By Novema Pte Ltd
Like other industries, most research organisations recognize a need to have a strategy on AI, for fear of being left behind by competitors.
Based on Novema’s survey of stakeholders, only 9% had no discussion at all or did not know their organization’s position on AI. While this figure would be higher at an industry level (those not involved in AI are unlikely to have started this survey), we can conclude that most organisations in this sector are engaged to a degree in AI.
38% of organisations have either a dedicated department or a person heading AI development, but more companies (47%) have an informal approach to using AI, e.g. individual staff using it as they wish or staff just providing inputs with no department overseeing it and no formal guidance. As a new technology with lack of transparency, some acknowledge that AI adoption will be a bit of ‘trial and error’
AI adoption can be more challenging in regulated industries like financial services and healthcare. For some client organisations, if they are aware that a supplier is going to use AI in their research, they must undergo an additional risk assessment. Often, the supplier would need to ‘declare’ their use of AI. Some firms are providing AI risk evaluation as part of their service to clients, including use of score cards!
Public sector clients can be somewhat more wary of AI than the private sector (requiring “clear justification for AI use”), and younger brands can be more open to the new technology than more established brands.
While most of the AI development comes from internal research, most organisations also look externally by speaking to specialist AI vendors, looking at best practice in other industries, or attending seminars to learn about AI. Very few involve academia in their consultations, suggesting either a disconnect with technical side of AI, or lack of access to academic institutions.
44% of suppliers are consulting their clients / brands about their needs on AI development. Vendors can have AI Client Advisory Team that collaborates with brands to uncover needs and a dedicated Product Value Teams to showcase AI prototypes.
However, more suppliers are choosing not to consult clients / brands, suggesting that for many suppliers, they ‘would know best’ about what AI the clients should be using, and are just making the recommendations. The AI solutions can be the ‘new tools’ that the suppliers want to speak to clients about, hence a good client engagement opportunity, so these consultations can in fact just be ‘selling’ opportunities.
The importance of AI requires most organisations to involve senior management in determining policies towards its use. Other key influences are research / consumer insight, IT / tech, and legal / compliance.
25% of organisations involve at least one type of specialist, leading being statisticians, operations, or behavioural scientists. Multiple stakeholders can form steering committees on AI.
Some report that the priorities for AI are more towards optimizing it for speed & efficiency, e.g. for fieldwork and data processing, rather than for greater insight or QC – hence it is more commercially driven than academic driven.
However, other efforts around AI are aimed at understanding human responses to stimuli, predicting behavior, and attitudes. Tech firms also look to AI to reduce human effort in surveys and improve compensation models for respondents.
Despite the biases in AI that arise from cultural differences, very few use cultural insight specialists in determining their policies indicating that this could emerge as a potential weakness in the wider adoption of AI.
