Lessons from Hollywood
Hollywood has taken some notorious missteps when it comes to awards. Here are just a few.
- The 2021 Golden Globes Scandal: The Hollywood Foreign Press Association was exposed for its lack of diversity and shady voting practices, when an LA Times investigation revealed there were zero Black members on its voting body. The scandal still tarnishes Golden Globes today.
- Blockbusters vs. Critics’ Darlings: Big-budget studios often dominate awards thanks to aggressive campaigns, while smaller indie films struggle for attention. Think about the mega-budget movie Titanic beating out the beloved indie charmer The Full Monty in 1997.
- Leonardo DiCaprio’s Wait for an Oscar: DiCaprio delivered Oscar-worthy performances for years before finally winning for The Revenant. He joins the ranks of other incredible actors who have been repeatedly overlooked by the Oscars, including Glenn Close, Willem Dafoe, and Denzel Washington.
But enough with the Hollywood bashing. The glaring issues with awards shed some light on problems we see in the market research industry, as well.
Market Research’s Hollywood Award Problem
This best-self-promotor-wins phenomenon isn’t exclusive to Hollywood. You’ll find something similar happening in the far less glamorous world of market research. Every year, multiple industry awards get handed out to market research firms for being “innovators.”
There are plenty of researchers out there doing game-changing work who deserve—and often don’t get—recognition. That’s because awards aren’t always handed out to the ones actually transforming the industry. More often, they’re presented to firms that promote themselves the loudest. It’s a bit like giving Best Picture to the movie with the prettiest poster, not the one that changed the game. So what exactly is our beef with market research awards? Let’s break it down.
The Campaigning Problem
Winning an industry award often boils down to resources: who has the time, money, and network to apply, pay fees, and campaign for votes? In market research, large firms with name recognition often overshadow the nimble boutique agencies and freelancers doing truly innovative work. Smaller firms simply can’t compete. Their focus is on solving client problems, not on completing time-consuming applications or whipping up votes.
And let’s not forget: award applications aren’t free. There’s often a hefty fee to enter, another fee to attend the ceremony, and sometimes even a membership requirement. It’s pay-to-play, and the game favors those with deep pockets.
The Subjectivity Problem
Another glaring issue? As with the Golden Globes, some market research judging panels are small, insular, and far from representative—raising questions about fairness and bias. And the criteria for most market research awards are about as clear as the plot of Inception. Consider this gem from one award, describing its criteria:
“The … Award recognizes a … researcher who is a proven game-changer for the marketing research industry.” Uh, what does that even mean? How do you define game-changer? What metrics are used to evaluate that? As far as we can tell, there aren’t any.
By contrast, marketing industry awards like the Effies tie recognition directly to measurable ROI. An ad campaign either delivered results, or it didn’t. Market research awards, however, rely on subjective judgments and vague criteria.
