Transformative Consumer Research

DEFINING IMPACT

To move TCR research from insight to action to social impact, the Social Impact Council seeks to connect academics with social impact organizations, such as nonprofits, public policy entities, and for-profit companies with a social impact mission, to develop pathways for academics to partner with social impact organizations (co-authorship, data sharing, idea generation) and to establish communication paths to distribute TCR research funding to relevant social impact organizations.

AI generated image of origami globe in purple and cream.

Transitioning to New Paradigms for Societally Impactful Research: Recommendations from the TCR Impact Task Force and an Agenda

Julie L. Ozanne, Brennan Davis, Christopher P. Blocker,

Benét DeBerry-Spence, Rebecca Ballenger Gann

An open-access article that outlines ways to measure impact.

Marketing scholars increasingly aim to research social and policy problems to create and implement solutions with relevant stakeholders that drive societal impact. In 2022, Transformative Consumer Research and the American Marketing Association sponsored the first TCR-AMA Impact Festival, celebrating societally impactful research in marketing. Results and reflections from the conference point to successes and significant challenges facing scholars who seek to do research with societal impact. A TCR Impact Task Force of leading marketing and consumer scholars was surveyed in a two-stage Delphi study to understand these opportunities and obstacles more deeply and prioritize next steps for the academic community. The results provide an agenda for transformative consumer and marketing research. This agenda provokes fresh thinking for paradigm-level changes by advocating new research validities, methods of stakeholder engagement, initiatives for developing researchers’ capacities, and more substantial institutional support to accelerate the success of impactful academic research.

Access Reading

Five Forms of Validity for Measuring Social Impact

The TCR Impact Task Force, consisting of over 50 experts who have experience publishing in peer-reviewed marketing academic journals, who hold roles as gatekeepers, and many of whom work on transformative consumer and marketing research, advocate researchers start with impact goals in mind, align their work closely with the problems at hand, and commit to long-term impact. Task force members identified a need for diverse metrics that include qualitative and quantitative measures, integrate traditional and nontraditional metrics, and tailor assessments to specific local contexts. The task force also emphasized the importance of continuous monitoring and evaluation beyond the initial project stages, and thus, local partners play a vital role in this ongoing assessment process. They propose that scholars who want their research to have a societal impact require new conceptualizations of validity. These shared validities provide researchers with a common language for talking about impact assessment but acknowledge the need for local customization and assessments over time. They suggest five forms of validity for measuring success: (1) democratic, (2) process, (3) dialogical, (4) outcome, and (5) catalytic validity, described below. The first three forms emphasize how the research is conducted and thus are primarily driven by researchers’ decision-making, whereas the latter two require stakeholder input and participation. These validities provide a structured way to evaluate the effectiveness and reach of research initiatives but also leave room to adapt measures to suit the local context.

Ozanne, J. L., Davis, B., Blocker, C. P., DeBerry-Spence, B., & Gann, R. B. (2024). Transitioning to New Paradigms for Societally Impactful Research: Recommendations from the TCR Impact Task Force and an Agenda. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 43(3), 191-206. https://doi.org/10.1177/07439156241246274

Process validity evaluates the learning and benefits gained by participants during the research collaboration (Reason and Bradbury 2001). When stakeholders participate in research, they often reflect on their conditions and gain new understandings. As one TCR Impact Task Force member shared, these are often the “mini-impacts” that “you see happening before your eyes.” These usually occur at the individual level as people gain new problem-solving skills and may be better captured by qualitative methods, such as storytelling. Other research methods like photo essays (Ozanne and Anderson 2010) or art-based methods (Knowles and Cole 2007) provide unique opportunities for community learning and creative expression. At a minimum, sharing research findings with the community through workshops and other educational events is something most research teams could do.

Outcome validity concerns the successful resolution of a social problem and, thus, directly addresses impact assessment. This involves demonstrating that the research generated practical knowledge people can use (Reason and Bradbury 2001). If we study complex, intractable, global problems, we are, at best, charting progress in alleviating social problems. Complex issues like sustainability require diverse multipronged solutions tailored to local conditions and ongoing monitoring. In Castro et al.'s (2024) research, they demonstrated outcome validity through the significant increase in the percentage of residential parcels with access to fresh produce, effectively making fresh food more accessible in these underserved communities. We propose that researchers should include clear, measurable goals, present the outcomes of those goals, conduct longitudinal studies to assess lasting effects, and continuously use feedback mechanisms to refine approaches based on real-world outcomes.

Dialogical validity involves challenging research findings through critical debate with peers (Anderson and Herr 1999). Because academics submit their work for informal and formal peer review at conferences and in journals, the dialogical validity of current research is typically high. However, given the importance of local stakeholders in societal impact research, dialogical validity could alternatively be critiqued by those directly involved in the research, such as community stakeholders and partners. Such critique often occurs informally and is ongoing across the research project, but the formal acknowledgment of this input might strengthen research findings by helping generate more practical solutions and challenging the applicability of findings in different contexts.

Democratic validity assesses the extent of stakeholder involvement in the research, which occurs in the initial research design and is largely within the purview of researchers throughout the research process. Measures of democratic validity seek to tap the extensiveness and quality of participation. Hence, this form of validity increases when the perspectives of relevant stakeholders are included because their participation informs more effective solutions (Anderson and Herr 1999). Castro et al.'s (2024) collaboration with local store owners on BrightSide, a healthy food initiative in a low-income community, is an excellent example of high democratic validity. They gathered qualitative insights from community residents, local nonprofits, and city and county staff, eventually integrating over 50 different organizational partners who each provided different perspectives. Thus, over time, the democratic validity of this research increased. As the healthy food initiative grew, new problems of food waste emerged, requiring the perspectives and involvement of local food banks and community gardeners. This exemplifies how societal impact research requires ongoing commitment and feedback. It also highlights that as community partners’ needs evolve, varied approaches (e.g., regular interviews and surveys) may be used. Along these lines, significant creativity, such as using new visual and technological tools, is needed to increase democratic validity (DeBerry-Spence, Ekpo, and Hogan 2019).

Catalytic validity measures the extent to which the research inspires and invigorates change, both within the research context and beyond, extending to similar contexts (Herr and Anderson 2005). For example, Castro et al. (2024) use of social entrepreneurial action research is a potential catalyst and solution for other neighborhoods that have limited access to fresh food. To amplify this effect, the authors engage in broader dissemination of their findings and methods while also working with policy makers to expand this program. This might include creating a detailed how-to guide based on the BrightSide model for use by other communities.

In the Media

Defining Impact

Learn about the different ways you can create impact

Field Talks

Listen to guest speakers from partner organizations

News coverage of TCR articles and researchers