Articles

Summer is here, but the insights industry can’t afford a vacation from legislative and regulatory advocacy for our interests. In June, the Insights Association secured significant victories on AI policy, helping defeat legislation in California and Minnesota that would have imposed substantial new restrictions on the use of research data, synthetic data, and AI-enabled insights tools, while engaging with other AI and privacy issues in California, Massachusetts and Congress.

ISO 20252 and ISO 27001 certification can strengthen credibility, improve processes, reduce risk, and open new business opportunities, but they are not guarantees of quality, compliance, security, or organizational success without ongoing commitment, strong leadership, and a culture of continuous improvement.

Utilization and application of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in research are expanding and already supporting exciting improvements in the speed, scale, depth, and predictability of insights the industry can deliver to end users. However, the impact AI can have on research raises familiar, new, and evolving considerations for practitioners. Key mandatories to ensure research integrity and quality when using AI tools are outlined in the Insights Association Code of Standards and Ethics.

There is a gap in today’s market research methodologies that needs to be filled; the ability to uncover a patient’s non-conscious narratives that drive their decisions and shape their experiences.

Interest in and use of synthetic data has evolved significantly over the past two years. Synthetic respondents, simulated personas, and AI-generated datasets are now common in conference discussions, product development, and professional dialogue. This shift makes it timely to revisit how synthetic data and synthetic participants intersect with the Insights Association Code of Standards and Ethics. The intent is not to slow innovation or endorse it uncritically, but to ensure that adoption is de...

Ensuring a positive participant experience not only supports better response rates, but promotes the accuracy and engagement that produce reliable insights. The Duty of Care principles in Section 1 of the Insights Association Code of Standards & Ethics (Transparency, Respect, Fairness, and Honesty) are a practical roadmap for obtaining better data and maintaining the public trust on which our profession depends. Below, we examine where each principle might be violated, connect it to the Code, an...

A pair of bills in Minnesota that would have restricted the use of AI-like automated decision systems regarding research subjects who receive incentives, and added a new layer of data privacy restrictions, have been defeated. H.F. 4445 and S.F. 4689 would have been enforced via private litigation, creating significant legal risks for organizations conducting market research, analytics and insights in Minnesota.

As AI tools get faster and more capable, our responsibility to ask harder questions at the start of a search only increases.

California A.B. 2027, legislation opposed by the Insights Association that would have prohibited the use of personal information provided by any research subjects (if they received an incentive for participation) for purposes of (1) training artificial intelligence (AI) systems or tools or (2) building synthetic data, personas or respondents, has died.

As the time for summer vacations approaches, insights leaders tell us what aspects of market research organizations need to get away from to enhance their efficiency and elevate their impact.