Is B2B Research Broken? Let’s talk honestly about what’s not working and how we fix it.
We don’t talk about it enough publicly, but behind the scenes in B2B research, many of us know that a lot of the work being done right now just isn’t that good. We’ve seen too many studies launch with vague objectives, misaligned targeting, poorly written screeners, and survey questions that don't even sound like they were written by someone who knows the industry let alone someone who’s ever spoken with the people they’re trying to reach.
It’s not always because researchers don’t care. But it is often because they’re using the wrong tools. And yes, sometimes the wrong partners.
Because that’s where most B2B studies go sideways.
Too many screeners are written in a vacuum, built around assumptions about titles, company size, or org charts instead of the actual ways decisions get made on the ground. It’s one thing to ask someone, “Are you responsible for selecting HVAC systems?” But if you don’t know how decisions happen in that space, who actually gets a say, how the roles overlap, what terminology gets used in the field, then that question probably isn’t going to get you the person you think you’re looking for. And if your screener filters for “roofing contractors” and excludes general contractors who manage re-roofing projects every month? You’re not tightening your focus. You’re cutting out your audience.
This happens constantly: good respondents, qualified, experienced, active professionals, are disqualified before they even make it past the first question. That’s not just bad for incidence rates. It’s bad research. Full stop.
If you’ve ever fielded a B2B study, you know this: targeting only by title narrows your sample and ignores how influence actually works in most businesses. A plant manager might not “approve” a technology purchase, but they sure as hell influence whether it gets used. A construction supervisor may not own the budget, but they can make or break a product spec. An office manager at a small firm might also be the IT buyer, the HR lead, and the culture champion, all at once. If you rely on title or job function alone, you miss those people. And if you miss those people, your research misses the point.
This isn’t a knock on consumer research firms. They have their place, and some of them are excellent at what they do. But asking a consumer-focused agency or panel provider to recruit niche B2B professionals such as contractors, engineers, facility managers, operations leads, is setting the project up for failure. The targeting’s too shallow. The panels aren’t vetted for relevance. The incentives don’t make sense. The language is off. The entire experience feels like it was built for someone else. And let’s be honest, it usually was.
There’s a better way. And it starts by working with people who actually know the space.
B2B research is different. It’s messier. It takes longer. It requires real familiarity with the industries you’re studying and real relationships with the people who work in them.
This is fixable. But only if we’re willing to stop cutting corners.
If you care about research quality, and about the professionals whose insights we rely on, then you have to care about how the work gets done.
Because when a contractor, a plant engineer, or a project manager takes the time to open a survey, we owe them more than a generic 15-minute experience designed for a lifestyle panelist. We owe them a thoughtful, relevant, respectful conversation.
We can’t fix B2B research if we keep pretending it’s the same as consumer research.
If you're running B2B studies, especially among specialized or technical audiences, work with people who know how to do it right. There are plenty of B2B-focused research companies, purpose-built panels, and partners who live in this space. People who understand the nuance, the targeting, the language, and the pressure these professionals are under. So let’s stop asking the wrong partners to do the wrong work. Let’s stop using survey templates that weren’t built for this. Let’s stop misclassifying good respondents as unqualified. Let’s stop making people feel like their time doesn’t matter. And let’s start treating B2B respondents, and the research we do with them, with the care, rigor, and respect it deserves.
Contact: Ariane Claire, Research Director, myCLEARopinion Insights Hub
A1: Because they start with flawed screeners built on assumptions, not real-world understanding.
A2: By grounding recruitment in actual workflows instead of org charts.
A3: Work with partners who live in the industries you’re studying.