why Lists make the research world go round

I love Lists (check out my talk at Bettakultcha if you need any convincing).  So I was cheered when I saw this tweet from Andrea:

http://twitter.com/#!/diemkay/status/73847444823224320

I replied with:

http://twitter.com/#!/gemma_T/status/74074458377302016

There is a point to all this work-specific list keeping.  Although the online world has made it much easier to find places, it doesn’t necessarily make it easier to weed out the dodgy ones.  It’s all very well having customer review sites like trip advisor, but I think ‘focus group venue advisor’ might be a bit too niche to work.

So you end up building a list from personal experience and word of mouth about the best (and worst) focus group and workshop venues all over the country.  Plus notes about the recruiters you wouldn’t touch with a bargepole again and good, fast and cheap transcription services (PageSix in case you were wondering).

I wish that some of the less brilliant research venues could know just how willingly I share recommendations and don’t-touch warnings from my list with other planning and researcher types (especially in response to desperate I-need-a-focus-group-venue-in-Stockport-tomorrow type tweets).  Then perhaps the hotels and viewing facilities would be a bit keener to make sure that everything was right first time.

In such an incestuous, close kit industry like marketing, supplier choice does often come down to reputation and recommendation.  But in contrast to the trip advisors of this world it just seems to happen more for us via online relationships than putting our faith in stranger’s reviews.