The Giant Whopper that Launched the Programmatic Sample Era
Blog | February 12, 2025
by Terence McCarron, CEO & Founder
Early in the sample exchange days, I became a huge believer in the value of tech platforms that made buying from multiple panels at once simple.
Here are the trends that convinced me:
- Panels were harder than ever to build and maintain.
- Screeners were getting tougher for gen-pop consumers to qualify.
- Feasibility was slipping.
- Studies needed multiple sources to finish on time.
- The industry needed a way to scale better.
Exchanges solved for the project-level impact of many of these issues. But would MR companies adopt the change?
At first, there was a lot of resistance. Then, it seemed we had a tipping point that sparked widespread adoption of “programmatic sample”. It was an overnight success that took years to arrive. I credit one simple pitch for spurring a mass adoption.
Programmatic Sample Elevator Pitch
Programmatic sample startups poached reps from the largest sample houses. Then, they all used one specific message to their clients. It worked so well that the concept still influences so much of sample discussion today.
Here’s the pitch:
“It’s the same sample, just cheaper.”
Bulletproof.
The pitch fed off of common underlying fears for the buyers. Many researchers suspected their sample vendors overcharged them, making more than a reasonable profit. Each wave of fundraising seemed to validate that. When sample buyers heard this pitch, they believed they could now keep the profit, without any risk.
Maybe you really could get better, faster, cheaper all at once!
One problem- the pitch wasn’t true. It was not the same sample. Far from it.
The Methodology Changed
When the industry went programmatic, MRX embraced higher-tech approaches (a good thing). However, the sample changes went further than most realized, striking at the core of the best practices. Without an open debate or discussion, we shifted how respondents were recruited, assigned to surveys, validated (or not), and incentivized. For sample companies, this evolution normalized “partner networks” while saving expenses on panel recruitment. It also opened the door to DIY ordering tools. This savvy strategy padded profits for sample shops by shifting work to the research company. Sample companies evolved from “Panel company” to effectively “Traffic” Supply Chains.
Another real unmeasured cost was the destruction of the respondent experience. The programmatic technology successfully recreated the dreaded IVR menu model that caused mass customer attrition for companies automating customer service.
Slippery Slope
Very quickly, “supply” became a free-for-all. Anonymous downstream marketing companies, who never heard of the CASRO Code of Standards or even talked to a market researcher, found a robust new revenue stream. The appetite for new supply in the programmatic landscape was/is insatiable, so this was quickly accepted by the Sample Tech world.
“Panel” was gradually but certainly replaced with “River”. To mask this, sample shops rewrote the industry language. For example, “Double Opt-In” was replaced by “Opt-in”. Buyers assumed it meant the same thing.
Most importantly, the economics changed. Before programmatic, the industry transacted on the same metric: Cost per Completed Interview (CPI). With programmatic, the underlying suppliers were selling “clicks” in many cases.
Why Does this Matter?
This change created a misalignment that still drives confusion. The financial incentives within the respondent supply chain became different. This inadvertently opened the door for bad actors to harm data quality. Fraudsters surged through. Researchers now have elegant and detailed QA processes that, frankly, were never needed 15 years ago.
Today, I regularly educate Researchers and their clients on the realities of modern online sample methodologies. I constantly navigate stunned reactions when I explain changes that occurred 10+ years ago. Most buyers just weren’t taught what was truly happening.
If the programmatic elevator pitch had been more honest, it would probably have sounded like this:
“It’s a very different, less validated, more commoditized sample method. Just cheaper”.
I guess it doesn’t pack the same punch, does it?
The good news is that OpinionRoute understands today’s complexities. We take what’s real and make it better so your next projects can run smoothly.
You have a friend here in Cleveland.
If you’re tired of navigating the complex tech maze of Programmatic and its associated quality challenges, let us help! Let’s chat about your circumstances by hitting us up here.
