Sarah 0:01 There's often this this, like, charming illusion that we have that if we just nurture the relationship enough, we'll eventually be brought into the inner circle. But, like, partnership isn't a prize you win for good behavior. If you find that you're having successful stakeholder relationships across a range of brands, different roles, different personality types, that's usually a good metric that your strategy is working.

Stephanie 0:31 Welcome to the Curiosity Current, the podcast where we dive deep into what's shaping today's trends and tomorrow's consumers. I'm your host, Stephanie, and I'm so glad you're joining me. Each episode, we tap into the minds of researchers, innovators, and insights professionals to explore how curiosity drives discovery and how discovery drives better decisions in an ever changing market landscape. Whether you're a data enthusiast, a strategy pro, or like me just endlessly fascinated by human behavior, this is the place for you. So get ready to challenge your assumptions, spark some fresh thinking, and have some fun along the way. Let's see where curiosity takes us next with this brand new episode. Before we get started today, I want to introduce my cohost, Victoria Waltman. Victoria is one of my colleagues here at AYTM. She's an experienced researcher with deep expertise in helping clients develop and refine their insight strategies. Victoria, I'm so excited you're here today.

Unknown 1:34 Thank you so much, Stephanie. I'm happy to be here.

Stephanie 1:36 So today on the Curiosity Current, Victoria and I are joined by Sarah Montgomery, director of human insights at the Coca Cola Company, where she leads research for the hydration category, which includes brands like Vitamin Water, Smartwater, and Dasani.

Unknown 1:52 With over a decade of experience in consumer insights and marketing, Sarah's built a career around transforming data into actionable human insights. She's worked across multiple brands from Simply and Honest Kids to Hi C and has spearheaded research that has driven key product innovations and strategic brand decisions.

Stephanie 2:10 In today's conversation, we're gonna delve into the Socratic method and how this technique of questioning assumptions and driving critical thinking can actually sharpen the way market researchers uncover insights and challenge organizational norms. We'll also explore how Sarah applies this method to her own work, empowering teams to push boundaries and deliver deeper consumer understanding. Sarah, welcome to the Curiosity Current. We are thrilled to have you today. Thanks for having me. I'm glad to

Sarah 2:38 be here. It's gonna be a organizational norms. We'll also explore how Sarah applies this method to her own work, empowering teams to push boundaries and deliver deeper consumer understanding. Sarah, welcome to the Curiosity Current. We are thrilled to have you today. Thanks for having me. I'm glad to be here. It's gonna be a

Stephanie 2:39 fun conversation. Before we jump into the kind of heady topic of the Socratic method, I would love to just hear about your background and your experience and insights. I look like in kind of reading about your experience and how you've come to where you are that you're one of the few among us who come to insights through your formal education. You have a bachelor's degree of marketing, a master's in in market research. Did you always know that you wanted to work in insights?

Sarah 3:05 Oh, surely not. No. I was actually going to be a professional clarinet player, and I had originally applied to the University of Georgia to be a clarinet performance major. Got accepted to the university on my clarinet performance major, but was rejected from University of Georgia as a freshman and ended up going to community college for two years. And I actually got my introduction to research because I was a focus group participant. And then I was brought in to be an intern because they liked my contributions as a focus group member, was hired on at that ad agency that I was participating in this focus group for. So I went from participant to intern, was brought on as an account executive very briefly, and then became a strategic planner. And that's kind of how I was first introduced into this, like, more peripheral world of of research and then sort of solidified that back with my my education. So it was kind of a roundabout way, but when you look at my resume, it looks more cohesive than it probably is in reality. So yes and no. But my education was definitely very foundational to where I ended up there. So my bachelor's in marketing was really a great way to sort of build out the business acumen of understanding the marketing fundamentals. UGA has a great business school, and then I ended up going back to get a market research degree because I really wanted to dive further into that research part of the career. I just thought it was so interesting, all of the the research specific part of marketing, that the MMR program at UGA was very attracted because I love UGA. The opportunity to go back to school there, the rigor of that program was all incredibly appealing to me. And so not not exactly a linear path, but one that I'm very happy I took.

Stephanie 5:02 I feel like it never is a market research, and that's kind of one of my favorite things about researchers. I think it it just it it almost I think it takes most of us a little bit of, like, winding about to get there, and that that journey is kind of a powerful part of why we're we're good at what we do. You know? So that's

Unknown 5:21 I feel like it's that hodgepodge of interests that make us all sort of researchers and that natural curiosity. And Yep. So I have to ask, how often are you still playing the clarinet? there, and that that journey is kind of a powerful part of why we're we're good at what we do. You know? So that's I feel like it's that hodgepodge of interests that make us all sort of researchers and that natural curiosity. And Yep. So I have to ask, how often are you still playing the clarinet?

Stephanie 5:32 Fuck it.

Sarah 5:33 Uh, well, since I live in a one bedroom apartment and I don't wanna anger my neighbors too much, not terribly often, usually just when I go back home to visit my mom for Christmas, I will indulge her and I will play my clarinet then, but not as often as I wish, unfortunately.

Unknown 5:52 Yeah. Okay. Well, great. As, uh, Stephanie mentioned, you are going to talk to us a little bit about the SIPRADIC method. So to start, if you could just briefly explain the Socratic method for our listeners who may not be familiar with it. What is it? Why do you like it? And how does it work for a technique for fostering critical thinking and deeper understanding?

Sarah 6:12 Sure. Well, the Socratic method is obviously comes from Socrates, a Greek philosopher, and it's really just a disciplined practice of asking pointed questions, sometimes inconvenient questions to expose contradictions and clarify thinking. Socrates didn't really lecture. He really kind of interrogated with civility, but precision, you know, until his students or his interlocutors refined their ideas or would abandon them entirely, much to the frustration of the Greeks who obviously executed him after they got a little bit sick of him doing this for too long. So there could be some downsides to this, although I think we as a civilization have come farther than that. So hopefully, that doesn't happen to you if you employ the strategy in your organization. But I think the benefit of it is it really, rather than getting to a point of being, you know, incredibly argumentative by saying, no, you're wrong. No, that's not what the data says. No, that's not what I told you. It kind of reduces the the butting of the heads of it kind of naturally by framing everything more in a questioning sense of bringing it back to that curiosity of if you're framing things more as a question, you're getting closer to exploring things in a truthful center. You know? We're not trying to be an echo chamber. I'm not trying to reflect back to you, I want you to be right or I want to be right. We're trying to get to what is the truth, what is the most accurate. And if I'm constantly trying to ask you questions and get you to think about the statements you're making in a deeper way, question your logic, question your reasoning. Why do you think that? What are your assumptions there? How are you defining winning concept? How are you defining strongest creative? Then we're getting closer to what we're actually talking about, getting closer to the core truth of the matter. And then, hopefully, we do that without too much outright frustration. It makes a ou think that? What are your assumptions there? How are you defining winning concept? How are you defining strongest creative? Then we're getting closer to what we're actually talking about, getting closer to the core truth of the matter. And then, hopefully, we do that without too much outright frustration. It makes a

Stephanie 8:28 lot of sense, and I feel like you're sort of acknowledging pieces of this and even that explanation there. But there is sometimes a tendency in research, whether that's driven by our internal stakeholders or even researchers ourselves towards confirmation bias, you know, finding answers that align with an assumption that we have, sometimes deeply held assumptions. How can the Socratic method help us avoid that kind of inherent confirmation bias that's just very human and encourage more open ended exploration of of consumer behavior?

Sarah 9:02 Yeah. I think that's absolutely fair. I think that's an issue that a lot of researchers have. There's different tensions. I've worked on the supply side before. Now I'm on the client side. There's different tensions on both sides of that. On the supply side, you're trying to work with your client and not bother them, piss them off because you want them to keep hiring you on the client side. You wanna work with your stakeholders. You wanna work with the c suite executives because they have an opinion. They have a preference. There's politics at stake here. But, you know, I really believe that our job as insights professionals, as researchers, is not to accept assumptions, but really to interrogate them with intellectual courage and sort of disciplined curiosity. We cannot be an echo chamber in the organization. We are the challenger. We're the clarifier, the constructive skeptic in the room. Great insights are not born when they're concerned with political appeasement. They don't come from consensus for consensus's sake. They come from a willingness to steward the truth even when that truth is inconvenient, and honestly, especially when that truth unsettles the status quo. The most salient, relevant insights are the ones that are disruptive, are the ones that break through things. And if we want to be a function in our organizations that changes things, that moves the business forward, we have to grow comfortable with the fact that we're going to say things that make people uncomfortable, that push boundaries, that contradict things. Because sometimes the truth is not the thing that everyone wants to hear.

Unknown 10:48 And that it's interesting because, actually, before this, Stephanie and I were talking, and I was thinking about how assumptions, especially if they go unchecked, can grow into beliefs that connect to people's self identity. And you mentioned civility, but what other advice would you have for challenging an assumption without a feeling as if you're challenging a person? this, Stephanie and I were talking, and I was thinking about how assumptions, especially if they go unchecked, can grow into beliefs that connect to people's self identity. And you mentioned civility, but what other advice would you have for challenging an assumption without a feeling as if you're challenging a person?

Sarah 11:08 Yeah. I think that's totally fair. You know, we we get so wrapped up in this idea that the things that I believe are me, and, therefore, if you're attacking someone's belief, you're attacking the person that they're attached to. And it can be hard to extract those two things from one another, but we have to try to ground people in the idea that wisdom doesn't come from certainty, it comes from admitting starting from the admission that we're ignorant. That's where we start knowledge. That's where it grows out of. That's why the Socratic method can be beneficial because you're not actually attacking the person's fundamental belief. You're chipping away at the basis of their assumptions, at the basis of their belief, not by saying the thing you believe is wrong or bad or incorrect, but by saying, why do you believe that? What is the edifice of your belief? How did you construct this thing that you've that you're basing your assumptions off of? And I'm going to work through your critical thinking, if there is critical thinking there. And once we've figured out how you've constructed it, if you've constructed it, I'm gonna walk you to that assumption. I'm not gonna correct you. I'm gonna get you to the point where you've developed it yourself. And then you're not really being the bad guy. You're not actually going on the attack a lot of the times. You don't have to be the person that's saying, no, bad, wrong, I don't like you. It's I'm I'm leading you to it. We are going together. We are both walking hand in hand in pursuit of truth.

Unknown 12:52 So you've worked with several brands throughout your career. How have you used the Socratic method to challenge internal assumptions about what customers want versus what they actually need or desire?

Sarah 13:03 Yeah. I mean, I think you don't you definitely don't go into it saying, hey. Let's use the Socratic method on this one because there's sort of a a natural, what are you talking about here?

Unknown 13:14 Blank stare when you say that? hat customers want versus what they actually need or desire?

Sarah 13:03 Yeah. I mean, I think you don't you definitely don't go into it saying, hey. Let's use the Socratic method on this one because there's sort of a a natural, what are you talking about here?

Unknown 13:14 Blank stare when you say that?

Sarah 13:16 Yeah, certainly. That's why I don't say that typically. They don't really even know that you're doing it. You don't know that you're applying it. That's kind of part of why it works so well because it just feels like you're having a discussion. It feels like you're having a really polite sort of natural discussion. And honestly, people we're kind of self involved people. When's the last time you've been having a conversation with someone and they've been asking you lots of questions about you, your beliefs, the things that you think, and you've thought, oh, I hate when people are curious about me and my beliefs. It's rarely ever happened. People like being questioned. They like people trying to understand them and the things that they believe. It can occasionally tip over to, okay, you're pestering me. So there's a time and a place if we're if we're busy, we're trying to take fast turn research and you you gotta choose your time and your place. And that's really the only other piece of advice I would would add in. In terms of, like, practical examples, you know, it happens all the time, you know, when there's a particular senior leader who has a preference for design a over design b, and you know that going into the meeting, we've always had those pieces of knowledge going in. When we know we want this campaign to do well, we know that we like this influencer, we want this to win, that's fine that they have those assumptions, but there's a reason that we're doing the testing, And it's because that end of one opinion is it's fine for them to have it. But if that was the only opinion that mattered, we wouldn't be doing the consumer testing at all. The consumer is different from the people inside of the building in so many ways. They're not always, you know, urban metropolitan people with master's degree that make x amount of money. You know, we're we're not our consumer a lot of the time, so we need to talk to them to understand what they want and what they like. And it is our job as researchers to make sure that that voice is represented in the room. And if you are afraid of that, if you are afraid of voicing that opinion, then I think you have to reevaluate what it is you think you're doing here. I think courage is it's hard, but it's I think it's Churchill that said that it's courage is the the first quality. It's the first of human qualities because it guarantees all the other ones. You can't do anything without that ability to stand up for what you believe is correct and right and truthful. It's it's fundamental to what we do. it's hard, but it's I think it's Churchill that said that it's courage is the the first quality. It's the first of human qualities because it guarantees all the other ones. You can't do anything without that ability to stand up for what you believe is correct and right and truthful. It's it's fundamental to what we do.

Unknown 15:52 When you run into things, is it more that you think the assumptions are everyone thinks like us? Like, I think, like, might be consumer, but to your point, urban living with a master's degree is not the same demographic as necessarily your consumer. So are those the types of things that you see that kind of cause these conflicts, or are there other assumptions that you that you typically see within the organization that you think need to be interrogated? ut to your point, urban living with a master's degree is not the same demographic as necessarily your consumer. So are those the types of things that you see that kind of cause these conflicts, or are there other assumptions that you that you typically see within the organization that you think need to be interrogated?

Sarah 16:17 I think there's a lot of reasons that we we make assumptions. I think insights people are where we're not immune from the same sort of mistake. It's a it's a fact of just we've worked closely with these brands. We've been, like, inside the building for so long that you feel a level of attachment to the brand. There's also the simple fact that business has its own dialect. You know, we talk about jargon all the time, and it's it's necessary for us to be able to communicate with one another, but it's also kind of insular. So the more fluent that we become in that business dialect, the more foreign the consumer and the shopper can seem. Insights exists, really, to reintroduce the vernacular of real life and real people. I think anyone that's ever done research or worked in, like, insurance or financial research has probably seen this, especially. I did some qual with, like, back when I was on the supply side for an insurance group. I think it was, like, a state medical or Medicaid group. And they could not understand why these retired seniors weren't picking health care plan a over these other options because it was obviously the better one. And the answer was just insurance is confusing to people. And it was just something they could not wrap their mind around because to them, it's not because they live and breathe this stuff all day, every day. So the difference between, you know, a premium and whatever other term is obvious and it's day to day to them. And the same thing applies in my field in the beverage world where we use terms to describe categories that consumers don't use, but we have these category definitions that enable us to sell into retailers or differentiate from us to others. But it's not the ways that consumers talk about those categories. Doesn't mean we have to destroy those terms inside the building, but it does mean that we have to remember that consumers don't talk about things that way. And so that matters when we're writing a survey, when we're thinking about what is our real competitive set, what is the real switching opportunities here, what are they comparing us to when we're talking about taste or benefits or what flavors we should be thinking of when we're launching an innovation. All of those things really matter. And if we forget those things and those assumptions because we've locked ourself into these business frameworks with our own particular jargon for our industry or our business major mindset, we're we're losing that. We're losing a lot of the vernacular of real people. g an innovation. All of those things really matter. And if we forget those things and those assumptions because we've locked ourself into these business frameworks with our own particular jargon for our industry or our business major mindset, we're we're losing that. We're losing a lot of the vernacular of real people.

Stephanie 19:17 I think that makes a lot of sense. And I'm I'm glad you unpacked some of those other kinds of assumptions because I think that they're very specific to working on the brand side, a lot of what you're talking about. It's like these these internal assumptions. But before that, you had mentioned one that I think even on the supplier side that we run up against all the time, which is when you're doing creative evaluation or product evaluation, which is just truly there are often moments where you're evaluating somebody's baby. Somebody's baby is getting evaluated. Right? And we tend to know that, and it's that is when that sort of the self-concept is bound up a little bit in the results of that study. And I think the challenges are so they are the same, but they're unique with the internally to the brand and then externally because you feel like you ought to be able to be a truth teller when you sit outside the organization, but it doesn't always feel like that because a client, supplier, or partner relationship is it can feel equally tenuous or like something you wanna preserve at all costs. And so I think it's so important to remember that, like, the best partner you can be is the partner who's a truth teller. Right? Oh, absolutely. I or a truth seeker. lways feel like that because a client, supplier, or partner relationship is it can feel equally tenuous or like something you wanna preserve at all costs. And so I think it's so important to remember that, like, the best partner you can be is the partner who's a truth teller. Right? Oh, absolutely. I or a truth seeker.

Sarah 20:32 Yeah. Yes. That role, especially, the role between insights and creative is one that I take very seriously because I came from strategic planning at an ad agency. So I was there working directly with the creatives who built these ad campaigns. So I have a a lot of deep sympathy for the the hard work that goes into, you know, the the babies that are out there, and and it sort of feels bad to go tested below norm, and they go, the whole the blood, sweat, and tears I put into this thing. And you're right. It's hard to sit down sometimes and to sit there and tell them, you know, this didn't perform well. And so the very natural human temptation is to go, well, how can we make these negative results look better? Or how can we deliver this bad news in a way that doesn't sound bad or that isn't? How can we make this not so negative? But the truth of the matter is, if it's negative, we need to be able to tell people this is bad news, but the there's a way to deliver constructive news or unconstructive news. So so I try to have a a first round meeting with the creative team and be like, hey. I'll level with you guys because you're adults and you're smart. This is not good news. What do what would you like to do about it? What's what is the thing what is the message that we are united going to go with to the brand team and say, we've talked, and here is our strategic way forward, leading with insights and a creative plan forward, versus feeling like they get stabbed in the back with the brand team there going, hey, those guys didn't do their job. Because that's not productive to anyone, and that doesn't foster a good relationship between insights and creative, and they're not gonna wanna bring me in before the brief next time to to lead with insights either. We all need to be working towards the same goal of understanding the consumer, understanding an insight, and moving forward from that point. I just think it's there's often this this, like, charming illusion that we have that if we just nurture the relationship enough, we'll eventually be brought into the inner circle. But, like, partnership isn't a prize you win for good behavior. And it's really tempting to believe that our role is to affirm and not to interrogate, to wrap every insight in sugar and to cushion every critique. But if you don't risk discomfort, you're not doing insight work, you're doing customer service. Insights can't be omniscient, but it is observant. And our power lies not in nd it's really tempting to believe that our role is to affirm and not to interrogate, to wrap every insight in sugar and to cushion every critique. But if you don't risk discomfort, you're not doing insight work, you're doing customer service. Insights can't be omniscient, but it is observant. And our power lies not in

Stephanie 23:16 prescribing answers, but in knowing what deserves further questioning. And you have to be there not as a polite guest in the meeting, but as the person that they feel like they can't make a decision without. That is some powerful stuff, Sarah. I really like lots of nuggets in there. That is awesome. I love it. What do you think about like, one thing that I wonder about is that, you know, we talk about agility in research, you know, and we have been for probably ten, fifteen years now, but it really truly does feel like that research is moving at a faster and faster pace all the time, especially innovation related research. We're all moving faster and more nimbly than we ever have before. How do you think something like the Socratic method can be integrated into those agile research processes? And I I guess I wonder, specifically, is it possible to maintain that kind of rigor and approach of Socratic questioning while staying responsive in that really agile process and making sure to hit those deadlines? Yeah. Absolutely. In fact, I think depending on how you adopt them, they can facilitate that usage because the tools that we have, the DIY tools, the AI, generative AI tools that we have, they can roach of Socratic questioning while staying responsive in that really agile process and making sure to hit those deadlines? Yeah. Absolutely. In fact, I think depending on how you adopt them, they can facilitate that usage because the tools that we have, the DIY tools, the AI, generative AI tools that we have, they can

Sarah 24:37 free us from a lot of the like small tactical burden that we have of like a lot of the really burdensome onerous tasks that we have, and give us the space to focus on some of the more valuable strategic research that we do, the custom research, the big picture synthesis that we do, the relational groundwork that allows for, like, sustained constructive dialogue with stakeholders. But, and this is important, I think, we do sort of stand on, like, a bit of a knife's edge because I feel like if we're not vigilant, it can become really easy to get hooked on the short term dopamine hit of quick turn DIY results. It's fast, it's clean, it feels really decisive, but speed is not depth. Chart turned around in forty eight hours is not always a substitute for that, like, deep rooted human insight that helps a brand understand itself and its audience in a lasting way. And our role is in part to defend that distinction, to ensure that as tools get faster and faster and faster, slicker, that we don't mistake this feeling of momentum for like real like, meaning. And I think there's, like, speaking of the Socratic method, there's a deeper philosophical tension here, especially with this younger generation coming up through college that, you know, it demands that we question what we know. You know, AI, the Socratic method is all about questioning what you already know. It's about questioning your assumptions, questioning the edifice of your your existing knowledge, and making sure that your foundations are well grounded. AI, by contrast, is really kind of designed to be a very polite assistant in a lot of ways. It's sort of to mirror our own biases back to us and make them sound more intelligent in a lot of ways. And so in that sense, it can become a tool of intellectual comfort and not like a a tool of courage. An over reliance on it, especially for the wrong tasks, can really dull the muscles we need to sharpen in this new era. So that would be, especially for young researchers, my really great caution.

Stephanie 27:23 How did you and I

Unknown 27:23 mean, researchers of any generation, right? And in sharpening those tools, how do you coach teams to adopt a sub product mindset? ull the muscles we need to sharpen in this new era. So that would be, especially for young researchers, my really great caution.

Stephanie 27:23 How did you and I

Unknown 27:23 mean, researchers of any generation, right? And in sharpening those tools, how do you coach teams to adopt a sub product mindset?

Sarah 27:32 Well, like I said, sometimes when I bring up philosophy, I'll get some somewhat of eye rolls because I I tried to bridge this with my philosophy on AI. I was bringing up another philosophical premise of of Plato's cave, this idea that my earpiece fell out. Sometimes when I bring up philosophy too much, I'll I'll get a little bit of eye rolls because I can I can sound a bit pretentious? But one of the philosophies I talk about with AI is the the concept of Plato's cave, that it's not actual intelligence, but it's like the shadows on the wall. So we see the shadows and we think it's the actual thing, but it's not the actual thing. It's the shadows cast by the thing that resemble insights and intelligence, but it's really just a figment of our imagination. When I again, I don't I don't generally walk into these with the the first thing I'm talking about being the Socratic method. Here's a one on one, here's an intro. It's more if people think or see that I have strong relationships with my stakeholders, they think or see that I'm successful with my projects in some way, and they want advice from me, then I have that advice to offer. And I typically don't frame it in the lens of, hey, you should go read the five dialogues of Plato, although you should do that because they're good. But you can just start framing it this way. If you're not comfortable with confrontation like I am, you can start by just asking questions of people and let them do the thinking themselves. You can start by having them question their own premises. You're not having to get into this huge, you know, Oxford Hall style debate where you're going point for point. You're really just digging a little bit and trying to make sure you understand basic things. Like what are their definitions of things? Are you on the same page? When they're using terms, are we using the same terms? Because that's a lot of the times the difference of confusion. Like what are your metrics for success versus what are mine? Are we making the same assumptions or different assumptions? That alone can be a huge game changer to make sure we're on the same page. And I think it's a lot less intimidating to people to ask for clarification and ask for questions than it is to be in a meeting and correct someone, especially someone that's more senior to them, even if it's not their direct boss, but a a stakeholder that's more senior to them. ger to make sure we're on the same page. And I think it's a lot less intimidating to people to ask for clarification and ask for questions than it is to be in a meeting and correct someone, especially someone that's more senior to them, even if it's not their direct boss, but a a stakeholder that's more senior to them.

Stephanie 30:15 You spoke to this a little bit, and I would love to hear you talk about it more. When you're applying this sort of dialectical method in market research or especially to to your role and insights, how do you measure its success? Are there specific outcomes and metrics, shifts in behavior within your team or your organization that you're looking for to determine whether this is actually leading to deeper, more impactful insights? Are are I mean, is it at the in the bottom line that you're looking for? Like, how do you measure your success?

Sarah 30:44 You know, I think bottom line is always tough. Unfortunately, it's it's always hard for research because it's dependent so much on the organization. So that can't always be a good metric because that's a variant on where insights sixt as a function in your organization. For me, it's so much dependent on my relationship with my stakeholders. Some of that can be personality dependent, but I think that's part of why it's a good metric. If you find that you're having successful stakeholder relationships across a range of brands, different roles, different personality types, that's usually a good metric that your strategy is working. And the metric that I'm using there is what are the types of questions that I'm getting? What are the nature of conversations that I'm being brought into? Am I begging to be let into the room, or are they proactively coming to me with questions? What are the types of questions I'm being come with? Is it last minute, hey, can you run this these five, you know, out of home boards and tell me which one's the winner based on purchase intent? And it's really just, I'm an order taker and they want they're giving me something and I want they want one specific metric out and that's the only type of stuff they're coming to me with? Or are they bringing me into cross functional calls that I seemingly have no specific question for? They just want me in the room in general for conversations. As a thought partner. Yeah. Right. They want me as a as a strategic thought partner whenever they're having broad discussions about brand direction, about creative, about what they're doing for strategy next year. Those are the types of things that tell me I'm doing a good job because I'm valuable to this team. Because they feel like if they making a big decision, they need me or want me in that room because I'm adding value to that team. It makes a ton of sense. , about creative, about what they're doing for strategy next year. Those are the types of things that tell me I'm doing a good job because I'm valuable to this team. Because they feel like if they making a big decision, they need me or want me in that room because I'm adding value to that team. It makes a ton of sense.

Unknown 32:53 We've already talked about kind of adopting the physical product method within the consumer insights team. But for really to be successful, your colleagues and your stakeholders sort of need to not need, but it would be helpful if they adopt this mindset as well. So how do you go about fostering a culture within the company where questioning assumptions just becomes a natural part of the decision making process, especially if you do have conventional wisdom that's deeply entrenched in the organization? eed to not need, but it would be helpful if they adopt this mindset as well. So how do you go about fostering a culture within the company where questioning assumptions just becomes a natural part of the decision making process, especially if you do have conventional wisdom that's deeply entrenched in the organization?

Sarah 33:22 That's something that, you know, I think is an a very natural question to get. And I think, to me, the answer is kind of obvious of if you believe that your insights are fundamental truth seeking, then you should believe that you're you're just going to be getting them somewhere that's fundamentally better than you otherwise would. So so why wouldn't I vouch for that? Right? The the the end goal is to be somewhere that's better. So if we're if we're working towards something, even if the conversation is difficult, then I should believe that even if this process might be maybe occasionally temporarily uncomfortable because I have brought up something that maybe someone in the room didn't want to talk about or didn't want to hear or didn't want to be questioned, that's fine because ultimately, at the end of the process, we've gotten somewhere closer to the the honest truth of the matter, which is that if we had launched this, whatever, as an example, this creative, we would've wasted millions of dollars on an advertisement that wasn't as good, or we would've launched an innovation that wouldn't have been as successful. We're we're wasting money, we're wasting time doing something that is not as effective, that is not as close to truth. And I there's many different types of truth. Our role is consumer truth. So I I say this all the time. You know, Coke is a great place to work because they care so much about consumer truth. But, you know, one one of the things I used to joke about when I was working on the juice team is like, look, if you ask consumers what they want for a juice, they will tell you all natural with zero sugar. And I said, that does not exist, but it's important that we understand that about what consumers want. Because sometimes they'll tell us things that are completely irrational, that don't really exist, and that's fine. But we need to know that, and then we balance that with other truths. Like, what are supply chain truths? What are our RGM truths? What are our, you know, research and development truths? And together, we can come to a collective decision about what is actually feasible for us to put out in the world. But your job as the consumer truth is to make sure that they have a really clear picture. If you're pigeonholing yourself and saying, well, I'm gonna caveat that because they probably can't do that. That's fine. Let RGM tell you they can't do that because that's their job. Your job is to tell them what the consumer wants. And you can be a strategic thinker and and business minded and say, hey, we probably can't do this, but you should know this is what the consumer's prioritizing. This is what the consumer wants. That's fine too. But ultimately, that pursuit of truth is important. r job. Your job is to tell them what the consumer wants. And you can be a strategic thinker and and business minded and say, hey, we probably can't do this, but you should know this is what the consumer's prioritizing. This is what the consumer wants. That's fine too. But ultimately, that pursuit of truth is important.

Unknown 36:13 It is. And I think you bring up a really good point that a lot of times, our stakeholders expect research to have the silver bullet answer, and it's not. It's meant to guide decisions in conjunction with business acumen and what we know about the organization and the larger economy and marketplace at scale. It can't just be one piece of the puzzle. It's not the entire puzzle. It's just a piece of the puzzle.

Sarah 36:39 Right. Which is I mean, this comes up kind of most, obviously, whenever we do research on pricing, which is what I love. I'm like, if you ask them, they're always gonna tell you as close to free as

Stephanie 36:50 I will let them say. It's just rational.

Sarah 36:53 Yeah. Right. Which is why you need to have some sort of, like, a conjoint methodology to introduce trade offs. Because if you just give them price points, they're just gonna say, I want as much as possible for as cheap as possible.

Stephanie 37:05 As possible.

Sarah 37:07 For sure. We're all consumers, and that's what I mean about business acumen. I'm like, because when we're consumers acting in the real world, we know that. We we know we wanna spend as little money. But as soon as we put our business hats on, we're like, well, maybe they'll like it if I charge them. It's like, no. Why would they like that?

Unknown 37:24 Yes. There's always that. I've had that before. Like, the consumer will understand if we have to price more for this. I'm like, no. They don't.

Stephanie 37:33 I had a a question in here. And, I mean, I still I I'm going to ask it, but I feel like I have learned enough from you, Sarah, that I know what your answer is going to be. But it it's in the context of AI. We talk a lot about AI on this podcast. And I was curious, you know, can the Socratic method coexist with our sort of AI driven approaches? I'm gonna guess that you would say it's never been more important than for it to sort of coexist and be a part of the process as it is in the context of AI. s in the context of AI. We talk a lot about AI on this podcast. And I was curious, you know, can the Socratic method coexist with our sort of AI driven approaches? I'm gonna guess that you would say it's never been more important than for it to sort of coexist and be a part of the process as it is in the context of AI.

Sarah 38:08 Yeah. I mean, I think, like, I'm I'm not a Luddite. I don't think that we can I don't think you can stop the the progress of technology? It's it's it's impossible to rail against those machines indefinitely, so it's pointless to, you know, halt this the the progress of technology. But it is important to think about how we're using technology and the ways that we're using technology. AI is an interesting tool because of the thing that it's trying to do. Right? It's not challenging your assumption. If you tell AI, give me an argument for blank, and, you know, there's some, most AIs have some sort of like political filter. Like, some of them will not make an argument for, like, the most heinous thing in the world, but barring those extremes, no matter what you put in, it will give you a relatively polished, relatively intelligent argument for whatever position you give it. It's not really going to say, well, have you considered, or why do you think that? Because that's not what it's doing, which is fine because that's not what it's supposed to be doing. So that's why I caution with AI something you can't use it. I use it all the time, especially when I'm trying to, like, quickly polish up email because it it saves time. And that's a that's a big thing that we need to do is just like, if you're trying to save time so that you can better use it for those other things, like honing your critical thinking skills, but don't try to use it to supplement or replace critical thinking because that's not what it's doing. It can't do that. It's a big regression model that's just going to take what you say and reflect back at you something else.

Unknown 40:00 Lastly, what is one piece of advice you'd offer to someone just starting out in the world of consumer insights? replace critical thinking because that's not what it's doing. It can't do that. It's a big regression model that's just going to take what you say and reflect back at you something else. Lastly, what is one piece of advice you'd offer to someone just starting out in the world of consumer insights?

Sarah 40:07 I talk a lot with younger people in research. I'm on the UGA advisory board, so I get the opportunity to to talk to them a lot, the the MMR advisory board. I and I love having that opportunity to stay connected to that, like, next generation of researchers, and it's amazing how fast the industry feels like it's changing, especially because of all the technological movement we've seen even in the last couple of years. I think higher education still plays such a crucial role as like really an intellectual foundation for the next generation. If I were to give a piece of advice to the next generation or younger researchers that are coming up into the field, I would say that there's a there's a couple of really defining skills that it takes to be a a good researcher, and those things really aren't gonna change no matter how much technology changes or how much the industry changes. One is a lot of what I've talked about here today is intellectual courage, that willingness to question not just others, but yourself, and making sure that you're always opening yourself up to the possibility that you could be wrong to things. Second, a need for agility, the ability to navigate rapidly changing tools, data landscapes without losing sight of what really matters, equally rapidly changing human behavior. And finally, curiosity, fitting for the podcast title, but about people, obviously, but also, and this is very important, intellectual and artistic realms. Literature, philosophy, history, art and these are not separate interests, they're vital tools for understanding the human condition. Engaging deeply with them doesn't just make you a sharper researcher, it makes you a more empathetic and thoughtful human being. So don't just take the shortcut with AI and all of these simplistic technological tools. Read deeply and read widely. Watch things, engage with as much as you can because you will never have more time than you do now to do that.

Unknown 42:26 Do you have a concern that the reliance on some of the new technology like AI is going to result in an erosion of critical thinking?

Stephanie 42:35 Brain rot?

Unknown 42:36 Yeah. Basically. Yeah. Right? It's easy. It's quick.

Sarah 42:40 Yeah.

Unknown 42:41 I don't have to maybe I won't interrogate it. a concern that the reliance on some of the new technology like AI is going to result in an erosion of critical thinking?

Stephanie 42:35 Brain rot?

Unknown 42:36 Yeah. Basically. Yeah. Right? It's easy. It's quick.

Sarah 42:40 Yeah.

Unknown 42:41 I don't have to maybe I won't interrogate it.

Sarah 42:43 Yeah. I do have that concern. I think MIT actually recently did a study on that finding that it's kind of already happening. You know, There is this idea that, oh, if I can just shortcut things and not deal with the the struggle and the complication and the difficulty, then that's easier, and easier is always better. And that seems sort of obvious in a way, but it's actually completely the opposite of the case. Human beings need to struggle through things. Struggle is the way that we learn, it's the way that we adapt. You grow muscle by struggling to lift heavy things. You learn to cook by pushing yourself to try recipes you haven't tried before. You struggle to gain knowledge by reading books that are just outside of your, you know, intellectual capacity. That's how you grow is by challenging yourself. And if you're not challenging yourself and you're just not to sound like a, you know, these kids today boomer, but if you're just scrolling through TikTok and letting the AI algorithm feed you whatever, you're not going to get anywhere. You have to be intentional with what you're consuming with your media. You have to be intentional with building a life for yourself that is meaningful. Do not let the ease of the screen life tempt you into its its warm embrace because it is very tempting, but it is it is an artificial happiness, and it will not get you anywhere.

Stephanie 44:17 As you were speaking, I just kept thinking it's intentionality. Right? And then you said that because that's really what it requires now. Right? Like, there may be in the past, it it didn't require so much intentionality to cultivate that. But in the environment we live in with so many quick hits and so many easy ways forward that it really does require carving out intentionally that space and time for yourself.

Sarah 44:39 Well, because before, we had this wonderful resource that wasn't scarce. It was boredom. You had boredom in so much vast quantities. And when you're bored all the time because you don't have this constant source of endless distractions, which, you know, I'm not trying to be holier now. I deal with this all the time where I'm constantly sucked into various screens. But when you're bored, you try to fill that boredom with other things. I'm going to read, I'm going to walk, I'm going to exercise, I'm going to do things, I'm going to develop hobbies, I'm gonna cook, bake, so whatever. That's how creativity and intellect develop. When you don't have boredom, because you always have screens of various sizes filling in that boredom, the creativity dies on the vine. You don't have it. So you have to really, really fight against that because these little machines are designed to prevent it. They're designed to just suck you in and never let you off. We can't can't let them win. Can't let them win. ve screens of various sizes filling in that boredom, the creativity dies on the vine. You don't have it. So you have to really, really fight against that because these little machines are designed to prevent it. They're designed to just suck you in and never let you off. We can't can't let them win. Can't let them win.

Unknown 45:42 Well and now I'm really gonna date myself, but I remember doing book reports with encyclopedias, and you had accidental discovery. You go to b, and then you would discover a whole new thing in alphabetical. And now you're just specifically searching for what you want, and I feel as if that is also just inverting accidental discovery. You don't have that as much anymore.

Sarah 46:03 Right. Yeah. It's perfectly crafted to what you're already interested in, what they already know you'd like. You get sent down this little tiny stream. You are really carefully crafted that they're not gonna send you outside of your existing stream. Yeah. It's it's preventing critical discovery and creativity. It's it's really, really bad. And now I think there's always been worse things. This is definitely not the worst time to be alive. I I am not a a doomer in any way, but that doesn't mean that it's not a a real problem.

Stephanie 46:37 For sure. And like you said, again, I mean, just to go back to it, that it it requires intentionality to to move outside of it. If you don't have that, you're it's not gonna happen because it's it's simply it's been made too easy to stay in that sort of in that river of of content or screens or yeah. Yeah. I Sarah, this has been an absolutely illuminating conversation, fascinating stuff to get to talk about with you today, and we really appreciate you coming on the show.

Sarah 47:07 Thank you so much for having me. It was lovely talking to you both.

Unknown 47:10 You so much.

Stephanie 47:11 You too. The Curiosity Current is brought to you by A YTM.

Unknown 47:18 To find out how A YTM helps brands connect with consumers and bring insights to life, visit aytm.com.

Stephanie 47:24 And to make sure you never miss an episode, subscribe to the Curiosity Current in Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts.

Unknown 47:33 Thanks for joining us, and we'll see you next time.