Providing Insight at the Speed of Light: The Challenge and Necessity of Embracing Innovation

By Mark Cameron

We live in a world where growth is demanded at every turn. In business, shareholders demand growth of revenues, profit, and share value. In government, taxpayers demand growth of industry, tourism, and gross domestic product. Even in our family lives, we try to grow our nest eggs while our children—who provide a sobering reference for the speed at which this world turns—cannot wait to grow up.

This “demand to expand” fuels an ever-increasing “need for speed.” More than ever, we need to know what people are thinking, and we need to know now. The requirement to deliver more information in less time asserts tremendous pressure on managers, media, and government, which in turn pushes researchers to find innovative solutions to both old problems and emerging challenges. Ironically, the technology that is supposed to help us manage this pressure all too often fuels even higher expectations, thus creating a vicious, accelerating cycle of demand.

For the past few decades, technology has been a frequent catalyst for disruptive innovation in the field of survey research. Starting with fundamental changes to the way paper surveys were produced and processed, through the introduction of Computer-Assisted Interviewing (CAI) tools, to the adoption of the internet as a primary mode of communication, we have seen many generations of innovative technology come and go within a relatively short timeframe. Within each generation have been numerous sub-innovations, compounded by differences in technology adoption throughout the world.

This complex web of technology represents a global game of “innovation leapfrog,” whereby new methods that are suitable for one region or market are bypassed elsewhere for logistical or cultural reasons. For example, with the advent of the personal computer, survey researchers in North America wholeheartedly embraced Computer-Assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) thanks to the inexpensive, pervasive landline infrastructure that was available from Anchorage to Miami. By contrast, the more costly and complex telephone infrastructures in Europe, combined with much greater population density, cultivated advancement of Computer-Assisted Personal Interviewing (CAPI). Now we find both of these continents embracing the internet with similar fervor, but from very different perspectives. As a result, few standards exist for creating and processing survey instruments, and thousands of technology solutions have been invented in parallel around the world. Factoring in the rapid emergence of other global research markets, the inevitable but unpredictable impact that wireless technology will have on how people communicate, and the increasing homogenization of global culture, it is difficult to paint a cohesive picture of research technology.

Popular culture has created a romantic view of revolution. Whether viewing the history of the world or developing business plans for global expansion, we liberally use the word “revolution” to describe a positive, energetic activity. I admit that I have used the “R” word on many occasions, but I cannot help seeing our revolutionary attitude as a key contributor to the pressure we face to deliver on the promises of technology.

I believe that most effective “revolutions” are actually a series of “evolutions.” Though many success stories stem from revolutionary ideas, execution is at least as important as invention in the innovation process. One need only look as far as the world’s most successful software company, Microsoft, to see the benefit of execution over invention. Microsoft did not invent the operating system, the word processor, or the spreadsheet, yet it has become the predominant player in all three of these areas.

There have been overnight successes in technology, such as the Napster file-sharing phenomenon of the late 1990s, but many of these have fallen under the weight of their own expectations. In a field that is near and dear to me—mobile survey computing—innovative companies like Wireless Opinion, CodeSurveys, and ZingData all fell short of expectations, despite strong backing and good people. From about 2000 to 2003, these companies developed wireless polling technology to conduct surveys using mobile phones. It quickly became apparent that mobile phone research was a good idea that was ahead of its time, at least in the North American and European markets that were being targeted (I am not aware of whether there have been success stories for related technology in Asia). A number of similar products are now emerging to tackle this same problem, and I believe we will see a wider adoption of mobile polling in 2007 and beyond. It remains to be seen who will be the leading players in this space, and whether text-messaging will be widely adopted as a polling tool or surpassed by newer, more robust mobile technologies.

By contrast, the now ubiquitous data analysis software, SPSS, began as an academic development effort at Stanford University in 1968 and was initially intended only for local consumption. As if to challenge my assertion, a visit to the SPSS website defines this invention as a “revolutionary statistical software system”; but I would argue that while the research behind SPSS software may have been revolutionary in nature, its adoption within the research community has been a long, evolutionary process.

It is human nature to favor revolution over evolution, to seek a more direct path to the imaginary finish line that we are constantly chasing. But it is important to pursue innovation with a pragmatic, iterative approach. The rate of technological change is sure to continue accelerating as historically separate means of communication—telephony, face-to-face, and electronic modes such as email, web-browsing, and text-messaging—converge upon a new world of interpersonal connectivity. I expect the most successful survey organizations will be those that are grounded but innovative in their view toward technology. Those who implement change for the sake of change will break ground for the rest of us—at their own expense—while those who seek new opportunities based on proven technology will position themselves for success.