Consumer research solutions
RapiTests®
Fast
RapiTests combine the speed of internet with in situ exposure of concepts, products, designs and ads. RapiTests central location tests use street intercept respondents that are incentivized. This approach is flexible. It can use visual aids (showed concepts, designs or advertising), real products for olfactory, texture, fragrance and touch and feel appreciation, permit depth probes, use various rating scales, and can even alter the direction of an interview while still in progress. The respondents complete directly on our online questionnaire program. We explain instructions and provide help with unfamiliar terms and research procedures. This physical interaction avoids professional respondents and can be used both in markets where internet is common or not (i.e. developing markets).
Set-up and planning
RapiTests can either be adapted to your best practices or use 1WR question and questionnaire advice, to suit your particular requirements.
Planning of different waves is conducted for selected key cities within a country or internationally.
Incidence rates suitable for intercepts are 20% and above. For lower incidence rates, pre-recruiting may in addition jointly organised.
Validate and diagnostic
A simple test exposing a new product, ad or design with a
sample of 100 respondents can help validate its objectives.Options can include:
- additional open-ended questions or in-depths interviews to
provide explanations on improvements
- a conjoint optimization
module to model an optimal product by studying
respondents "liking" or "choices" of its various analytical features
(>Product
optimization)
- with an increased sample of 150 respondents, two sub samples of
75 respondents can compare uptake among
two different target groups. (i.e. a "general conservative" versus
"early
adopters" targets, early adopters being more
experimental and outgoing)
- mobile solutions using special trailers for kitchen and home installations
Select a winner among alternatives
Testing various alternative materials increases chances to find a
winner.
Selection compares new alternatives, and when an enhancement is
envisaged, its current version should be used as benchmark.Two techniques are proposed depending on the number and nature of tested materials:
- Sequential
comparisons: When many materials are compared to seek one or a few
winners, or if materials are in a draft or rendering format, 1WR
recommends that
sequential tests be performed. Sequential comparisons enable
respondents to review the various alternatives and indicate her/his
preferences.
- Matched sampling comparisons: When materials have reached a prototype stage or are compared to its current version, 1WR recommends using matched samples comparisons.
Materials
Some general features are below indicated:| Materials | Concept |
Product |
Design |
Ad |
Price |
| Formats | Either offline or online | Preparation might require specific formats, samples, refrigeration |
- Drafts - Prototypes - Finalized |
- Animated story boards - Final audio cassettes, video cassettes - Prints | Price levels |
| Material requirements |
Concept boards or files | One set of products per respondent (+10% for security) | We can replicate pack facings photographically | One set of ads per interviewer, 1WR can handle duplication of audio/video cassettes | Conjoint program or elasticity test |
Reporting
Typical RapiTests online projects include: - presentation and recommendations
- top line results
- project files (questionnaire, translations, central locations, dates
Norms
Database maintenance is provided for the variables of all previous appropriate RapiTests. Online reports and results can show significant differences to previous similar data. All data can be exported to major statistical software programs.
This is an example of a successfully completed project. Specific parts
of the project are retained to protect confidentiality.
Fieldwork dates planned, results were needed immediately after fieldwork. 1WR automated standard reporting and presentation.
Speed required specific controls before producing reports and presentations.
Questionnaire and translations were online and checked in a week. Later, many questions being standard, economies of scale were managed for translations.
Products were dispatch for early delivery at the different field locations.
Fieldwork was conducted during 1 and 3 days, and reports and presentation immediately available after fieldwork.
Objectives
To compare/benchmark products’ fragrance, texture and olfactory perceptions in various cities internationally: London, Paris, Hamburg, Milan, Madrid, Sao Paulo, Mexico, Moscow, Jakarta, Tokyo, Mumbai.Fieldwork dates planned, results were needed immediately after fieldwork. 1WR automated standard reporting and presentation.
Sampling and methodology
Central location; quota based upon women/men, age groups, product usage screener; questionnaire addressing product preference, attribute ratings, likes and dislikes.Speed required specific controls before producing reports and presentations.
Reporting and advice
Reporting consisted of specific project tables, a database with project and respondent data, and standard presentations.Project requirements
Chosen central locations in different cities, required 2 weeks prior set-up.Questionnaire and translations were online and checked in a week. Later, many questions being standard, economies of scale were managed for translations.
Products were dispatch for early delivery at the different field locations.
Fieldwork was conducted during 1 and 3 days, and reports and presentation immediately available after fieldwork.
Quality
Field supervisors were present during all central location interviewing. Project managers visited fieldwork and assisted at briefs, physically or via webcam.
© Copyright 1 World Research (1WR.net)
2002-2008. All Rights Reserved.
updated last Sept. 2008
updated last Sept. 2008