Q&A With Jan Thede on the Future of Research

Almost every project at Edenspiekermann begins by identifying user needs and industry trends through research, using various methods like design thinking and service design. Often, this can be a tough job. In order to learn about relationships, touchpoints, and trends, we have to understand what motivates and drives people as well as industries. This is essential for our work, and ensures that what we create is both relevant and attractive.

Creating innovative and user-centric products and services means investing time and effort, but, in our experience, it always pays off—both for our clients, and for our client’s clients. For us here at Edenspiekermann, that payoff is that we can explain our decisions through real, existing needs and wishes, and not rely on assumptions or tastes.

We always keep our eyes open for research trends, and we recently talked to Dr. Jan Tewes Thede about his project 12K, to learn about the role of research and its future for brands and companies.

ESPI: Jan, how do you want to redefine research with 12K, and why is it necessary?

We aim to make it easier for companies to research digital trends by structuring and utilizing the world’s tech knowledge. We believe that Peter Sondergaards was right when he stated that every company is a technology company today. And as a technology company, every company needs to have answers to questions like “which digital trends are emerging in my areas of interest?”, “what are the latest market predictions for a new technology?” or “which new startups came up in my industry?”.

Staying up to date on these questions is super annoying, especially as we’re in a quickly changing environment of constant disruption. We are building software that helps companies stay up to date on technology by extracting business-relevant information like upcoming startups, market stats, and emerging trends from leading expert sources.

Dr. Jan Tewes Thede

What is the role of research for business and development of companies today?

The role of research in companies changed fundamentally over the last years. It evolved from a vertical unit to an embedded discipline. 10 years ago you usually had one big research project at the beginning of an innovation process in large corporations. With agile methods being widely adopted, research has become an integrated part of iterative innovation processes. The same applies to marketing and sales. Instead of doing research at the beginning and at the end of a campaign, companies now measure and iterate constantly. Research is no longer a single department that executes one-off projects, but an integrated part of every business process.

How would you describe the advantages or value of research for companies, on a scale of 1-5, where 1 is the best?

I would say 1. Obviously, research alone won’t make a company successful, but I think research is one of several crucial disciplines. Companies have to solve problems and fulfill the needs of their customers to be successful. If they don’t research to understand the needs of their customer, the technical possibilities to solve problems and the strategies of their competitors, they can’t be successful in the long run.

How well recognized is the value of research among companies you know? Why do you think that is?

I worked as a researcher for several companies over the last 10 years, and got the feeling that the value of research is, in general, well recognized. Most criticism results from unrealistic expectations or vague problem statements. Many people, for example, expect research to come up with all new ideas, even if the problem statement was just to validate a given hypothesis. This leads to one sentence that every researcher loves hearing when they come up with results: “I could have told you that before”.

Are there any limitations or disadvantages when it comes to research?

A very critical point of research in general is at the intersection of data analysis and the derivation of results. I’ve seen it many times that people misuse research results to support their own goals. Quantitative results especially are very often misinterpreted, as people are willing to believe something if you justify it with numbers, even if the conclusion is pure bullshit.

And why is research on the internet, in times of almost unlimited access to information, even harder?

I wouldn’t say it is harder, but that digitalization changed the required skill set dramatically. The main objective of research a few years ago was data production. Today, data doesn’t have to be produced artificially anymore, but rather emerges automatically and is a natural part of the world it describes. It is ambient. The new problems of research in a world of ambient data are finding data, differentiating relevant from irrelevant data, analyzing huge amounts of data, and deriving the right conclusions.

What can new technology offer to the discipline of research? And what are the most important developments and trends in that area?

One important development is that products themselves become a data source, making classical market research more and more expendable. Products in almost every category, from cars to watches to household appliances, are connected and equipped with sensors. These smart things can collect data on how the consumers use them, so companies don’t have to ask their users about it.

In the field of desk research, technology can especially help with information collection. Studies show that knowledge workers spend about 20% of their days gathering information. And their most used tool is Google, which is highly inappropriate for finding business-relevant information. Technologies like machine learning can help with gathering relevant information and take over the repetitive and uncreative parts of the research process. For example, at 12K we have developed algorithms that extract stats like market sizes or user numbers on any given tech topic from online expert sources. This gives researchers more time to analyze the facts.

How can companies and brands benefit from investing in research? Can you give any examples?

There are several studies that revealed that companies who don’t innovate will die. And that, alongside other factors, like the willingness to disrupt yourself, and a deep understanding of your market, is a crucial condition for successful innovation.

One example that shows the power of research is Netflix. Listening to their users better than other players helped them to become the leader in a highly competitive market, with strong competitors like HBO, Hulu, or Amazon. For instance, they analyze which color schemes of covers are most appealing to specific target groups, which plots make people stop watching a show, or what sort of cliffhanger works best. They were also the first streaming company to understand the phenomenon of binge-watching, and as a result introduced the post-play feature earlier than the competition.

What is your vision for the future of research?

I think research will become a more and more creative discipline as progress in the field of artificial intelligence helps to automate annoying aspects like information gathering and repetitive data analysis tasks. Researchers will, for example, need creativity to come up with ideas on how to generate insights from an increasingly diverse pool of data sources. It may seem a bit counterintuitive at first but I also expect that the importance of intuition will grow with the amount of data available. We need intuition to know where to start searching for patterns in data, and to evaluate whether a found pattern is relevant or just a random correlation. To sum it up, typical human skills will become more important precisely because research will be increasingly shaped by technology.