Polling is easy. Developing research maturity is harder.
There are few things political people love more than a fresh set of polling numbers, and lately we’ve had plenty to look at. Election and referendum campaigns across the country have given pundits and practitioners no shortage of horse races, regional breakouts and demographic shifts to dissect this fall. Depending on where your interests lie, polling numbers are great fuel for conjecture, betting pools, or new grey hairs. While this is often the most publicly visible form of opinion research, our fascination with the numbers can obscure a more important question: What can we actually do with what we learn?
Start with the question, not the method
Polling and research are often treated almost interchangeably. But polling is a methodology, whereas research is a process. At Counsel, we return to this distinction often because starting with a preferred methodology puts the cart in front of the horse. Good research begins by asking: What do we need to understand to make a better decision?
Sometimes the answer requires a survey. Sometimes it requires focus groups or interviews. Sometimes it means looking differently at information an organization already has. Often, it requires a combination of approaches. But the goal of research is not to produce data for its own sake; it should be about reducing uncertainty around decisions.
Research maturity happens in stages
We work with organizations of all sizes, from small non-profits to large corporations. Every client approaches research differently, and maturity isn’t necessarily a function of size or budget. It’s a matter of how research is understood, positioned and applied within the organization.
As I see it, that maturity develops across four distinct stages.
Stage 1: Research as information
In stage 1, research describes what is happening but doesn’t go further. What percentage of people support a policy? How favourably do they view an organization? Which issues matter most? Who is leading?
There is absolutely value in knowing these things. Tracking public opinion can provide context and challenge assumptions. But information on its own doesn’t necessarily tell us what to do. A finding can be fascinating without being particularly consequential. And politically engaged people are particularly susceptible to fascinating numbers.
Stage 2: Research as validation
The next stage is more purposeful. An organization has a strategy, message or idea and uses research to test it. Does this message resonate? Which argument performs better? Do people support our proposed approach?
In stage 2, research is connected to a broader objective. That’s a good thing, but there’s a potential trap here too.
If the strategy has already been decided, research can easily become an exercise in validation rather than learning. The research is focused on asking if an idea works instead of asking if it’s the right idea in the first place. Even a clear answer may offer limited direction if the research was never designed to explore what could, or should, be done instead.
Stage 3: Research as an input to decisions
This is where things become more interesting. Instead of simply reporting what people think or testing something that’s already been developed, research begins to shape the work itself.
Now the question after the research isn’t simply, “What did we learn?” It’s “What should we do differently because we learned it?” Perhaps the audience we assumed mattered most isn’t really the group we need to persuade. Perhaps the argument we have been emphasizing doesn’t address what people genuinely care about. That might mean changing the message, shifting the audience, reconsidering the communications approach or adjusting an advocacy strategy. The important thing is that something is different after the research than it was before.
Stage 4: Research as part of strategy
The most mature approach goes one step further. Research doesn’t just sit beside the strategic work; it is part of how the strategy is developed. Researchers are included in the process at an earlier stage; instead of simply being briefed after the strategy has largely taken shape, they are part of the conversation about the problem itself. They understand the decisions on the table, the assumptions behind them and the unanswered questions that matter.
The best researchers aren’t just research practitioners: they’re strategists. Being embedded in the broader work means looking at the full information landscape: what we know, what we don’t, which assumptions we’re making and what evidence can help us make a better decision. Sometimes the answer is more research, and sometimes it isn’t. A researcher who is integrated into the strategic process knows the difference.
The deck isn’t the deliverable
Researchers often talk about producing “actionable insights,” and though I’m guilty of using it myself, I’ve always found this phrase to be slightly incomplete. Insights don’t become actionable simply because we put a recommendation beside them on a PowerPoint slide: they become actionable when they are used to make decisions.
That’s especially important in the work we do at Counsel, where research rarely exists in isolation. We are usually trying to decide how to communicate an issue, persuade an audience, build support, anticipate opposition, understand stakeholders or determine where an organization can realistically move opinion. The value isn’t in the number on the chart. It’s in what that number allows us to understand, question or change.
Research maturity isn’t about how much money an organization spends or how sophisticated its research tools are. Nor is it simply about internal versus external research; excellent research can come from either side. What matters is proximity. The closer research sits to the decisions it is intended to inform, the greater its opportunity to influence them.
There’s a quick and simple way to gauge your organization’s research maturity:
What did you do differently because of what you learned?
If that’s a difficult question to answer, the solution might not be more research, it might be a more mature relationship with it.
Research, integrated
At Counsel, we approach research maturity not as the end point, but the starting point. Our research practice is built on the same foundation as our government relations and communications practices: we’re public affairs experts with different specializations, but a shared focus on turning insight into strategy. That means research can be part of the thinking from the outset, helping determine what we already know, what we still need to understand, and what evidence would help our clients make informed choices and advance their objectives.
If your organization is navigating a complex issue, considering a major decision, or seeking to better understand its audience, Counsel can help you replace assumptions with evidence. Reach out to learn more about what we do.