Clarifications: Reuters Coverage on Facebook News Release

Yesterday I was interviewed by Reuters on our recent news release. As with most interviews related to polling results, there are some things that get a little lost in translation and edited.

Please note the following clarifications on their article “Facebook users willing to let employers see profiles” by Claire Sibonney.

Quote:

Almost half of 1,200 people questioned in an online survey said they would be comfortable sharing their personal profile with their current employer, while two in five would consider letting prospective employers look at their Facebook account in addition to their resume.

Clarification: Poll was population representative of 1,200 online Canadians. Of which, 51% were Facebook members. It is this 51% that these findings apply to.

Quote:

The poll showed that out of Facebook’s 9 million Canadian members, almost 9 in 10 adults aged 18 to 34 use the site. Singh suggested that more people are censoring potentially embarrassing information.

Clarification: Based on Facebook membership stats, when proxied against the Canadian population (2006 Census) yields the estimate of “almost 9 in 10 adults aged 18 to 34 use the site.” Our survey indicates 74% of those 18 to 34 years are members of Facebook. Assuming that there may be persons with multiple profiles and that there may be some small concerns with the reporting sample, the truth may be somewhere in between.

The “censoring” reference relates this quote:

“The days of getting drunk and getting all your pictures posted online, that’s gone,” he said.

What I said: Almost two-thirds of Facebook users feel that their profile is an accurate representation of who they are. While there may be a time in their youth that their profile may contain the usual silliness of pictures getting drunk, people are savvy about employers searching for their profiles and related postings online. So when these member enter the working world, they would likely tailor their profile to be more professional but still reflective of their personality. I also noted that Facebook has sophisticated privacy settings should a member want to limit access to who views their profile.

Everything else was accurate.

Fact remains, Facebook is great tool for screening and attracting talent (and getting a sense of a candidate’s personality and organization fit), and presents great platform for building a vibrant company culture (with ample examples of companies who have done so already).

Facebook helps employers screen & develop talent…

Social networking is the new frontier of recruiting and connecting with staff.

Yes, indeed. While not an obvious first place to advertise jobs, the medium does take advantage of one key element - networks.

There have been a wave of employers shutting down workers access to this revolutionary Web 2.0 application because it is considered a time waster. E-mail was once considered a time waster. Even the telephone.

Employers are trying to figure out how Facebook can be a positive contribution to their operations. Even in the midst of what we now refer as the “talent crunch.” But, with all the efforts being poured into new recruitment and retention programs and employer branding initiatives, Facebook might be a manager’s best ally.

It is well known that many new hires are now done on a referral basis - may it be through an employee, professional network of post-secondary drive. It is my strong sense that employers who embrace the ‘trusted network’ aspects and personal profile features of Facebook could leverage the social networking system to attract talent with the “right fit” faster and easier than traditional means.

As we noted in one of our recent reports: Facebook is the account of choice for more than 80% of Canadians who subscribe to social networking sites. While membership appears to have stabilized at over 9 million, almost 9 in 10 Canadians aged 18 to 34 years are members – the cohort that is most sought after by employers.

For some excellent insights into what Facebook and social media can do for your organization, I suggest you read the following article “Web 2.0 @ Work” by Elizabeth Kelly that appeared in the April/May issue of HR Professional.

Article: Web 2.0 @ Work by Elizabeth Kelly

Have we got our priorities right?

I’ll admit it. I am a foodie. Some may say food snob. Sure. Whatever.

I regularly pick up food magazines for new ideas, among which bon appetit is one.

Flipping through the May 2008 issue I encountered this ad for Fancy Feast.

Now, I’ll also admit I like cats and that they make good pets.

BUT THIS IS RIDICULOUS.

“Restaurant Inspired” food for cats??? Come on.

At this time when food prices continue to rise, the are riots over the shortage of staples and millions starving in poor countries, I have a real problem with such product development and marketing.

While kitty should be fed, I think that we should take a hard look at how we have promoted such frivolous opulence in our society.

Trying to stay up-to-date

In the business of providing advice, you simply have to stay in the know. Whatever is going on in the news, business, science, the arts and popular culture, clients expect us to be up-to-date. We need to stay abreast of the latest trends and innovations in society and the market.

So we have the radio on… on some news channel. Or a small television on… on some news channel. Near our desk. While we work. We try to read the daily papers first thing in the morning… at home… in the office… on the can. Or check out the key news websites and scan the new postings (some of us subscribe to a host of RSS feeds). And the magazines – weekly, monthly, special issues… news, business, music… IT TAKES A LOT OF WORK TO STAY UP-TO-DATE!!!! And even more challenging, trying to get a balanced perspective by reviewing a number of news sources.

Another thing that takes effort… EXERCISE.

I have found a handy little trick to stay in the loop AND (my attempts of) staying fit. PODCASTS.

Yup. I listen to a host of podcasts from around the world. With iTunes and an iPod I have access to news reports, documentaries, editorials and political and social trends analysis at my fingertips as I grind away on the treadmill. I am thankful to media around the world for letting me package information in a way that allows me to digest it when I can, wherever that may be.

Some of my favourite podcasts are as follows.

On the Media (www.onthemedia.org): From their website - “On the Media explores how the media “sausage” is made, casts an incisive eye on fluctuations in the marketplace of ideas, and examines threats to the freedom of information and expression in America and abroad. For one hour a week, the show tries to lift the veil from the process of “making media,” especially news media, because it’s through that lens that we literally see the world and the world sees us.”

Peter Day’s World of Business (www.bbc.co.uk/radio/podcasts/worldbiz/): From their website - “In Business is all about change. New ways of work and new technologies are challenging most of the assumptions by which organisations have been run for the last 100 years. We try to report on ideas coming over the horizon, just before they start being talked about.”

Slate Magazine (www.slate.com/id/2119317/): From their website - “Slate is a daily magazine on the Web. Founded in 1996, we are a general-interest publication offering analysis and commentary about politics, news, and culture. Slate’s strong editorial voice and witty take on current events have been recognized with numerous awards. The site, which is owned by The Washington Post Company, does not charge for access.”

Search Engine (www.cbc.ca/searchengine/): From the CBC website - “Search Engine is your open source to all the surprising and significant ways the Internet is transforming our world. It’s about the little Myspace page that could swing the next election, the anonymous message board comment that led to the CEO’s indictment, and the official online video game of the Chinese government. Think of Search Engine as a radio show about the Internet in the same way The New Yorker is a magazine about New York. It’s a look at politics and culture through the lens of the Net. It’s radio that predicts the present.”

All in the Mind (www.abc.net.au/rn/allinthemind/default.htm): From their website - “All in the Mind, presented by Natasha Mitchell, is Radio National’s weekly foray into all things mental – a program about the mind, brain and behaviour. From dreaming to depression, addiction to artificial intelligence, consciousness to coma, psychoanalysis to psychopathy, free will to forgetting – All in the Mind explores the human condition through the mind’s eye.”

There are many more…

If you have not done so as yet, and are looking for creative ways to stay up-to-date in your field of interest, search the podcast section of iTunes and start subscribing.

Happy listening.

AB Election 2008: A Remarkable and Spectacular Result for Governing PCs

Amidst much debate about a need for change, the Alberta PC party rode into a bright new dawn with a resounding victory in the 2008 provincial election on March 3, 2008.

With a mandate of 70+ seats, they have effectively eliminated any opposition and have free reign over the operation of the province for at least another four to five years.

The opposition parties, optimistic with 20+ seats in 2004 and stealing Ralph Klein’s riding in a by-election, are now decimated. With little hope and no voice for the current term, elected members can only hope on working on their roles of as future statesmen in a range of different capacities. Kevin Taft has no option but to step down as leader of the Liberals.

This result has emphasized the following realities.

1. The Tories clearly understand the electorate better than the opposition. While under the Tory rule, even though wealth from oil has increased, and access to healthcare and post-secondary education and environmental protection has declined (based on factual data), they continue to demonstrate that they have a resounding appeal among their core constituency.
2. The Tories understand what it takes to stay in power. While there is much discussion about resolving voter apathy and the need for electoral reform, these are of little interest to Tories. The current system and configuration works for them and they are remarkably efficient at using it to their advantage – especially when they can generate enough interest to get a 41% turn out rate, obtain 53% of the vote and parlay that into 88% of the seats. Opposition parties have little chance, if any, to erode this well-oiled machine.
3. Voter apathy… self-fulfilling prophecy or political advantage? Voter turnout at 41% raises a number of questions. Are Albertans happy with the current state of government that they don’t feel that they need to vote? Do they think that the result is pre-determined that they have little effect on the final result? Do they think that being labeled “apathetic” that they act accordingly? Or are citizens disengaged and lack any interest in politics whatsoever? Regardless of what voter apathy is exactly (and how it contributes to weakened debate with a minimal opposition), the Tories understand it, are happy to maintain the status quo and leverage the situation to their advantage.
4. A paradoxical notion of change. While all parties emphasized they offer a solution for and were the agent for change, voters opted for the status quo. Did they buy into the Tories vision for change? Did voters unequivocally reject all other parties’ notion of change? Or was it that no change was the most desirable change of all? Or are voters scared to rock the boat with “too much change?”It is interesting to note on this measure of change how Albertans view the world. After over 12 years of Federal Liberal rule, Albertans were among the most vocal demanding change. They also view Ontario as a Liberal stronghold - even though Ontario has managed a number of changes in provincial government while it has been steadfastly Tory blue in Alberta. Regardless of what “change” is, the Alberta Tories understand that holding steady is what their committed electorate seeks.
5. The Tory Team is Alberta’s team. For the basic majority of voters, anything other than a Tory government is “un-Albertan.” Being a Tory is an Albertan tradition – that which has resulted in the province’s wealth and land of opportunity. The Tories continue to tap into this tradition and strengthen their brand with committed voters who perceive that being Albertan means voting Tory.

While the problems in the province rise – physician shortages, conflict in water rights and usage, power rates, ever increasing cost of housing, rising costs and reduced access to post-secondary education, homelessness, crime, suburban sprawl and environmental degradation – Tory stewardship has been deemed as the only acceptable solution for the province’s voters. And with no opposition, the Tories have been granted the strongest possible mandate to provide citizens with their current level of management and concern. The Tories will likely keep their foot firmly planted on the economic accelerator with the anticipation that market forces will resolve any of these “perceived” problems.

With an impotent opposition, it will be left to the mayors of Calgary and Edmonton to lead the charge on trying to resolve the lack of investment and support for the Alberta’s cities. However, with their renewed power, the Tories can pick and choose what investments will strategically support their mandate, ensure that Albertans stay politically engaged to the extent they currently do and steer their party towards a solid fifth decade in power.

Alberta Election 2008: Voter Apathy, the Undecided & Knowing When to Say “I don’t know.”

Monday, March 3, 2008 is Election Day in Alberta. And from the looks of it, and if the pollsters are correct, the Tories are heading for another victory and extending their stay in office over 40 years.

While a Tory victory appears to be “in the bag,” things are clearly not all they appear to be.

It is an interesting time in the province’s history – the economy is low, the participation rate above 75% in major centres and unemployment is at incredible historical low. In most jurisdictions this world, this would be a slam dunk for the ruling party.

However, as former Premier Klein admitted, there was no plan to deal with the boom, and this has lead to host of citizen discontent. With growth, there are labour shortages and wages have been bid up through the roof (and employers are doing their best to retain their talent). Housing is in short supply and real estate is among the most expensive in the country. Critically, there has been little investment in municipal infrastructure, and they are stressed in accommodating the growth. There are also concerns about the environment – the impacts of the Oil Sands development and water rights. Further, an unpopular response to Royalty Review and healthcare stretched to limit (e.g. newcomers are finding it almost impossible to find a family doctor) has lead to many questioning the province’s management and leadership. Citizens, while pleased with the prosperity, are not happy about the direction the province is heading and their quality of life.

Given all this, this is and interesting time to call an election. Maybe Ed Stelmach, winner of the leadership race but never elected as the Premier, felt that it was his time to get his mandate from the citizens. Also, with economic challenges ahead (and the downturn in the U.S.), maybe he felt that things may get worse so this was his window of opportunity for the Tories to maintain a solid majority in their role of government.

So will the Tories get their desired result? This researcher believes they will, but the political landscape will be altered. And more likely, the result will not be as predictable as in the past. There are a number of reasons for this.

First, citizen discontent with the negative impacts of the economic boom. Almost half of eligible voters are indicating that they feel that they are not happy with the management of the province and would like a change in government. Many, while not “totally discontent” with the Tories are seeking a new vision for the province, more accountability in government and a more effective opposition.

Next, Alberta has the lowest voter out among all provinces – 44.7% in 2004. With some voters feeling that the election result pre-determined staying home, those supporting other parties may feel more motivated to turn up at the polls.

There is also the changing attitude of the populous. With the influx of people from other parts of Canada and the rest of the world, there is a growing sense that is not “un-Albertan” to support someone other than the Tories (in 2004, they got 62 seats with 46.8% compared to the Liberals with 13 seats with 29.4% of all votes). The opinions of those saying that if you don’t vote PC you are not welcome in the province are quickly diminishing. Further, rural constituencies are questioning the support for the Tories as they have felt short-changed for their loyalty and pressure tactics by elected officials.

Lastly, all of this has led to many reconsidering their votes. While there is much loyalty with the Tories, there are easily a quarter of committed voters who are undecided. Most, I suspect are holding their cards close and not wanting to reveal their hand to pollsters.

If we were to seriously consider all of these variables – which can swing things a few points either way – other than a secure Tory victory, all other aspects of this election presents challenges in gauging what voters will say on decision day. Pollsters are rightfully cautious in their predictions as to outcomes other than a Tory win.

One thing I will venture forth and predict is that the political landscape of Alberta is going to be different. Calgary has now become a wildcard. And if voters in the city decide to send a message to the Tories, there will a major urban/rural divide. The party in power will be so primarily on the strength of a non-Edmonton and non-Calgary MLA base, and will be governing from the strength of its rural base.

Such a dichotomy will lead to some interesting times in provincial politics. If Stelmach does not deliver at least 50 seats, a leadership review is warranted. Similarly, if Kevin Taft does not capitalize on Tory discontent and deliver some big wins in Calgary and select ridings in southern Alberta, his leadership will also be subject to review.

Beware of Black Boxes - The Strength and Validity of Internet Surveys

ZINC research was recently a sponsor for Net Gain 2.0 in Ottawa.

This was an excellent conference on the current state and future on online research and using wireless technologies. I recommend that fellow researchers attend future iterations of this conference.

One area that many speakers dedicated much attention was the reliability of online polls. And specifically, the representativeness of the sample. I take the firm stance that online polling, with demographic-based weighting, is able to deliver findings reflective of the general population.

The fact is online is just another medium for data collection, and should be treated as such. With 70% of North Americans being Internet Users (with a higher incidence in Canada), given the nature of the study being conducted, we are at a point of acceptability of online gen-pop polling.

At the conference there were a number of issues raised about online data collection. Let me elaborate on the topics and my associated thoughts.

First, there was discussion as to how do you overcome the issue of the offline population. This is the traditional argument among researchers who argue that telephone polling is better at generating a “random and representative” sample. Two points here. First, young people are opting not to have a land line. Given the diminished capability of contacting this group, one must question the weighting procedure for younger respondents within a sample. Second, telephone response rates are most probably at the lowest point that they ever were. Telephone polling now has a host of tools, such as predictive dialers and pre-screened sample, to assist in their trade. So the question arises - are they approaching a representative population? Like the online population, in reality there are limits of who can be contacted and who wants to be contacted via telephone surveys. Thus, it is likely that the offline population may share much in common with the “uncontactable” population.

Another discussion was on self selection bias with online surveys. As indicated above, given the declining telephone response rates there is likely a self-selection process in participating in a phone survey. Many of us are aware that there are respondents who pick and chose to participate in the telephone survey, especially when asked how long it would take and what is the topic. Online researchers have been challenged to conduct parallel studies with telephone methods and the findings have repeatedly shown that there are minimal self selection differences. Further, given the vehicle of online data collection, it has delivered innovation in using incentives to motivate participation without any major quality effects.

Mode effects also raised some questions. Does the medium attract and produce skewed results? There is ample evidence - from polling companies and academic researchers - that has proven that the presence of “hyperactive” panel members is a myth and, if there are any withing a survey, have had little effect on data quality. Further, there are enough controls to assess fraudulent responses and “automaton” type responses via pattern recognition algorithms. The latter is easily investigated within longer surveys - and truth be told, we as market researchers do a great injustice to our discipline with lengthy surveys, regardless of the medium.

Finally, there is the subject of social desirability. The presence of a person automatically offers a “barrier” and “perceived filter” for the honesty of respondents. We have seen this across the breadth of research we have conducted - including self-complete and administered onsite projects. We have noted that online respondents tend to me MORE honest on contentious issues as know that their feedback is anonymous. Clients should appreciate this as there is less “sugar coating” within the actual data. Ultimately, what needs to be assessed is the consistency of method - if it is a tracking study, keeping a similar data collection is critical to mitigate any of the surprises that may result in shift in methodology.

Considering all these points, one thing that is noted is many government departments (who I regard as the most stringent in their data collection methods as they cannot afford to get it wrong), regardless of order, have moved over to online methodologies. So they must be comfortable with its application.

My last thought is this notion on proprietary weighting schemes. I personally disapprove of these. As they are proprietary, by definition they are not transparent nor reproducible. And the question arises, is the weighting applied designed to “fit the data?” We as researchers have a responsibility to apply simple methods to rebalance data from publicly available sources (such as the census) to ensure that our approach is reproducible and easily validated. I personally believe, given the magnitude of the online population at this time, that weighting by age, gender, region and (if the data exists) education. For those who have proprietary “black box” weighting schemes, it has been demonstrated that their data is within the margins of error of demographic weightings. With the issue of margins of error being debatable for online studies, the goal should be to deliver insights that are from a sample reflective of the population to ensure and reinforce the credibility of this means of data collection.

We got your goat.

Helping out with some good ole nannies.

Another one of ZINC Research’s pillars is community support. Over the course of this year we supported a number of events – The North American OutGames and The Calgary International Festival - run by some very hard working not-for-profit organizations, with our research and consulting services. We also sponsored the Net Gain 2.0 and TTRA Canada annual conferences.

Given our success this year and our fortunate lives here in Canada, at this time of giving we would like to help at least four families in developing countries to realize some of their own opportunities. We have purchased four (4) female goats through a recognized charity. While we all find our way in celebrating the season, for those who are looking for new

avenues for giving, our charity of choice – Oxfam - indicates that a goat “will also provide vaccinations, health and market awareness training and much more. More importantly, the income your gift generates will create greater self-sufficiency, self-esteem and educational opportunities.”

For more information on Oxfam’s program, click here.

Calgary OutGames - A Research Legacy

The North American OutGames were held in Calgary, Alberta from April 1 to 8, 2007 (click here for website). The week-long event comprised a human rights conference, a cultural program and the annual Western Cup sporting event. ZINC Research was proud to be a sponsor for this international gay and lesbian event (click to see our program ad).

ZINC Research OutGames Advertisement

One of the challenges of doing research on the gay and lesbian market is the issue of self-identification. Much gay and lesbian research is done online - may it be via snowball sample or panel - that requires that respondents self-identify themselves by their sexual orientation. While this is great for directional purposes, it is not representative. While many gays and lesbians are out - they are a limited group of “card carrying members” - there are still issues related to stigma and self-identification.

One means of getting “representative” feedback is doing research with a well-defined and receptive “population.” Within the gay and lesbian population, this is done onsite. Thus, the findings are pertinent to the environment where the data were collected, but not projectable to the general or gay and lesbian population. It does however provide solid direction, as the respondents are drawn from a well understood environment. And that environment may serve as a proxy for another environment or event.

Over the course of the OutGames, our team conducted 347 complete surveys. The findings emphasized some of the real and perceived impacts of the event. Of great value is the expenditure impact estimates - these clearly demonstrate the inclination of this market to spend while attending these events.

We welcome all to review these findings and assist you in enhancing your knowledge of this solid and lucrative, and sometimes elusive market.

For more information about this survey and doing research with the gay and lesbian market, please contact Brian F. Singh at brian@zincresearch.com or (403) 861-9462.

North American OutGames Onsite Evaluation

Why you hire a market research professional (Part 1)

I used to be a member of an online grocery delivery service. I discontinued the service for a host of reasons.

However, they retained my contact information and they recently sent me an online survey to better understand why I left and what was important to me. While I commend them on their effort to do research, their execution was poor.

First, it was obvious that they designed this survey instrument themselves - the questionnaire had a host of double-barreled and in-appropriate questions. Here’s an example (one of too many!):

Which option(s) best describe your lifestyle?

Single
In a long-term relationship
Do not have children
Want children in the future
Pregnant
Have one or more children

They did not ask my gender (I am male), and I found that I was able to check off that I have a “pregnant lifestyle.”

This leads to my second point. While there are great online tools available to us all, they are meaningless unless they are used properly. Here is a case where if they knew how to program skips and text piping properly, they could have obtained better feedback.

At this point, consulting with a professional - even on meagre budget - would help businesses avoid these (identified) pitfalls and ensure that they obtain meaningful and actionable feedback.