Now, you can also track your transcripts through star ratings. This will allow you to isolate the best chats, and save the less vocal respondents for later analysis if needed. This quick, at-a-glance reporting is meant to save you time when sorting through data for patterns and verbatims.

We’re always eager to understand more about how our community of researchers is making the tool work, and what kinds of things we can do to improve. Leave us your product feature requests at our community page, here. And, as always, let support know if you have any issues with the tool!

Happy chatting!

In late January and early February, GutCheck fielded online community discussions with large groups of Gen X and Millenials to determine differences in their feelings about Smart Phones.   Here is a synopsis of some key findings:

 1. Gen X Still Considering Traditional Brands – Even When Buying New Phones.  Over 25% are still using Blackberry, and not just old models.  This was double of the usage they reported compared to iPhone usage.  And they still reported owning brands like Nokia, Motorola and Palm.  In comparison, Millennial were much more in love with iPhones, with over 40% currently owning one.  They also were big Samsung users, and almost none of them owned a Blackberry.

2. Millennial Choosing Phone Based on “Coolness” vs. “More Functionality” for Gen X.  This directly links to the brands they chose, but the younger generation said they chose their phones because it excited them and had apps they were seeking.  The Gen X group however, said that factors such as pricing and features were more important reasons to make their choice.

“I bought my 1st Smartphone about 4 years ago, because My friends had the same one and I thought it looked cool so I got one! ” – Amanda B (Millenial)

The two different generations did agree on several key issues:

 • Driving and texting was #1 pet peeve for both groups.  Both found that behavior very annoying.

 • Facebook, Games and Weather apps were viewed as most valuable – and ones they couldn’t live without.

 • Overall thought that Smart Phones are not making life more complicated, although both said volume of information available does take up more of their time. 

 • Both groups think the ability to stay in contact with others and easily connect to the Internet are the biggest benefits of the technology.  Neither group would want to lose access to their phone.

 Impact for Marketers and Consumer Insights?  While everyone is talking mobile technology today and wanting to offer products, services and apps to support mobile users, it is important to remember that one size or solution does not fit all.  Taking just a few days like we did to drill down into particular consumer segments can bring deep learnings very quickly and help shape your future business decisions.  To find out more about GutCheck, don’t hesitate to email us at info@gutcheckit.com. More detailed findings on this particular research will be available for GutCheck customers on request.

“The high-level answer is that we plan on staying true to our vision of making online qualitative research accessible to brands of all sizes. In practice, that means making online qualitative very easy to use. I think the tipping point you refer to is going to be one of exponentially more experimentation. Experimentation will lead to repeat usage only if the the product promise is fulfilled. It is one thing to talk about making online qualitative quicker, more affordable, and easy. It is much different to actually fulfill on that promise. So for us, staying ahead of that curve is working at fulfilling that promise every day. If we do that, we are given the opportunity to start a dialogue with our customers. That dialogue mapped to our organizational capabilities will drive our innovation forward.”

Read more from the full interview here.

The New York Times recently published an article about the rise of “GroupThink,” a phenomenon that comes into play when people work together, whether brainstorming or being forced to collaborate on work or school projects. The author asserts, “People in groups tend to sit back and let others do the work; they instinctively mimic others’ opinions and lose sight of their own; and, often succumb to peer pressure.”

Moderators who run focus groups see the same thing – one very vocal respondent will overpower more introverted respondents. Or others make take a backseat while a few respondents attempt lead the discussion.

The most fascinating thing about the Times piece, however, is the fact that the negative aspects of GroupThink have not been seen in ONLINE collaborative groups. The article states, “The one important exception to this dismal record is electronic brainstorming, where large groups outperform individuals; and the larger the group the better. The protection of the screen mitigates many problems of group work.” That is, when people are allowed to express their ideas online, and not in in-person groups, larger groups actually thrive.

At GutCheck, we spent significant time over the last year thinking of how to make online group discussions more valuable, quick and affordable. We are anxious to unveil this to the world in the near future.   This New York Times article is great validation for what we are seeing with our new group discussion product – being “alone together” in an online discussion can be extremely valuable.  We are excited to be able to share more on group discussions in the weeks to come, so stay tuned!  

Read the full NYT article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/15/opinion/sunday/the-rise-of-the-new-groupthink.html?_r=2