Victoria Sakal 🏴’s Post

If no one is doing something, does that mean it’s actually not essential…? Or that we’re all just resigning ourselves to a painfully low status quo (AKA a massive opportunity)? I recently talked about the 3 pillars of world class research, and based on the comments, it hit a nerve. 2 of the 3 seem to be less a headache: 👉 “𝗕𝗶𝗴 𝗥” research efforts are regular and table stake (even if slow, tricky, and resource intensive) 👉 “𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘁𝗹𝗲 𝗿” efforts are also decently common (even if sometimes a bit more aspirational and requiring extra hours or shifts in priorities) But the third pillar: “𝗥𝗲𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴” research? Those always-on pulse checks that keep you in the know on competitors, category dynamics, consumer trends, and all the “unknown unknowns” in between more formal research projects? The scans that pull from... • Articles & headlines • Press releases • Podcasts • Newsletters • Reviews • Academia • Social media • Thought leaders • Analysts & investors • ... & myriad other sources To monitor important developments, movements, & insights across your... • Market • Category • Consumers • Competitors • Function / role So you can... • Look around corners • Discover “unknown unknowns” • Seek ideas & inspiration proactively vs. panicking reactively • Stay at the bleeding edge of potentially-important developments 👆👆👆𝗧𝗵𝗮𝘁’𝘀 evidently a pipe dream for most. “𝘐𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 actually 𝘢𝘯 𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘺, 𝘦𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘥𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘸𝘦𝘭𝘭?” “𝘛𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘬𝘯𝘰𝘸𝘭𝘦𝘥𝘨𝘦𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘴 𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘰𝘤𝘤𝘶𝘳 𝘢𝘴 𝘰𝘱𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘰𝘯 𝘢 𝘲𝘶𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘭𝘺 𝘣𝘢𝘴𝘪𝘴? 𝘐 𝘸𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥 𝘓𝘖𝘝𝘌 𝘵𝘰 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴… 𝘪𝘧 𝘪𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘪𝘦𝘳.” “𝘐𝘵’𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘨𝘳𝘢𝘴𝘱 – 𝘐’𝘮 𝘫𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘰𝘧 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘨𝘰𝘦𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘨𝘦𝘵𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘥𝘰𝘯𝘦 😵💫” So you tell me: Does this type of insight feel non-essential, or extremely powerful? And if this type of research has SO much potential to transform our careers (let alone our companies), why haven’t we cracked it yet? No matter your Google Trends, RSS feed, or newsletter signup savviness, it’s extremely hard to set up and maintain a motion that checks all of these boxes (let alone actually monitor and consume what’s being surfaced for you). And yet? We’re scrolling X and LinkedIn feeds, scanning headlines in the countless tangentially-relevant newsletters hitting our inboxes, or – perhaps worst of all – waiting until the powers that be ask us about “this new player” or “what that trend could mean for us.” If smart strategy and impactful innovation are about staying relevant (if not ahead of the curve), isn’t it time we stop relying exclusively on reactive requests and tentpole projects? Methinks it's time we redefine the status quo 😜 #ai #innovation #staycurious #askbetterquestions  

Which looks more fun? 𝗰𝗼𝗻·𝗳𝗲𝗿·𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 (noun) /ˈkänf(ə)rəns/ 𝘢 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘭 𝘮𝘦𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘥𝘪𝘴𝘤𝘶𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 The irony of that definition 👆? The very formality of booths, massive exhibition halls, multiple stages, headsets, lanyards for badge scans, etc. (allll the things that typically comprise a traditional conference), ...often BLOCK discussion, let alone innovation, exploration, creative applications or partnerships, and curiosity. What I experienced at Peep's and Erik's Wynter event (Spryng) confirmed that the "old way" of doing conferences wasn't great for vendors, and it sure didn't create the best experience for attendees. So, inspired by Mark's creative approach to Spryng, here's what we did to shock the system and stand out at a recent industry-wide conference. 1. Took it outside     • We hosted an 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗲, 𝗶𝗻𝘃𝗶𝘁𝗲-𝗼𝗻𝗹𝘆 𝗲𝘅𝗲𝗰𝘂𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗻𝗲𝗿, which was specifically NOT a sales pitch or disguised demo • The evening was carefully designed for one thing: bringing people in similar roles and trenches together to spar, therapize, and learn from each other • Attendees raved about the experience: they made new friends and connections, appreciated the non-salesy approach, and told us that our invites and the whole concept stuck out to them as creative and a great use of their time 2. Flipped the narrative     • We hired EventShark 🦈 as our 𝗰𝗮𝗺𝗲𝗿𝗮 𝗰𝗿𝗲𝘄 for <24 hours • They came to our exec dinner, filming longer sit-down interviews with every guest who attended, and joined us at the conference itself to capture quicker "can I get your thoughts?" interviews with attendees • Instead of hoping attendees came to our booth for a free notepad and badge scan, we went to them ... and NOT to sell our wares    These efforts translated to 50+ (extremely) interesting, (mutually) valuable, and (as pictured) fun conversations with people we would of course love to have as customers - but more importantly, loved to learn from and now have relationships with. Key benefits: • stood out • lots of learnings • more cost effective • way more fun for all involved • real-time insight on our audience & what their challenges are (#research) If insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results, Innovation is shocking the system, asking "what if" "how might we" and "why not" to challenge the status quo and risk it for the biscuit (which we did not have at dinner, come to think of it). #ai #innovation #askbetterquestions

If there's one thing worse than not doing primary (customer) research, it's this: Doing it poorly. That can mean: ❌ poor-quality participants (whose responses you then trust to make important decisions off of 😱), ❌ poorly-written questions that muddy / bias insights, or (the silent killer)... ❌ poor preparation, whether because of rushing or recklessness Imagine the chef asking a group of diners how their meal was...not knowing one of them just got sick in the bathroom from something that went bad. Or a flight attendant cheerily asking a family how their day's going...not realizing their flights had been canceled and delayed into oblivion and at this point they'd be grateful to sit on the wing. Context isn't just for delivering better, less tone-deaf experiences. It gets you better insights, because it helps you ask better questions. It reveals what someone has already uncovered on the topic, surfaces someone else's "known knowns" for you to then build on with your own discoveries or nuances, and helps ground your primary research in the broader reality your customer, company, and category are operating in vs. operating in an isolated bubble. In my recent conversation with Erin and User Interviews, we discussed why and where to leverage "desk" or "secondary" research (𝘪𝘯 𝘢𝘥𝘥𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘰 primary research) as part of a winning research stack. So the question becomes: Why 𝙬𝙤𝙪𝙡𝙙𝙣'𝙩 you scan already-out-there information for essential context? If your answer is it's too slow, difficult, and/or costly to mine everything publicly available in hopes of finding anything that's relevant, I have 2 newsflashes for you: 1. I promise it's NOT faster, easier, or cheaper when you then have to redo or augment your primary research to compensate for dynamics or nuances desk research would've surfaced     2. you're probably not using the right partner to do that desk research for you 😜    #askbetterquestions #staycurious #mrx

I spent Q1 analyzing 200+ FAANG and Fortune 500 companies' research stacks, workflows, and knowledge gaps to answer one question: What separates a winning research organization from an average (or flailing) one? After hundreds of hours interviewing, analyzing transcripts, and digging through the data, one thing is clear: there’s no one size fits all approach to best-in-class research. But there ARE core ingredients that make up a recipe for success, no matter the company, category, team size, or any other factor. Whether you consider these in the context of an organization’s broader operating rhythm or your own team’s workflows, they make sense. There are: ✔️ 𝗻𝗼𝗻-𝗻𝗲𝗴𝗼𝘁𝗶𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝗳𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗮𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗹𝘀 which keep you relevant, ✔️ 𝗮𝗹𝘄𝗮𝘆𝘀-𝗼𝗻 𝗶𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁𝘀 which keep you sharp, and ✔️ 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗺 𝗿𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝘀, 𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗮𝘀, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗹𝗼𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 which need to be addressed. Let’s break these down. 1️⃣ 𝗙𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗮𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗹𝘀 are the core research efforts every org executes, whether annually, quarterly, or specific to a new initiative or innovation. They’re guiding lights for important decisions as much as they are aligning forces; proceeding without these in hand is either a calculated risk, or a reckless oversight. 👉 𝘌𝘹𝘢𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘦𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘭𝘶𝘥𝘦: competitive landscaping and profiling, audience insights, and broader market research (including SWOT, PESTLE, and other key dynamics analyses) 2️⃣ 𝗜𝗻𝗰𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗹 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗰𝗵 includes the inevitable questions that arise from meetings, executives, or curious minds. These are the lifeblood of innovation – but are often the first to go when deadlines or resources are tight, the investment or effort involved in getting an answer is tough, or when efficient output is prioritized over productive inquiry. 👉 𝘌𝘹𝘢𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘦𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘭𝘶𝘥𝘦: deep dives on new competitors, downloads on new regulations or legislation, quick rundowns of new developments, or key player profiles / case studies 3️⃣ 𝗥𝗲𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗰𝗵 is what keeps you at the bleeding edge, 𝘣𝘦𝘵𝘸𝘦𝘦𝘯 the big projects and the ad hoc explorations. Here, curation, relevance, and actionability matter (though we often settle for generic, lengthy, and unactionable … or skip this pillar altogether, finding ourselves on our back foot). 👉 𝘌𝘹𝘢𝘮𝘱𝘭𝘦𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘭𝘶𝘥𝘦: competitor activity roundups, macro news dumps, investment / funding memos, or thought leadership roundups / distillations In a world where there’s no shortage of information, data, and research but an extreme shortage of relevance, insight, and actionability… Winning strategy and innovation organizations are somehow managing to execute across all 3 pillars through a smart combination of the right platforms / tools, processes / workflows, & people. Does this resonate? What do you find yourself skipping, or wishing you could do more of? #innovation #research #askbetterquestions #staycurious

Somehow, I'm already a year into this job. The word that sums up the last 12 months is among the luckiest one could ever hope to describe their work: ikigai You've probably seen the venn diagram: "what you love" and "what you're good at" intersect with "what the world needs" and "what you can be paid for" to reveal your ~life's purpose.~ What's interesting about your "life purpose" is that it implies a finish line. A moment at which you've officially arrived, where the mission is accomplished. Instead, I like to think about that intersection as the recipe for a "purposeful life." Where the work is almost definitionally 𝘯𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳 𝘥𝘰𝘯𝘦, but the ride is one you don't want to end. #askbetterquestions was my battle cry long before I knew about Wonder (AskWonder.com) 🤔. As an empath, highly sensitive person, consultant, Airbnb host, and proud Greek, solving problems for other people is effectively part of my DNA (for better or worse 😅). But the best problem solving often involves anticipating problems or needs 𝘣𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 they're even articulated. So the whole premise of asking better questions is actually less about intellectualizing, more about humanizing. Less about complicating, more about simplifying. Less about more questions, more about the right ones. Less about rushing to an answer, more about slowing down to get to the crux of the issue. Now, imagine believing all this and working for a company that not only lives and breathes this in its day-to-day, but also evangelizes this through what it sells. In a world where corporate America is exhausted by the effort required to mine Google's search engine and frustrated by the rushed irrelevance of LLMs' answer engines, you get to show the power of a question clarification engine. In a world where consultants are all too often paid to tell you what you want to hear and colleagues jump to providing an answer (often before you've even finished asking the question...), you get to help customers 10x their outcomes by 10x-ing their thinking. And in a world where asking questions has become an inconvenience, whether because they complicate the beeline from A to B or because of the time it takes to answer them, you get to eliminate allll those barriers and help ambitious professionals unleash game-changing curiosity. I recently looked up the opposite of "curiosity." Among the options? Apathy. And the opposite of apathy? Passion. Feeling. Intensity. Sincerity. Initiative. Caring. How poetic. Because as a wise man once said: "Don't ask what the world needs. Ask what makes you come alive, and go do it. Because what the world needs is people who have come alive." To another year (or ten) of this oh-so-purposeful life 🥂 #ai #innovation #staycurious  

Not a great sign when people wear shirts like this👇 to conferences. Why? Recent research found that literally 99% of working professionals leverage Google for their job. So that it's SO hard to find precise answers is bad news for our effectiveness or efficiency at work. There are MUCH better things we can be doing with our time and energy than digging for a needle in a virtual haystack. Even if it's just logging off earlier. Google democratized answers, but didn't eliminate the burden of finding them. It's great for surfacing the best Thai restaurant in your area, good for comparing different couches, and okay for finding general info on trends, but it wasn't built for "professional" questions requiring rigorous, relevant, precise answers. Why does this matter? There's a treacherous "effort journey" we all embark on at work, related to a choice we face every day: We can either make assumptions OR ask the important questions (and then put in the work to find the answer). But asking is hard. With the "promise" of LLMs, we thought maybe it'd get easier. But they've only exacerbated the problem, creating an abridged version of that treacherous "effort journey": 1. Have a problem that requires an answer {Effort = Low 🟢} 2. Be sure I can use {insert LLM} for this particular problem {Effort = High 🔴🤷♀️} 3. Think through how to formulate my problem into the right questions, prompts, or search terms {Effort = High 🔴🤔} 4. Detail 𝘢𝘭𝘭 pieces of context needed to get an actually-useful output {Effort = High 🔴😮💨} 5. Didn’t find what I was looking for / misunderstood my intention, so try to re-explain in different words {Effort = High (+ Frustrating) 🔴😡} 6. Get slightly better results, but still don't trust responses and still need to go deeper / in different directions {Effort = High 🔴🔄} 7. Repeat step 7 another 20 times {Effort = High 🔴🔂} 8. Just do the work myself {Effort = High 🔴🤬}     Curiosity, defeated. From childhood's "because I said so", to education's "memorize answers", to society's "must know the answer", to technology’s "garbage in, garbage out"... We've architected the perfect incuriosity machine. So in the spirit of reinvigorating curiosity, let’s ask a few questions: 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗶𝗳…we didn’t have to choose between fast, affordable, easy, and accurate to get answers we need? 𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝗺𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁 𝘄𝗲…remove the barriers to asking more of the questions that fall between the big research projects and the low-leverage, low-risk ones – which could very well transform our business? 𝗜 𝘄𝗼𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿 𝗶𝗳…there’s a way to leverage the best of technology and humans to accomplish both of those – and go further, faster? Researching trends, competitors, the market, and other important strategy questions shouldn’t be so hard, slow, manual, or cost-prohibitive. We all know there HAS to be a better way – and we’re working around the clock to bring it to life. #innovation #ai #askbetterquestions #research

Just because everyone's doing something doesn't mean everyone's happy about it. Taxes are a perfect example. But so is desk research (scouring the internet for publicly available information to information decisions on the job). In fact, it turns out that most of corporate America feels there HAS to be a better way to do desk research. Here's the reality: 👉 Nearly 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆 𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴𝗹𝗲 strategy and innovation professional rates desk research as somewhat or very important to their work. 👉 While 𝗺𝗼𝘀𝘁 (84% or more, depending on the solution) of those same professionals use Google, LLMs, analysts, and other public research reports or providers to help them with desk research… 👉 …𝟮 𝗶𝗻 𝟯 cite at least one of the below reasons as why they’re not doing any (or all!) of the desk research they need to do: 💰 It's too expensive ⌛ It's too time-consuming 🥵 It's too hard to find the info needed 😭 No great tool to find the info needed Digging one level deeper we find a JTBD researcher's dream: ⬆️ The 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 someone uses a given tool or solution for desk research, the more likely they are to say they're satisfied with the value it delivers. Why? They might've grown an affinity for it just by using it so often (liking bias) They might've selected the solution and are post-rationalizing (choice-supportive bias) They've might've invested the time to learn how to get what they need from it (sunk cost fallacy) ⬇️ ...BUT they're also more likely to select 1 or more of those 4 reasons above as a blocker to doing more desk research. Even (especially!) power users of a solution are feeling hamstrung by it. 🔴 Access to good (read: helpful, relevant, accurate, and actionable) information has never been harder — or more important. But today’s menu of options leaves professionals tasked with driving meaningful revenue for their business either: • skimping on research they know is important, OR • wasting valuable resources (time, money, and/or energy) on solutions that still leave them needing more 🔴 Researching trends, competitors, the market, and other important strategy questions shouldn’t be so hard, slow, manual, or cost-prohibitive. THERE HAS TO BE A BETTER WAY. 🔴 Old way: solutions like Google and LLMs, addressing any question for any type of user 🟢 New way: • doubling down on specific types of research we know strategy and innovation leaders both need to do and want to be doing more of (where to play, who to serve, how to win) • mapping the workflows and best practices for doing each type of research, pulling from the right type and quality of sources and connecting the dots in an actionable, helpful way • leveraging the speed and horsepower of AI and the agility and ingenuity of humans to get all that done ... in hours. The "research tax" we've all just accepted as reality is one you not only CAN evade, but NEED to to stay competitive in this environment. #innovation #jtbd #marketresearch #askbetterquestions