they were doing as they performed it, giving Mary the chance to be walked through the process and then relay that step-by-step experience to her readers. This speaks specifically to the fact that generalizations, theories, and large-scale conferences are NOT a suitable replacement for primary research. Sure they save time, but what did you really learn that your competitor can't?

2. Use the right language to guide your search. It was particularly important for Mary to use the correct language when she began her search--I can only imagine what kind of results you get from a Google search for "odor of body decomposition." For Mary, this meant using "cadaveric" as her search term instead of "cadaver," as it is only in medical research that the term "cadaveric" is used. Similarly, if we want to connect with a target about a concern like wrinkles, we need to know the way they talk about it- "anti-aging regenerating serum" certainly wasn't what consumers expected would be a product on their shelves before advertising and branding had their say--they likely imagined something like "wrinkle cream."

3. Have a folder to collect relevant content. Collect all things you think are interesting and connected to the topic you're researching. You never know when one of those things might become the newest, most interesting movements in the current landscape. Furthermore, having a physical collection of related items can help you determine what your brand or product has or knows that your competitors don't-- it can help aid you in everything from the strategy to creative execution and media placement. 

4. Connect the dots-- from each strong source, find another. Perhaps the best way to save time and ensure great results--when you find a source that is on the right page for what your research requires, consider asking them for more references. In Mary's case, many times the community she was working within was small, and so the folks she was interviewing typically knew of many others she should contact. The same will go for your target--they'll likely know of others that could be valuable to your search.

5. Don't stop looking for new content. Mary told me that the majority of her time is spent sending emails to possible leads trying to find out where the newest research is being conducted, or what the newest findings are. In her process, Mary takes up up to two years or more to complete her book. Of course, in advertising, that isn't an option. Continual research and digging for relevant insights, however, is not only an option but should be part of our daily role as planners. Our work is not done once the brief is out of our hands and approved by the client. Similarly, husbands around the world will tell you their wives still want flowers "for no reason" and expect dates and other vestiges of their previously-single lives. It's a continual relationship, one you have to continue to work on.

I intend to look to other disciplines to learn more, both in terms of research methods and approaches to communication. I'm looking forward to my re-education.

Photo credit: David Paul Morris