| Topic: | Re:Re:Taking Control of Chiswick Streets | |
| Posted by: | Claire Moran | |
| Date/Time: | 31/10/20 20:32:00 |
| Please post your views on Twitter - #chiswickchaos. This is reposted from OneChiswick re the Commonplace survey:- · I am an Ealing resident (former Chiswick resident) and just posted this on ERALTN about the Commonplace survey: Long post alert! I have spoken to a long time friend and colleague who has worked in market research, on both the client and supplier side (she used to own an agency herself) for more than thirty years. I met her 12 years ago when I worked in market research at GSK, and I commissioned a piece of research from her agency. Although her expertise is commercial rather than consumer research (which is what the Commonplace survey is) the same principles apply. She studied the Commonplace survey for the Ealing LTNs are these are her comments: Clear conflict of interest in the Commonplace's Sales & Marketing Director is a former Ealing Council Cabinet member, whose objectivity is therefore compromised. Should only be completed by people who live, work or have children at school in or near the LTNs. She was able to complete the survey, and she lives in Portland, Dorset. This should not be possible. Infrequent 'users' of the LTNs (say, they use them less than once a month) should be filtered out. Multiple responses should not be permitted. As it stands you can 'vote' as many times as you have email addresses. The introduction to the survey expresses favour for the LTNs. It should be impartial. The responses are weighted towards favour for the LTNs. They invite 'tinkering' of the current schemes rather than downright rejection. Whilst the responses to the majority of questions can be analysed by computer, the contents of the Comments boxes require qualitative analysis by a human. This is time consuming and costly and may not happen. A note on the Comments box warns that comments might be posted publicly. This is breach of the Market Research Society (MRS)'s code of conduct, which expressly prohibits the publication of such data without the respondent's permission. And it is could discourage respondents from answering frankly. Steps should have been taken to ensure that all households had the opportunity to answer the survey, not just the computer-savvy. Like the elections, households hold have been written to so that all are aware. General: My friend said the survey reminded her of the MRS membership exam she took 30+ years ago, where examinees are presented with a deeply flawed survey and asked to identify the mistakes. Suggestions: Ask the Market Research Society to comment on the survey. They do not look kindly upon surveys which pose as market/consumer research but which fail to follow the MRS code of conduct. We could do our own survey. It wouldn't be perfect, but it should be relatively straightforward to identify people who live (census), work (business rates payers) or have kids at school (schools) in/near the LTNs. If we used a simple tool such as Survey Monkey we could restrict the questions to closed ones, with perhaps one open question for general thoughts, which would require human analysis. |