Framing the decision
What exactly must be decided, and what evidence would change the answer, so the research stays focused.
Research is only useful if it changes a decision. We start from the decision you face, such as whether to enter, whom to target or how to price, and gather exactly the evidence needed to make it, from published sources, from customers and competitors, and in the field where it matters.
Market research is gathering and analysing information about a market, including its customers, competitors, size and channels, to answer a specific business decision such as whether to enter, how to price or whom to target.
Desk research, also called secondary research, uses information that already exists: industry reports, public data, competitor websites and published studies. Field research, or primary research, gathers new information directly by talking to customers, retailers and distributors. Desk research is faster and cheaper; field research answers what nobody has written down.
What exactly must be decided, and what evidence would change the answer, so the research stays focused.
Industry sources, public data, competitor material and published studies, gathered and checked.
How large the opportunity is, estimated from the top down and the bottom up, with every assumption visible.
Who already serves the market, how they position and price, and where the gaps are.
Interviews and surveys that reveal how buyers actually decide, what they value and what they would pay for.
Talking to customers, retailers and distributors in person, where the decision needs ground truth that no report contains.
Two ways, then compare them. Top-down starts from the total market and narrows to the part you can serve. Bottom-up multiplies the number of realistic customers by what each would spend. Where the two estimates disagree, the reason is usually the most useful finding of the exercise.
Desk research is enough for early decisions, broad sizing and understanding competitors. Field research is needed when the decision depends on how customers, retailers or distributors actually behave, which is rarely published. Most good research uses desk work to focus the field work.
| Desk and secondary research | Field research | |
|---|---|---|
| Source | Existing reports, data and published material | New conversations and observation |
| Speed and cost | Faster, lower cost | Slower, higher cost |
| Answers | How big, who competes, what is known | Why buyers choose, what the channel really does |
| Use when | Framing, sizing, early screening | The decision depends on real behaviour |
A clear answer to the decision you asked about, the evidence behind it, and the confidence level of each finding, with sources. Raw data and interview notes are included, but the core output is a recommendation you can act on, not a stack of charts.
Often, for early decisions and for understanding the size and shape of a market. When the decision depends on how real customers or channel partners behave, some primary research is usually worth it, even a small number of well-chosen interviews.
For gathering and summarising published material faster, yes. Every figure and claim is then checked against its source, because AI tools can state wrong numbers confidently. Interviews and field work are done by people.
By agreeing the decision first and listing the questions whose answers would change it. Anything that would not change the decision is left out, which keeps the work faster and the findings clearer.
Tell us the decision you face. We will tell you what evidence would settle it.