Overall Program Rating

2. Overall Program Rating Mean Rating = 7.63 (N = 60, out of 216, 28% response rate) On a 1 – 10 scale with 10 being Excellent and 1 being Poor, how would you rate this CASRO program overall?

3. Total Experience & Insights Positive Comments* Interesting Topics (21 mentions) Good Speakers (13 mentions) Relevant Topics (11 mentions) Well Organized (8 mentions) Good Overall (6 mentions) Good Location/Venue (4 mentions) Informative (4 mentions) Good Schedule/Pacing (3 mentions) When asked for additional insights, comments included: Positive Comments* Informative/Interesting (3 mentions) *Multiple mentions shown. • Negative Comments* • Redundant Talks/Overlap (12 mentions) • Need More & Better Info/Insights (8 mentions) • Poor Speakers (8 mentions) • Not Relevant/Poor Topics (4 mentions) • Poor Networking/Mix of Attendees (2 mentions) • . • Negative Comments* • Weak/Light Content (3 mentions) • Need More Networking/Interaction (2 mentions) Note: see pages 24-34 for all comments What specifically about the conference caused you to rate it [INSERT]? Please provide us with any additional insights regarding your experience at the conference.

4. Educational Content Mean Rating = 7.40 N = 60 On a 1 – 10 scale with 10 being Excellent and 1 being Poor, how would you rate the educational content?

5. Amount of Information Learned Mean Rating = 7.15 N = 60 On a 1 – 10 scale with 10 being Excellent and 1 being Poor, how would you rate the amount of information learned?

6. Networking Opportunities Mean Rating = 7.17 N = 60 On a 1 – 10 scale with 10 being Excellent and 1 being Poor, how would you rate the networking opportunities?

7. Why Register for This Event N = 60 Other reasons included Presenter/Speaker (2 mentions) and one mention each of Vendor, Took New Employee and Looking for New Software. Why did you register for this event?

8. Christian Super • Comments: • Christian knows his stuff. • Good presentation. • Nothing particularly insightful. Mean Rating = 6.94 N = 48 On a 1 – 10 scale with 10 being Excellent and 1 being Poor, how would you rate [insert]?

9. Tim Macer &Pat Molloy • Comments: • Good content. • I appreciated their editorial/opinions though not sure I agreed with some. • I look forward to this every year. • Provocative. Mean Rating = 7.60 N = 48 On a 1 – 10 scale with 10 being Excellent and 1 being Poor, how would you rate [insert]?

10. Melanie Courtright • Comments: • Excellent content. Got me to critically think about our use of panel samples. Good presenter. • Good flow to the presentation, well thought out. • Hers was very good -- content, the actual research / data -- and conclusions. • Interesting combination of data sources, but topic - March Madness - too easy, not realistic survey topic. • Pretty dubious methodology in the study she talked about. • Subject was not relevant -- "March Madness”. Mean Rating = 7.04 N = 50 On a 1 – 10 scale with 10 being Excellent and 1 being Poor, how would you rate [insert]?

11. Annelie Phillips & Kristine Burnaska • Comments: • Case study was informative. • I thought it was fair. • Just not a big subject of mine. • Presenter not very good, somewhat disjointed presentation, not much insight, case study not very interesting (conclusions were drawn lacking basis). • Some of the charts were hard to read. Mean Rating = 6.47 N = 49 On a 1 – 10 scale with 10 being Excellent and 1 being Poor, how would you rate [insert]?

12. Jasper Snyder • Comments: • I don’t think the presentation taught me how to distill, if anything I felt more overwhelmed by the deluge. • I thought it was fair -- did not bring new ideas forward. • Not very practical. • Okay. Mean Rating = 7.00 N = 48 On a 1 – 10 scale with 10 being Excellent and 1 being Poor, how would you rate [insert]?

13. Stephen Few • Comments: • Best presentation of the conference. • Even though I was not interested in the topic, this was the most enlightening and interesting presentation of the entire conference. I really enjoyed his instructive example where he deconstructed a chart to tell a story. • Exciting, fresh, relevant to all researchers and informative. • Good presenter, got specific, distinct point of view. • Good stuff. • Great presentation. • Great presenter. • It was great to have a keynote address for this conference. • Perhaps the most interesting and informative session for me. • Really excellent talk. • Terrific presenter. Very engaging. Valuable information. • The content was nice, but not entirely relevant to our small organization. • The industry needed to hear what he had to say, presentation was on target and clear. • Well done. People need to embrace these ideas. Clear from many presentations that these ideas are not well understood. • Would have liked to see more integrations vs. how to develop the perfect chart. Mean Rating = 8.86 N = 49 On a 1 – 10 scale with 10 being Excellent and 1 being Poor, how would you rate [insert]?

14. Michael DeNitto • Comments: • Few is a hard act to follow. • Good presentation. • Nothing very interesting, seemed a roundabout sales presentation. • This was the anti-Stephen Few presentation. • Unclear message. Mean Rating = 6.56 N = 45 On a 1 – 10 scale with 10 being Excellent and 1 being Poor, how would you rate [insert]?

15. Bitsy Bentley • Comments: • Engaging speaker, interesting presentation of the abstract. • Great presentation, a rambler without a lot of substance during Q&A. • Helpful feedback for researchers about how to successfully work with data-visualization professionals. • I really enjoyed her perspective and it reinforces that data visualization is less about the software and more about what your story is. • Really nice job ... Very thought provoking. • Very knowledgeable and enthusiastic. Mean Rating = 7.77 N = 47 On a 1 – 10 scale with 10 being Excellent and 1 being Poor, how would you rate [insert]?

16. Charles Baylis • Comments: • Boring presentation, the speaker was not at all engaging. • Good insight. • Not a good talk. Didn't seem to get that PowerPoint isn't primarily a graphics tool. The graphics displayed indicated that whoever created them didn't have even a basic understanding of good graphical design. • Okay. Mean Rating = 6.55 N = 44 On a 1 – 10 scale with 10 being Excellent and 1 being Poor, how would you rate [insert]?

17. Andrew Elder & Carrie Angiolet • Comments: • A good topic, but not lots of real content. • Generally okay - a little disappointing - I think they could have done more with the topic. • Very high level. Lots of buzz words. • Very relevant. Mean Rating = 6.86 N = 43 On a 1 – 10 scale with 10 being Excellent and 1 being Poor, how would you rate [insert]?

18. John Seal • Comments: • Good presentation - made some fresh points. • Interesting content, well presented. • Provided useful, tangible data on the effect of advancing technology on the quality and consistency of data. • This was useful to see how the use of tablets is 1 - increasing, and 2 - what to expect in differences vs. using paper surveys. • Useful reference. • Very interesting. • Weak content. Mean Rating = 7.90 N = 48 On a 1 – 10 scale with 10 being Excellent and 1 being Poor, how would you rate [insert]?

19. Gregg Peterson • Comments: • A lot of good, real data. • Also very relevant. • Good content. • Good presentation - brought some fresh points. • I was really hoping for a whole lot more from this presentation. It did not deliver. • Liked the subject. • This is a common problem among all marketing researchers and it was helpful to learn the common survey issues that stem from this topic. • Useful understanding of changing platforms. Mean Rating = 7.94 N = 51 On a 1 – 10 scale with 10 being Excellent and 1 being Poor, how would you rate [insert]?

20. Patrick Comer & Ted Saunders • Comments: • Fair presentation - nothing really new. • Good, honest, valuable data though I found Patrick's presentation style annoying. • I thought Patrick Comer was a bit off-putting in his Q&A. • Interesting topic. • Repetitive. • This is the future of our business and it covered what our industry needs to do to stay up on this group. Mean Rating = 7.71 N = 55 On a 1 – 10 scale with 10 being Excellent and 1 being Poor, how would you rate [insert]?

21. Jennie Lai • Comments: • Good topic, but my greater criticism is that we barely touched on this. We needed more content! • Interesting. • Interesting, but hard to apply to my field. • Subject matter was good and a very applicable topic, presentation was a bit busy though - meaning the slides were too information heavy and it felt rushed. • While the topic was interesting, I felt as though the findings being based on only Nielsen employees was not representative enough to make accurate claims from the findings. Mean Rating = 7.02 N = 48 On a 1 – 10 scale with 10 being Excellent and 1 being Poor, how would you rate [insert]?

22. Charles Pearson & Lindsay Veling • Comments: • More interesting content. • Okay. • Repetitive. • These two speakers were very engaging and the data contained a lot of information on the different modes of taking surveys. • Unfortunately, it felt like this was crowded in at the end, and a lot of the topic was already covered. The presenters did a great job of working to present new info, but it seemed strained. Mean Rating = 7.34 N = 47 On a 1 – 10 scale with 10 being Excellent and 1 being Poor, how would you rate [insert]?

23. Respondent Profile Title: C-Level 5 mentions Partner/Principal 3 mentions President 6 mentions Vice President 15 mentions Director/Manager/Consultant 22 mentions Analyst/Researcher 5 mentions Sales Rep 2 mentions Info Tech 1 mention Years of Experience in this Position On average, respondents have held their current job position for 6.68 years. Years of Experience in Survey Research Industry On average, respondents have worked in the survey research industry for 14.62 years.

24. Total Experience Verbatims Overall Program Rating: Excellent I thought it was very well organized, there was a very good showing, and the sessions were relevant and interesting. Quality of the speakers and venues, excellent CASRO staff, and NY! Great conference, very well organized. The clear explanation by Tim Macer about the number of surveys already being taken on mobile devices has changed everything for our industry. Nice common theme among all presentations. Not a lot of sales talk. Relevant content ... Great presenters ... Always walk away with a few 'pearls‘. The material presented was quite relevant to the issues that most organizations are dealing with, including my own. Great conference, interesting topics. Good selection of delegates. Well organized, good amount of time, presentations were interesting, exhibit hall conducive to discussion. Good speakers, good presentation, good program. The committee did a great job organizing the conference. I liked the establishment of five main themes and the speakers spoke about applicable topics to the market research industry. In the past, technologies were discussed that were not applicable. Presentations on Big Data could have been a little more informative. The topics, quality and experience of the speakers. On top of that - the great location and hotel! Overall Program Rating: Good There were some good presentations relevant to my work in technology. The venue was nice - I like NY. I found the material to be applicable if not original research. The first day was great. The second day was a little redundant. Overall it was pretty good, not great. I was very pleased with the topics, but many presenters were not great. Too much reading of their own material. There was also a bit too much overlap. I thought the speakers were great, especially Stephen Few. I would have liked to have more time with the Exhibitors, but overall, great job! Some of the speakers were great while others were sub par. Too many presentations on data visualization and social media. What specifically about the conference caused you to rate it [INSERT]?

25. Total Experience Verbatims Overall Program Rating: Good (Continued) Good presentations, passionate speakers, and well organized and run by CASRO. There was some repetition in the program. It would have been nice that each presentation within the section delivered unique content. Pacing was excellent, well-organized, ample opportunity to ask questions and provide feedback. Venue was convenient and accommodating. Some of the presentations were not very interesting and only marginally related to the overall theme. I learned something at most every session. Most of the topics on the second day were very interesting and helpful in understanding the direction that our industry (and technology in general) are heading. For the most part, the topics were relevant and the presenters engaging. I enjoyed the variety of topics. The breaks which enables attendees to mingle with exhibitors. As an exhibitor this was vital. Topics were right on this year. I felt the topics of discussion were very relevant to the industry and my personal position. Good agenda, the topics could have been more complementary, less overlap. It was interesting to hear others in the industry speak, but some of it was common sense if you have already had any exposure to the topics covered. I was looking for a more in-depth coverage of the topics, to learn something new. It was very professional. Interesting presentations. Some of the content was great, but other presentations were more "experience and opinion" based than data based. I felt the second half of Day One was particularly content-light. Most of the talks were quite good. I wasn't especially interested in social media. Good conference . The topics covered are of interest to me and my firm. Mostly excellent, but some weak presentations. I though some of the sessions were very good and some were okay. So the 7 probably comes about because of the okay sessions. A lot of repetition of ideas on Day 1. Generally OK, but thought a lot of the talks were similar. Small venue, and some of the material just wasn't relevant to what I do. What specifically about the conference caused you to rate it [INSERT]?

26. Total Experience Verbatims Overall Program Rating: Good (Continued) I only attended day 2, so I can't speak for day 1 content. I thought most of the presentations were interesting and useful. There were a couple that I didn't find as useful. Content. This felt like less of a conference, and more of a lecture series. I would have liked more "workshop"-type sections, with more interactive content. Less pedagogy, more interaction. The content of the speeches, they were very similar most of them. Was difficult to find person in which you were interested for networking. I thought the speakers were generally good not great. I don't feel there were new insights offered. The presentations seemed a bit disjointed (in topic and scope). The quality of presenters was mixed. Understandable given the format, but a couple were challenging to sit through. A number of the presentations were about interesting topics -- but we lamely presented. Overall Program Rating: Satisfactory It seems weaker as compared to previous conferences. Presented material was very theoretical. Networking was a bit disappointing for me. Too pricey. The presentations were informative but seemed to be repeating a lot of information. The topics were interesting, but I didn't feel like I learned anything new or saw anything novel in the presentations. Good breadth of topics, but left me wanting more content for each. Too few topics. I would prefer to see more of a variety. Speakers were good. More of a technical audience would have been nice to see since its a technology conference. Day One topics were strong. Day Two topics were nothing new and those presentations were redundant with one another. Nothing new presented, but good to hear what's happening around the industry. What specifically about the conference caused you to rate it [INSERT]?

27. Additional Insights Verbatims Overall Program Rating: Excellent Topics are very relevant to my business. I loved how you had to walk through the exhibit hall to get to the session. Overall Program Rating: Good Some of the topics were fairly light in their content. Good balance between presentations and break time for networking. Small enough to meet with most people. A couple of the sessions were rather weak. Seemed like just a re-hash of already accepted best practices. Personally, there were not too many networking opportunities as many of the vendors were more tech oriented (as expected) and I manage a team of market research project managers. As a newcomer to the sector it's given me valuable insights in to the challenges facing the sector. There was certainly learning involved, but the different approaches and opinions struck me as the most interesting part. I enjoyed each presenters different approach to mobile technology and their findings. While you cannot screen presenters for how good they are, you should make sure they understand that whatever they present should have some informational or educational value for the audience at large and not be too narrow in scope. The vendor area was a little cramped with all the people and then the snack tables in the middle. I think it was interesting to hear what the other companies in the industry are saying about mobile now - especially compared to last year's presentations. It would have been easier to network if there was more break-out sessions, giving us an opportunity to network with those who are in our specific roles, rather than just "people in general." Networking was good as always. The educational content and amount of info learned was less than what I had hoped for. Overall Program Rating: Satisfactory I think the content was great except that the content was replayed over and over. I would like to see more speakers on a variety of topics rather than mobile over and over. Please provide us with any additional insights regarding your experience at the conference.

28. Other Comments & Suggestions Positive Comments (Multiple mentions) Good Overall (7 mentions) Good Schedule (2 mentions) Good Networking (2 mentions) Overall Program Rating: Excellent The only thing I would say is that it was a warm day and the AC could have been a little cooler -- other than that I thought it was great. Two full days would be perfect. I really liked all of the networking and the cocktail party at the bar the night before. I enjoyed the event as always and look forward to attending each year. Sharing of white papers that are presented. CASRO always puts on great conferences. Case studies are great, networking time is important, and a limited schedule like this year makes it possible to participate. Location is great, but not a draw. The subject matter was very appealing and I enjoyed meeting with some of the vendors and learning about new approaches to research. I thought the conference was good, unfortunately a little warm on Wednesday. Perhaps more group social opportunities. Overall Program Rating: Good It was a good event, though day two might have benefitted from more variety. I understand that the intent was to offer variety of presentations on day two but they ended up blending together unfortunately. I realize this is hard, but the speakers are generally not engaging - except for Stephen Few. It would be great to see examples of new/innovative solutions that have been implemented in the market research world. • Negative Comments (Multiple mentions) • Should Be 2 Full days (3 mentions) • Need More Social Aspects (3 mentions) • Poor/Need New Venue (3 mentions) • Air Conditioning Issues (2 mentions) • Need Better Schedule (2 mentions) • Need More Interaction/Workshops (2 mentions)

29. Other Comments & Suggestions Overall Program Rating: Good (Continued) I'm not sure why social media and data visualization are classified as technology. Both are more of a means to an end in the research process vs. technology tools for research. It would be nice to have more networking opportunities with the attendees during the conference. I thought the conference was handled very well and was happy to receive the PowerPoint slides that were presented. Have you thought of conducting a speed networking session? A very useful way to get people talking. In the end, it was well put together and covered great topics. I wish I would have been available for the first day of speakers but the second day was more relative to my needs. A new venue would be good for variety. Just need more case studies and tests and less theory. Overall good event. Overall, a good event. Let's continue to push the agenda around where we see technology taking the industry in the next 3-5 years. Consider a different location. Either get everything lined up in one day or have 2 full days. I think the half day was less attended and no fair to the later presenters. It felt a little rushed. Perhaps it would have been better to have it over two complete days? Or perhaps it's time to stop pretending "technology" is not an integral part of survey research, and roll the technology aspect into a larger CASRO event. Continue to bring folks (Tech Conference) who are not directly in the traditional market research industry -- but, can shed light on Tech trends / practices and how they will shape the market research industry. The presentations on Day 1 seemed to bounce around topic areas, and the presenters did not seem as aligned given the focus of the theme. It's been a while since I have attended, and I did like the current time format (1 and half days) as well as the grouping of presentations. Live demonstrations of technologies related to market research. Overall Program Rating: Satisfactory Segment the ability to opt into shorter time lengths-- 1/2 day seminar. Prices are really steep in this economy. Should be financed by vendors, not individuals. I expected a technology conference to have more cutting edge presentations, but most seemed fairly basic. Would have liked to have seen more innovative, real life examples.

30. Other Comments & Suggestions Overall Program Rating: Satisfactory (Continued) Really liked the presentation from Malloy/Macer setting the stage for current adoption. Would like to have seen a roundtable debate about what this means for the industry. More small workshops would be nice to see. For the price, it should be 2 full days at least.

31. Other Topics Multiple Mention TopicsShown (Multiple Mentions) Mobile Surveying (18 mentions) Technology (6 mentions) Social Media (5 mentions) Emerging Trends (5 mentions) Case Studies (5 mentions) Data Visualization (3 mentions) Best Practices (3 mentions) Emerging Data Analytics (2 mentions) Gamification (2 mentions) Data Convergence/Blending (2 mentions)

32. Other Topics Verbatims Additional Data Visualization technologies. Aside from mobile/tablets, what is the future of survey taking? Best practices Continue with mobile Convergence of data for research Data collection platforms – Confirm-it vs. Dimensions vs. others. Offshore vs. onshore models. Social Media. DIY Model and Impact on market research. Emergent market. Social media. New methodologies. Emerging trends in research approaches, including technology. How to do quality 'market research' in a rapidly changing world. More B to B research best practices. Expanding mobile so non-smart phone users can participate. Follow-up on the topics presented. Heavy emphasis on big data and emerging data analytics techniques. Helping clients to build their own panels. How the industry has adopted to the mobile platforms. Practical examples of successes and failures would be interesting. How to use the data. How to blend the data. I'd like to see something on the general quality of online sample. Do we honestly believe that people taking the thousands of online surveys for an incentive are giving honest, actionable, projectable data? If we are really moving towards mobile/tablet, how would that impact representation of the population. When online first came to play, one of the major concerns was that the data could not be projected to the general population. I would imagine that this would be a concern here as well. Innovative interviewing techniques (new media) -- Video dial-- introducing qualitative in a quantitative environment. It would be good to have a couple of end clients who could discuss how technology is changing the way they conduct research and / or glean insights....as well as how this impact how the research supply chain is being changed. Love the mobile trend. Managing the payment of incentives. Methods of behavioral sample balancing.

33. Other Topics Verbatims Mix qualitative & quantitative. Mobile. Mobile. I like to see case studies too when two different companies present. More discussion about how to change survey research to support mobile devices. More examples of non-survey data collection methods. Examples about how research technology is delivering actual business value, rather than just more data. More gamification, more case studies and sharing of methodology. We aren't just interested in "we found that x people did y things with z devices", but _how_ did you go about getting this data? What tools were used to gather data? More hands on practical data. More mobile but on the side of conducting mobile market research not just about respondents taking surveys on mobile without our intent. More data visualization but from the infographic side and best practices. More mobile data collection and reporting lessons learned. Are we moving to Apps? Is SMS an acceptable source for data collection? Should we stick with mobile web? How are companies handling mobile reporting with traditional PC/laptop reporting? More mobile. More security features. How increasing technological challenges influence respondent behavior. More on gamification for increasing respondent engagement. More on small screen mobile survey design. More on the most important technology trends and changes that impact our industry. More on visualization and broader discussion on tools/processes being used to accomplish faster/better/cheaper. More participation of social science researchers. Need more understanding of the impact of social media samples. Neuroscience as paired methodology with online surveys (validation, deeper understanding). Role of context in response ... i.e. surveys are not audits, but nor are they random ... why people answer differently in different time/place. New channels (TV, gaming), more mobile, when will the web die. Paper based surveys: how can we finally get rid of them? Real data, real results, useful insights about how to use emerging technologies. Routers and the impact of device mode to the industry, Coding/quantifying social media data.

34. Other Topics Verbatims Solution-oriented approach to big data would be useful. Technology is changing so many industries and we should fully expect that it is going to revolutionize market research. Future topics should revolve around where we see technology taking market research in the next 3-5 years. Technology, operations leadership issues. Technology's impact on survey design; implications for trending. Unsure -- just interested in what the trends are at the time and future. Update on mobile data collection/respondents accessing on mobile devices. Video, audio and image within online surveys. Whatever topics are relevant at the time -- mobile research or social media perhaps,