MIT Task Group One - March 2003

Proposed Research Model

Committee Members :

Mike Nussey, AMF
Howard Gabriels, MFSA
Nick Holdsworth, PMSA
Thomas Oosthuizen, Independent
Tracy Stafford, NAB (ex SABC)
Ludi Koekemoer, ACA
Brian McMillan, TV
Les Holley, OHSA
Brenda Wortley, AMF
Nina de Klerk, ACA
Ross Jennings, MFSA
Anina Maree, SABC

Models the Task Group considered

- 63 surveys in 51 countries
- Excluded United States as JIC are illegal under their monopolistic laws, but research tends to go to one major player in a media group.

Source: Readership Symposium, October 2001

- Bigger countries, such as France, split radio, television, newspapers and magazines into separate surveys. For France only print were included in this analysis.
- Because research endorsed and conducted by a JIC is perceived as a better currency an international body has been formed to share information.
- Founder members are: Belgium, Canada, France, Netherlands, South Africa and Spain.
- Countries with fewer media tend to have single source data across many media groups, as in South Africa.

Principles that Guided our Thinking

- We agreed the merits of joint industry research taking into account different requirements.
- Single source data is not a pre-requisite, however data that can be fused is.
- Industry research should provide a credible/objective basis for comparison both inter and intra media options.
- We should preserve technical experience and learnings that has been gained by SAARF over the years.
- The model must provide stability and should be a three year (or so) industry commitment in line with the research house contract period.

- It was also agreed that industry research should not lose sight of a monitoring role and it should keep pace with the changing media landscape.
- The principle of a centralised, industry-wide clearing house to manage, run and mediate industry research requirements was agreed.
- Adspend and penetration criteria limits would need to be set for inclusion/exclusion in this research – if not we would find ourselves in the same predicament we are currently in.

Developing a New Model

Allowing for a common base survey with individual media types/client data linked on in a modular way (omnibus concept).

Key Elements

- Media owners liaise /present their requirements to marketers. The portion of these requirements that is included in the fee will then be negotiated. Issues such as what is required for marketing/placement decisions vs editorial would need to be debated.
- Each medium is likely to end up with a different fee/levy.
- All modules must be designed so that fusion between modules can take place.
- In determining the common elements of research, the big media types/owners should be given greater priority e.g. the number of television questions should be more than those for the internet.
- High level involvement by senior members representing key stakeholders is a prerequisite.

Further Principles

- The base survey should be for the purpose of inter-media decisions e.g. media coverage and audience profiling.
- The base survey should provide a robust national sample.
- Data for small media can be rolled over more than one survey (ie across 2 or 3 years).
- It was generally felt that an agreed time limit should be put on the questionnaire. This will prevent the survey from becoming a cumbersome questionnaire in the future.
- Costs should be identified per stakeholder, e.g. the base survey costs should be proportioned.
- Budget should be allocated for the on-going validation of the research methodologies and the data.

back