How traditional public opinion research raises more questions than answers

The reason campaigns use public opinion research is to eliminate the guess factor and base their decisions on hard data. But the truth is that traditional public opinion research usually raises more questions than answers.

For example, traditional public opinion research might tell a candidate his favorability ratings are 50% favorable, 25% unfavorable. However, the research doesn't tell the candidate and campaign manager WHY, leaving them to guess how to improve these numbers - no guesswork has been eliminated.

Another example: Traditional public opinion research could tell a candidate his numbers are much stronger in region A than in region B. Yet the campaign manager and candidate still have to guess whether to (a) work hard in the lower-scoring region B to bring it up to par with region A or the national average, or (b) under the assumption that there is a reason why they are doing well in region A, to concentrate efforts in that reason. Either way, traditional public opinion research still leaves the decision-makers guessing.

A third example: Traditional public opinion research might tell a candidate that 40% of voters agree with his messages on a certain issue. Yet it will not tell him how to increase the approval ratings - should he take it up a notch or tone it down? Again, decision-makers are left guessing.

This is exactly what Shaviv Strategy and Campaigns does better than anyone else. We call it Strategic Forecasting Research, and we use it for one purpose - affecting the way electors vote. We are not all that interested in the public opinion, rather in the triggers of public motivation - those illusive factors that will make electors get out of bed on election day and go vote for our candidate.

To learn more, please visit www.strategyandcampaigns.com