“War”
“We can give up some part of the territory. We can give up our people. But, we understand that Putin won’t stop. He will proceed with the conflict,” the older man in Kharkiv continued.
“How can I help myself? My family? My children? The only important thing is the war.”
There it was again: “War”. We were only 15 minutes into the focus group—right when we should be asking about recent economic policies—but our participants couldn’t ignore the conflict at hand. In times of life or death, the prospect of good-paying jobs is meaningless. To make sense of the moment, we needed to step outside of the research we had planned, and listen to the voice of the moment.
We were talking with residents of Kharkiv about Russia, war, and Putin in March of 2015—a foreboding echo of what they’re currently experiencing. Only a month after the Minsk II ceasefire, the fighting had resumed, and the mood was dire. Once more, Russian-backed separatist troops in eastern Ukraine had launched an offensive against the Ukrainian military.
Our task was to map Ukraine’s political landscape after the 2014 snap election—understanding Ukranians’ priorities to inform policy making. But, one month and 200 miles from the Battle of Debaltseve, our discussion guides were useless. We had to change our research approach. We had to research in a crisis.
In Rapidly Evolving Situations, Take Time To Listen
The first lesson of conflict research is simple: listen.
Our clients—from politicians, to companies, to nonprofits—often ask us if we should “wait it out until normal life resumes.” We have heard this in times of war. After a natural disaster. At the beginning of a global pandemic.
We always have the same counsel. Choosing to “wait it out” is (1) deciding to operate without information and (2) ceding the opportunity to shape that future. You can’t put out a fire without knowing where it’s coming from.
Actively engaging people in post-conflict environments leads to honest, open, and important conversations. It helps us provide strategic insight—early—to help our clients respond faster.
We have firsthand experience with the value of listening. We used satellite map imaging to design a geographically representative sample survey of the refugee camp residents in Haiti after the 2010 earthquake, elevating refugee voices to their governments and the international community. We conducted political research in the Rift Valley in Kenya at the site of post-election violence, to ensure that political communications wouldn’t stoke the same fires. We conducted survey research in flood zones (India), tsunamis (Indonesia), and earthquakes (Philippines), helping prioritize reconstruction efforts. And, less than a month after COVID-19 shut down the world, we were interviewing migrant farmworkers in California, informing the communication of health and safety protocols to frontline workers.
There is no one-size-fits-all approach to research in times of crisis. However, during our decades of experience doing conflict research for progressive issue campaigns, political leaders, and corporations, we have found a few common guidelines for how to collect better data to inform better strategies.
Safe Environments Foster Meaningful Insights and Better Strategy.
Conflict is stressful. People on high alert are far from optimal research participants. Trust doesn’t come naturally. Abstract or forward-looking concepts are difficult to internalize. They are rightfully suspicious of anyone deemed ‘Other’, whether that’s foreigners, outsiders, or just people with different opinions. These will not be your standard conversations. What does this mean for insight collection?
First, it’s important to remember that your participants likely crave normalcy. If you can engage people, it can feel like a window to ‘normal’ life. Conversations with researchers can be a thin silver lining to their dark cloud, and provide them with a meaningful respite. For clients, these conversations can deliver unparalleled insight to inform better, faster, and more responsive strategies.
Second, in places where there are ongoing security concerns, or you are in a non-permissive research environment, you have a duty to ensure safety. That could mean transporting respondents from an unsecure location to a neighboring geography, so you can collect information in a safe, comfortable environment.
You are also responsible for protecting your local moderators, interviewers, and panel providers. It’s important to make sure that they’re safe and well-remunerated for the difficult work they do. This means providing official credentials, proper PPE, and contingency plans for extraction from sticky situations.
Third, you can’t take shortcuts with your research team. Your recruiters need to be from the area, so that they can relate to—and confidently source—the people you're trying to recruit. Participants need to trust that you’re recruiting for a focus group, not a trap. Ideally, your moderators need to be local, or know how to quickly break down barriers. Familiarity breeds comfort, and comfort leads to insights.
This Is No Time For ‘Thoughts and Prayers’. Be Bold.
Now that you’ve extricated insight from a conflict zone, the most important part begins: developing a viable, impactful path forward.
Whether your clients are politicians, a non-profit, or a corporate interest, you will encounter the same dynamic in strategy development. They will have a bias towards perceived lower-risk responses. They will lean towards the ‘safe bet’. Towards ‘actions’ that are middling, meandering, mitigating. You will see that Doubt has a seat at the table.
No matter what, Doubt will be there. Your duty, as a strategist in a time of conflict, is to make sure that the voice of your research participants is seated at the head of the table.
Done right, this is the easiest part. Belief is a scarce resource, and ‘thoughts and prayers’ scare it away. People are tired of unfulfilled or empty promises. Tired of "same clown, different circus."
There’s a simple solution. To foster belief and goodwill, all you have to do is take your learnings, and apply them to improving people's lives. That's it. It's easy when you are dealing with people who feel—at best—irrelevant. All they need is proof that they haven’t preemptively been relegated to the history books.
As a strategist in a time of conflict, you have a simple maxim to follow.
What actions can your client take to meaningfully improve their audience’s quality of life, placing people—not your client—at the center of the impact?
We saw this when we were testing vaccine hesitancy messaging. Talking about how vaccination “buys” you a return to normalcy was significantly more effective than miring the conversation in science—because we channeled people’s wants rather than challenging their opinions.
You must push your clients to see the moment for what it is and rise to the occasion. Don't put on Wellington boots and survey damage from a helicopter. Wade into the water and help yourself. Don't offer press conferences and cabinet meetings. Go to drive-thru vaccination sites and ensure they are working properly, offer well wishes to people waiting in line, and give people confidence that they will be cared for. Don't show leadership by presiding over the command center. Show leadership by presenting yourself with the people and providing emotional support to victims.
The lower down Maslow's hierarchy you are, the bolder you can go. What’s happening in Ukraine today is a case in point. It's crystal clear what the "right thing" to do is when you’re being invaded. But when there isn’t a clear and present danger—how do you show commitment? How do you show strength? How do you be bold?
The Cost of Failure
While the bar for success may be low—make people’s lives meaningfully better, and we can sleep well at night—the cost of failure is high.
As researchers and strategists, we have an inherent inclination towards stratifying, segmenting, and placing bubbles on a 2x2 grid. To explain the world, we abstract people into populations. Our clients hire us based on our ability to pattern-match—because if we can figure out where a situation has parallels, we can apply learnings from past experiences.
In other words, we constantly run the risk of forgetting why it is important to get things right.
As strategists, we have an obligation to remember the audiences we survey. They didn’t choose to live in a time of crisis. They are playing the hand they were dealt. These are people doing their best to live their lives. They are not statistics.
There are small but meaningful levers we can pull to help—paying healthy incentives, providing some degree of comfort and security, listening. When we’re fortunate enough, we can help our clients decide to pull levers that change the status quo for the better.
At the end of the day, as researchers, as strategists, as people, we must do right by the people we serve.
All photos taken by ClearPath staff on assignment in Ukraine (2015).