MrWeb Series – David Garcia Pawley of Samsung on Samsung’s CMI on Keys to Managing a Successful Panel [A Brand’s Perspective]

My guest today is David Garcia Pawley, Director of European Countries CMI (Consumer & Market Insights) at Samsung. Established in 1938, Samsung is the world’s largest information technology company, consumer electronics maker and chipmaker measured by 2017 revenues. Prior to joining Samsung, David has held senior roles on both the agency and client-side at leading firms including LG and GfK. 

Find David Online:



Find Jamin Online:




Find Us Online: 





This Episode is in Partnership with MrWeb:



This Episode’s Sponsor: 

This episode is brought to you by HubUx. HubUx reduces project management costs by 90%. Think of HubUx as your personal AI project manager, taking care of all your recruitment and interview coordination needs in the background. The platform connects you with the right providers and sample based on your research and project needs. For more information, please visit


Hey, everybody, this is Jamin, host of the Happy Market Research Podcast. In conjunction with MrWeb, I’ve had the honor of interviewing three of the leading custom panel companies. This is one of those three episodes. If you’re not currently subscribed to MrWeb, I just can’t recommend another resource. He gives you a daily update on happenings, whether it’s HR, M&A, technology releases, companies going out of business, companies starting. I mean there is not a single point of truth that I found to be more consistent and reliable than MrWeb. So check them out. They’re great and I hope you enjoy this episode.   


According to the GRIT report, there has been an increase in the number of qualitative based tools. This is centric to user experience, customer experience, and market research. However, as with all things, the actual research operations remains to be done and that happens usually outside of those toolsets. HubUx is a solution for that. You plug your tools directly into it; you enter in who it is that you want to talk to when you want to talk to them and HubUx literally does the rest for you. If you already have an existing customer list, you can just upload it directly into the tool. If you want to leverage social recruiting, that’s integrated as well. It is the single source for all of your research operations needs HubUx. Check it out. Thanks. 


Hi, I’m Jamin. You are listening to the Happy Market Research Podcast. My guest today is David Garcia Pawley, director of European countries for CMI (Consumer and Market Insights) at Samsung.  Established in 1938, Samsung is the world’s largest information technology company, consumer electronics maker and chip manufacturer, measured by 2017 revenues. Prior to joining Samsung, David has held senior roles on both the agency and client side at leading firms including LG and GFK. David, thanks very much for joining me on the Happy Market Research Podcast today.


Hello. Thank you for having me here. 


It is an honor to have somebody like yourself. Of course, we love our brand guests. But before we jump into our conversation, I’d like to provide some context to our listeners. Maybe you could tell us a little bit about your parents and how they informed your current career. 


Well, from my name you can gather… It’s David Garcia Pawley. I’m half English, half Spanish. So I was brought up in Spain; that’s where my father’s from. I was born in England; my mother is English and I’m married to a Russian lady. So, actually, we’re very international at home and I think that’s pretty much a lot to do with my background. I’ve always had international schools, a bit traveling a lot around the world. And I think that’s a part of this curiosity, which has helped me to be very engaged with this industry, with this market research. I think that the curiosity is something that all researchers need to have to work is in this industry. 


What language does your family speak primarily at home? 


Well, mainly Spanish, but now I’ve moved over at the beginning of the year to take on this European role at Samsung. Now I live in the UK with my wife who just came over and we have a three-month baby. So I speak to him in Spanish, my wife in Russian, and whenever he goes into nursery school, English. So I think that’s the plan in terms of languages. 


Yes. That is going to be one adequately educated child in context of culture, for sure. It’s going to be exciting to see that child grow up. I tell you what, I think that having the international lens on at an early age is such a benefit to becoming well-rounded. Also, I think being humble because you realize that actually your culture isn’t necessarily the center of the universe. 


That’s right. 


Let’s shift gears. You’ve been in this space for quite a while. Tell me about the market research project that you are most proud of.


Well, after 23 years in market research and, as you mentioned, that’s in a different areas of work. I did start at Proctor & Gamble, which is a great school to be at. I’ve had both the client side as well as the agency side and both the multinational as well as small startup companies. So I think of two areas. I mean like a Proctor & Gamble, which is a learning place. It’s a wonderful to place to start on. So, you always remember your first occasion. So I was very happy doing our first ORS, which was how we called Off-the-Air Research Studies on evaluating advertising. This was back in Spain. So I think you tend to be proud of the first things you do as you become engaged in your first project. And so, I remember analyzing a piece of research on some advertising that we’re doing for Fairy Washing Up Liquid. That was a great thing, just being the first project. Actually, also from the agency side not long ago, I was involved in a project on launching Argentinian beef in Europe. So again, that’s a very different kind of project.  But we’ve spoken earlier about having an international project is something which is very appealing to me. So, again, it also leads to the pride behind those projects. Yeah. 


So is a point of pride centric to the international context of the research and really conquering the difficulties around that? Or was it centric to the outcome of the research or something else? 


Well, it varies. In the case of the P&G project, it would just be the first one.  It was advertising in the early 1990s, and there was the main investment was only on TV. And especially for Proctor & Gamble, we invest a lot on TV. Well, it’s a key piece of research being done. So it’s interesting to start seeing what consumers value. The work you do internally you think may be relevant to consumers and you don’t always hit the nail on the head. In the case of the Argentinian meat, it was interesting because it was a completely different category, interesting to relate to the product. It took the knowledge you acquire in relation to what is behind the meat that we eat. We probably don’t give that much thought where that cow comes from, how it’s reared, and how that impacts everything. It’s interesting how that industry works. So, and it’s something which is completely new and the fact of the impact that had in terms of the Argentinian economy. Out of the output meant I had to go to Buenos Aires to actually present to all the leading figures in agriculture in the country or the people who are leading the beef producers of the country. So it’s like a big consortium of different people on both the political and social level. That was a very interesting presentation. I have to give up the results. Sometimes you’re used to presenting to 10, 15 top managers.  Here I was presenting to over a hundred people in a hotel with all the people, as I say, from the political background, and it just made it a very interesting project. So I was quite happy to be there. 


I like how you’re weaving it into the impact, not just at a financial—actually not at all from a financial return perspective—but more on a social, socioeconomic or benefit to a specific region perspective. And I think that the more that we can make those connections with the work that we’re doing, then the more meaningful that work is for us and the easier it is for other people to be able to adopt the insights that come out of it.  


That’s right. I think that’s a key point. I think we see it in terms of evolution of market research and what is expected from us. I think the impact is key. I think we’re all facing difficult situations in all organizations, in all industries. We need to justify what we’re doing and the return on investment, which is a right approach. So even within our roles, we need to make sure that all we do is actionable and impactful. So beyond the love that we can have on the actual research pieces that we do because we enjoy doing it, there obviously needs to be a clear output to it and delivery to business, which helps enhance the image of customer marketing inside the market research department. 


So, it’s nice to have somebody that’s had a couple of decades inside of the space because you’ve seen the evolution that’s happened as we migrated from caddy and in mall intercept or paper-based surveys to a digital context to now, again, we’re seeing over the last few years the adoption of this term or maybe borrowing of this term agile research, taking it from the development or product space and applying it to consumer insights.  It has become, I think in a lot of ways almost trendy or buzzwordy. What does agile research mean to you and what do you see as the key differences? 


Now you said about the caddy and so on. Before starting in business when I was 17, I remember the first money I made.  So we’re talking about the eighties; we’re going back to the 1980s and I remember having to go to do face-to-face interviews at people’s homes and on a 45-minute questionnaire with pen and paper. And if these people were not willing to see you, there was a process you had to follow on who you should be interviewing if that person wasn’t available. There’s a whole methodology behind that. So it was interesting to see that. And now any company cannot give me results within a working week and then, you know, it’s not agile, fast enough. So I’ve tried I see things of yes, speed, adaptability. I think there are those traits that a lot of it as I think you’ve mentioned it. The digital environment means that everything is fast; everything is real-time. 

I didn’t know industries and again I think we will see that, as consumers, how things are moving. Market research is at the service of the organization. I mean marketing is evolving. So do we as an industry need to evolve in line with all that and be able to deliver insights in a more timely fashion. There’s the pros and the cons in that. There is an evolution: speed is becoming paramount together with cost effectiveness. I think they’re both linked together. The things that we would deliver, they said as fast as possible in a cost-effective manner. And sometimes that can be at the expense of quality or reliability. I don’t know. For us, we’ve been all these years in market research where we were so conscious about the sampling, the confidence level, the reliability of the data, the source of the data. I do get a feel that over these years that we have become, as an industry, a lot more lenient on this, a bit too relaxed on where the 80/20 rule seems to be a predominant like, “Well, I’m quite happy to sacrifice some quality or some reliability on this at the expense of having things and being able to take decisions a lot faster.” So I think top managers are aware of that; so are we. I think there are some occasions where that needs to be the way to move forward.


So, there’s a ton to unpack there. And just to level set because the majority of our audience probably doesn’t have more than two decades of research experience. But back in the day, (I sound so old) you would spend a ton of effort coming up with your sampling methodology. There were buyer decisions based on the quality of the sampling methodology, error rate and all that sort of thing. And then, the in-field aspect of the data analysis or the data project, I should say, was a big part of the end-deliverable. We called it a term and tally sheet, which helped identify where people were terming. The benefit from that is you’re able to size an audience. In other words, if you’re identifying that you’re having maybe it’s a 10% incidence rate when you’re in 12 different malls across whatever region that you’re targeting… if your incidence rate’s falling below that, then your term and tally sheet will tell you why and what assumptions that you made in your incidence tests that were frankly wrong. And to the point that you’re making, which is actually something that I don’t believe anyone’s brought up before, (and the audience will, of course, correct me if I’m wrong) but it’s a really important one. And that is that that amount of thoughtfulness created a lot of insights that were gleaned just during the fielding stages of the research that frankly now we’ve in a lot of ways lost access to.  


That’s right.  Yeah, I totally agree. I think that it’s part of the evolution. You let go of some things; you introduced some. I think there are some great things going on right now in the way we’re doing research and the impact we can have. And it’s amazing. Actually, I think the evolution of internet and into our industry, I think that’s a huge impact as most of the agencies are aware of that and have adapted into that. I think we have learned from, now it’s good to sit back and weigh some of these decisions that we’re making because I think there is obviously a space there for some reliable, detailed studies, some U&As where you invest the resources to get some clarity on what we’re doing. So, and I think it’s like most things in life — it has to do with the balance, getting the right balance on some things where you can experiment, come up with some basic, some fast areas of interest. And there are others which require and should have sufficient time and resources dedicated to them. So at the end of the day, obviously, when speed and cost is the only variables, then you, obviously, end up getting what you pay for. So I think from the client side now, we need to be conscious of that when we’re expecting from our partners, from our agencies to deliver in a cost-efficient and timely manner; however, that necessarily works both ways. So it’s a bit of a compromise there. 


I think that’s interesting. I don’t know if you’re familiar with the GRIT Report, produced by GreenBook’s Lenny Murphy. But in that he identifies industry trends; it’s a twice annual publication. One of the trends that he just continues to hit on is… It used to be the case “speed, quality, cost – pick two.” And we continue to see pressure really on all three. But I would completely align with what I’m hearing your point being, which is the reality is that you do have to make certain sacrifices and gives if you are really focused on quality or, sorry, price and time or just really pick the two. And we oftentimes don’t have the budgets to be able to support the large research necessary or maybe “necessary” isn’t the right word. That’s just the trade-offs that we make. And as we’re experienced, we can start understanding when it’s OK to cut and when it’s necessary not to. So we’ve been doing a series on community-panel technology companies and service companies. One of them is Verve, who I believe you’d done some business with. I was just curious as a user of these types of panel technology companies, what do you see as the role of a community panel for a brand? 


Well, I think some of the points we’ve just touched upon. I mean the right job, I think there’s the agility aspect.  Also, they’re so they’re faster, cost effective on an interview per interview base. And then from the service we’re getting from Verve, I think that excellent partners and a very important thing here is it has the capabilities. I think that works on both the client and the agency side. So in all this context and all this evolution that we’re seeing, the newcomers into the industry maybe missing some of these scientific approaches to research that maybe us people could be in a couple of decades in this probably have. On the other hand, we need to adapt to the new technologies that are developing. So I think it works both sides. The younger people may have all these digital views but are missing some of the expertise that some of us may have. 

On the other hand, we need to adapt to all the new technologies or the new digital-era tools available. So it’s getting that right balance. And I think in these community panels or in the case of Verve in particular, I’m quite happy in the level of expertise that they have in terms of research while they’re also balancing with the fact that they can be very effective and efficient in terms of being speedy with our demands and also being fair, having the assumption where speed is of paramount importance. We’re not the easiest partner to work for. As a client, we’re very demanding, I think it’s fair to say. And in this case, they have adapted themselves very well to our needs. So that’s something that I personally value very much. And again, this community panels have given us all this possibility of always being on. So it is a very quick way to react. We are aware of some of the changes that our competitors are doing, and we can immediately launch a study on a Monday and have some basic results on what’s happening in the marketplace by the end of the week. So we do something that our top management is demanding from us and which few companies can deliver. And Verve, through the community panel that we have with them, are able to do so.


Yeah, that’s, actually, such a key insight. It requires a long view in terms of an investment thesis, right? Because as opposed to it being a one-and-done or single use PO, you’ve got to know that or trust that, while you’re making an ongoing investment in the community, the payback is quite literally over time. And the benefit is that you’re shaving weeks off of those insights when you need to. What do you see as a user? Was there any surprises? Like, wow, I didn’t see that as either a benefit or potentially even a barrier issue with respect to having your own community?


Well, the community we have with Verve… Some of the panelists are our own consumers of our products. So that is quite well set up in terms of on how we use it. But one of the big advantages that we have is that we can be an international company. It’s easy that we can set these panels across countries. So it gives us a way to have an international view on international results and comparable across countries in a very fast and efficient manner. So the fact that we can have access to this at international level so that we can have a variety of projects, both tactical to more strategic ones, I think that’s important. And again, going back to this balance, we do use a lot this community panel, but we also do a lot of ad hoc research. So it’s basically knowing at which stage we need to be able to pull from one or the other, so each of them are offering some benefits and I think we need to look out for. 


So what are some of the bigger challenges that you face as an internal researcher in order to create, maintain the community panel? Was it centric to budget requests or maybe more operational considerations? 


Yeah, I think the budget is continuously our constraint in any organization these days. I think that’s pretty consistent wherever we’re working. I think in our case, we’re very fortunate in that Samsung invests a lot of money worldwide and in research. We’re very consumer-oriented and we give a lot of importance in terms of product development and communications. It’s very important for us. One of the key things I find for community panels, which I keep trying to improve, is the representativity of the panels and how these are made up. Obviously, as with everything in research, your data is only as good who you are interviewing. So we need to be very methodical and take a lot of care on what is the panel made out of, who is actually responding, any possible biases. I think that the reliability of the data ensure, that it’s there. And again, specifically for panels, I have mentioned that they are engaged.  Opposed to other research where it’s like a one-off. I mean the fact that this is a continuous panel where you have people there, you need to find the right amount of engagement. Don’t overwhelm them, but again keep them sufficiently engaged so that they will want to carry on being in those panels. So us offering relevant projects, but I can rely on our partner to make sure that they are offering the right incentives or if they are working for other clients with a given panel. But he does keep them engaged on a regular basis so we don’t lose them basically. 


Have you found that you’re spending time doing research on research, thinking about things like optimal incentives or frequency of engagement? 


Not that. What I do is I do regular checks on the panel structure. So in each case, Verve will provide me, I know exactly how many users I have, which is the talent which we have. We have our own unique panel for us and, depending on the project, we may also need to increase our sample in case we need it. And then, we may have to include other panels from outside our own one. And then in that, yes, I keep track on each of the European countries I’m responsible for: what is the size of the panel, what is the competition of that panel in terms of demographics, in terms of brand ownership to make sure that I’m fully aware on who we have and who is answering all our questions. So I don’t do research on research.   


Yeah. And Verve, it sounds like they’re providing that oversight to drive optimal outcomes. I guess one of the overarching questions for me is from a panelist perspective… So somebody as a respondent, someone who’s part of your panel, is there a motivator? Is it primarily centric to like money or points or does it feel like it’s more just overall engagement and opportunity to provide feedback? 


Well, I think it’s a bit of both. We do create panels in other organizations where I’ve been, where you try and get employees to give their own feedback. I think all of us are researchers at heart. In the same way as we ask our family members to give an opinion or I’m thinking of buying a new television, you may ask your friends and relatives. Everyone shares their opinions on things. I think even within each organization, we’re all experts in our products. So I’m sure we all have our opinions on the products we’re using. So there’s the possibility of doing that and getting engagement through the different networks that you have access to. So I think, yeah, I mean it’s a…


So, let’s say that you were sitting having a cocktail with a good friend, head of insights for whatever company. (Let’s say Apple’s iTunes.) And they were interested in starting their own community panel. What are three considerations you would tell them or three things that they should be thinking about as they embark on making that decision? 


Well, considering Apple is my main competitor, I don’t think I’d be sitting with him having a coffee. 


You know what? It’s funny you say that. I apologize about the bad taste on my part. 


Okay. Someone else in another industry. I mean… 


Not Apple!


The things I would think of for building a community, obviously, you need to give, as with every project, what is the objective? Why are you setting up a community panel? I think as with all pieces of research, you need to be very clear on the “why” and that should help you in deciding a sample. Who do you want to have in that community panel? Who’s going to help you best deliver the insight that you’re looking for for your business based on the people plus the raw material. What is it going to look like? 

Second, I think engagement. You do need to get your panelists engaged that keep the field interested in the project that you’re doing. In terms of rewards, yes, it can be money. Sometimes, the thought that you’re going to share the results with them could be an option depending on, obviously, the confidentiality or the project you’re running with them. People do like to share their opinion. Well, I think there needs to be a clear engagement done with a panel so they want to continue to be there because one of the key things about a panel, you need to look at it in the medium to long term. So creating a panel, you need to think of where do you see this panel in the mid-, long-term. I mean three, five years time. It’s not something that you can set up and close down. So that requires some thought or this is not just on a project basis. It’s like “What kind of use am I going to get out of it on an ongoing basis?” So again, that’s linked to the engagement you’re going to be able to get from your panelists. Having some quality checks as well:  Who’s going to be in? Who’s out? What kind of governance are you going to have for the way the things are going to work with the panelists in order to deliver the insights to the organization?


I like the last part. I like all of the points you made, but quality checks and governance is actually really interesting.  Do you see that as an evolution or do you expect that to be just like baked in on Day 1? 


I think quality is always an issue. I mean it’s a consideration, and it’s key for everything you do because, as we stated earlier on, I think that was a lot more ingrained in the research industry years ago. To insist, I think we’ve become very lenient. As we start seeing in the digital area, a lot of the big KPIs and methods are being used around the place, which as a researcher do not make much sense. Or you see some of the things that are being reported without having the sufficient methodology behind it to really understand what is going on. I think we’ve gone from one extreme to the other, and I think we need to start going back to really question some of the data that were sharing into the business. Where is it coming from? Is this something which is really happening in the world outside? Sampling errors. All these issues, I think we do need to have some kind of quality check on the data that we’re producing and the insights that we’re delivering as a consequence. So yes, I think you need to be clear about the governance. As soon as you start questioning the data, then you just question the whole methodology. I would start questioning the whole panel if that were the case. 


Yeah, for sure. And it is an interesting point that you’re making, and probably one of the more important things that we don’t think about ‘til it’s too late, which is trust is a slippery slope and once it’s broken and people start second guessing the data source, then you’ve got a material problem on your hands, especially from a vendor perspective. Then it also impacts our customers in terms of how they’re viewed inside of their companies. So, it’s just imperative that we pay… Quality checks and governance are kind of the… While it’s not sexy, I think it’s got to be one of the leading messages just to provide that overall level of comfort. I also wanted to just underscore this theme that I’ve been hearing among my brand guests, which is this validate a point of view or a theme based on outside data. So, like Microsoft is a great example of a company where you can’t just go in and present primary research. You’ve got to have that research backed by auxiliary sources, whether it’s third party or behavioral or whatever. 


Yeah, I think actually there’s been a history where we talk about qualitative and quantitative research, and I think there’s always been the discussions inside the brands. “Well, I went to these focus groups and there were two people who said whatever.” You need to put things into perspective. You need to validate this is quantitative and so on. I mean qualitative, when you think analysis, I mean the repetition of the point of what is being said is what validates the idea. So I saw that two people… It’s when you do half a dozen groups and you get the same overarching idea is present, you know there is something in there. That’s how I feel a lot of the Twitter and Facebook and all these social platforms. Although it’s a great way to express are like huge focus groups, I find it a bit harder to get metrics out of some of these tools or measuring of sentiment. As I look into the different European countries, everyone has their own language and the value of humor and sarcasm plays a different role in different countries. So if you could measure that and quantify that… So I think we do need to be aware of how we’re using those tools. And I do like to look whenever we’re doing a launch or a follow-up or something’s happening in the market, I love to read all the tweets and to read for like 20 minutes. That’s going to give me the overall idea of what is going on. I don’t need to know whether the sentiment is positive or negative at 17% or 37%. I will get the overall idea based on what I’m reading from consumers. So I think that is another thing to bear in mind in terms of the reliability of the data and the sources that we’re using. 


Yeah, social media is interesting. There’s been a lot of effort that was made over the last five years to create like these sentiment scores and etc., etc. But still it hasn’t been adopted at scale by researchers. You know, it definitely has found some purchase. I’m not saying it doesn’t have a role, but I don’t think it’s achieved what the original thesis was: ultimately, driving the sentiment for a specific brand as expressed on social media. The other thing that I want to unpack a little bit before we move on is this point about qualitative and quantitative. Quantitative, of course, allows us to extrapolate a point of view on an audience at scale, whereas qualitative allows us really to get to more of the uncovering the “why” or humanizing the results: that discoverability and connection with the data. Are you seeing tools come out right now or do you expect to see tools come out over the next three to five years that allow you to conduct qualitative-like research but at a scale that then allows you to extrapolate to a larger population?


Well, I think the first thing, I think that the biggest change we need to do from a brand’s point of view, we need to get out a lot more, a very basic thing. But I think the trend is research, but I think that should never be a substitute for common sense. And I think what I find in many organizations is that we’re all stuck inside offices and we don’t go to the point of sale enough. We don’t speak to consumers informally enough. I think we need to get out. Even self-moderating, I mean this is not against real research Institutes who do with professional moderators, but I think it’s interesting in several of organizations I’ve been to, I’ve even given trainings on teaching marketing departments on how to moderate. What I mean by moderate – how to ask a question, how to listen to consumers. And I think it’s good for clients to actually be able to sit around a table or go shop and go do shop-alongs. A lot of the ethnographic research… That’s been there for ages, but I think we need to do a lot more of that. Rather than just read things, it’s actually get out and talk to people, listen to people. It’s not so much inventing new things, but going in some cases back to basics to learn about those things. We’ve just mentioned also about social media. A lot of the time that is spent and a lot of the purchase decisions that are made online and through social media requires us to try and improve our measurement, our listening, how to drive business impact through these channels. So I think anything along those lines, we probably need a lot more evolution as where we are right now. I think it’s moving such a pace that it’s hard to catch on, but I think that is where most of the work I think needs to be done. 


Yeah. That’s so interesting. So, you’re the second guest I’ve had that has made this point. Estrella Lopez-Brea, who’s the head of insights for the cereal partnership between General Mills and Nestlé, had the exact same point and I can’t remember, I think it was on her podcast, but it might have been a separate conversation. But the framework is them as researchers and even like outside of the research function, they’re helping others connect with consumers and really with the intent of not just consumer insights but also just empathy with their constituents. I do think that this is a trend that we will see materialize. I can’t quantify yet, but I’m going to start incorporating it in more conversations and see how it materializes. So thanks very much for bringing that up. So, my last question, what is your personal motto?  


I haven’t really thought about that. I think there’s a balance. I like to think about work-life balance. I do take my professional career, obviously, with great importance, but now that, as I mentioned the beginning, I’ve got a three-month baby and you put things into perspective. I think it’s applicable to both work and the personal life, but I think it’s a matter of balance. If I were to think back in my life, I think one of the best decisions has been to spend my life traveling. I’ve been to over a hundred countries throughout my life. And I think that helps you to understand the people a little bit better. This is such a global environment we’re in even more so now that you have to work with the multinational companies.  It doesn’t matter where you’re based. I think you need to be islands and be able to listen to all the different points of view and try to improve on communication. So, in terms of motto, I would say, or an attribute, a value, a balanced person, I think, can go far. So yeah, I think that would be it – probably the area I would focus on.


My guest today has been David Garcia Pawley, director of European countries, CMI. That is Consumer and Market Insights at Samsung. Thank you, David, for being on the Happy Market Research Podcast today.


Thank you, Jamin. It’s been a pleasure. Thank you very much. 


Everyone else, thank you so much for your time. I truly appreciate it. If you found value, please take a moment. It takes about 60 seconds: screen capture, post on Twitter or LinkedIn. If you tag a Happy Market Research or myself, we will be give you a special gift. Ah, how’s that? And I actually have 300 stickers. So if you do a tag me, I will send you a sticker. I’ve never done that before either. I have a great rest of your day.


According to the GRIT report, there has been an increase in the number of qualitative based tools. This is centric to user experience, customer experience, and market research. However, as with all things, the actual research operations remains to be done and that happens usually outside of those toolsets. HubUx is a solution for that. You plug your tools directly into it; you enter in who it is that you want to talk to when you want to talk to them and HubUx literally does the rest for you. If you already have an existing customer list, you can just upload it directly into the tool. If you want to leverage social recruiting, that’s integrated as well. It is the single source for all of your research operations needs HubUx. Check it out. Thanks.