Submit newsAdvertise & rates  23°C Johannesburg Contact us
Press offices

Marketing opinion

SAMRA responds to open letter

22 Nov 2011 11:111 commentsBizLike
Dear Jean,
Your open letter published on the MARFA website and Bizcommunity refers. The executive of SAMRA welcomes positive debate and idea sharing since we believe it strengthens our industry. However, I do find the public statement about SAMRA's alleged lack of interest quite surprising since disinterest in cash flow problems and breach of contract by clients is not and has never been the SAMRA policy.
At the same time, our objectives as a professional industry body and our Code of Conduct do not imply that SAMRA can prescribe fees or payment policies to suppliers or research users. The public challenge is especially concerning coming from a SAMRA Honorary member.

We share your concern about cash flow and your point of view regarding the generally accepted industry practice of requiring an upfront payment of 50% or 60% as part of payment terms in contracts with clients.

If you were unsure of our view on this, I would have preferred that you contact us first to allow us to issue a statement in this regard (ie to exercise our right of reply). If you followed my declared vision at our most recent AGM and our July 2011 Strategic Planning document you would find that SAMRA is indeed extremely concerned about several challenges that the industry faces, including cash flow problems, amongst many similar issues.

In point 2 you raise a very valid point around breach of contract on payment terms. If more clients, and indeed research suppliers who subcontract to other researchers, become SAMRA members we would be in a position to formally act against these members based on unprofessional conduct.

In the case of non-member research users we have no recourse other than industry-lobbied initiatives by suppliers. I also refer you to Article 1 of our Code of Conduct that require SAMRA members not to act in a way which could bring discredit on the profession or lead to a loss of public confidence in it. The Article thus addresses the systematic failure to pay interviewers and sub-contractors money that is legitimately owed to them. This Article makes the behaviour you refer to a clear breach of the Code. Therefore, where SAMRA (or ESOMAR) members transgress, there is recourse via the SAMRA (or ESOMAR) complaints procedure.

Your interpretation of the Consumer Protection Act is, unfortunately, technically not correct since it covers individual consumers and not companies that would fall under the Companies Act. Regarding advising on and assisting with recourse, I would like to extend an invitation to you to suggest how we could assist. SAMRA will then submit a formal request for further investigation and involve the relevant portfolios in this as well.

With regards to the Qualitative Special Interest Group (QSIG) you might have seen the notice that the chair (Marna Kircher) recently resigned due to her husband relocating overseas. Elna Smit has been elected as new Chair for QSIG. I will forward your letter and my reply to her as well.

Similarly I will forward this to Grant Lindhorst as Chair of RUF for comment .

Kind regards

Adré Schreuder (Prof)
SAR (SAMRA Accredited Researcher)
CHAIR: 2011/2012
 
More options

About Prof Adré Schreuder

Prof Adré Schreuder, the 2011/12 chair of the Southern African Marketing Research Association (SAMRA; www.samra.co.za; Biz press office), is CEO of Consulta Research (www.consulta.co.za) and a SAMRA-accredited researcher. Contact SAMRA on tel +27 (0)11 886 3771 or email .View MyBiz profile and articles...
Jean Green
Jean Green's reply to SAMRA
Prof Adre Schreuder
Chairman
Southern African Marketing and Research Association
P O Box 1713
Randburg
2125
RE: OPEN LETTER TO SAMRA
Dear Adre

Many thanks for your considered reply to my letter to SAMRA.

I have no desire to enter into an acrimonious correspondence on the issue which is causing so many in the research industry so much concern.

I have taken note of all the points you have raised and while I do not agree with all of them I do see your point regarding several of them

At no time did I suggest that SAMRA should be prescribing fees or payment policies to suppliers or research users. Yet I do think that if there are concerns about important issues it is quite appropriate for a Life Member to raise them.

I believe that the situation regarding the payment of a percentage of a project fee on confirmation has reached a stage where it can be regarded as scandalous. I am pleased that SAMRA is concerned about challenges facing the industry, yet I am not aware of what kind of steps are planned to face and solve those challenges.

I have been writing and speaking and challenging members, Council, clients on this issue for at least the past 12 years. When there was a strong movement towards the qualitative research community breaking away from SAMRA and forming their own association along the lines of AQR in the UK it was I who strongly fought against this and voted for the formation on a QSIG within SAMRA.

I don’t wish to dwell on how long it took to actually get such a SIG formed. I have been part of that group since its inception and, in fact, wrote the guidelines to be used by members. I have supported Marna and Jani wholeheartedly and have been one of the very few members who contribute to the group on Facebook.

I am, indeed, aware of Marna’s move as she personally let me know about this. I sent a letter of congratulation and good wishes to Elna Smit whom I believe to be a very good choice for the position.

I couldn’t agree with you more that we need to bring practitioners back into the SAMRA fold. I do what I can to encourage people to join – or rejoin – SAMRA. Unfortunately, there is a perception, right or wrong, that SAMRA is not supportive of its members – particularly qualitative practitioners. The ongoing saga of poor recruiting never seems to be grasped and dealt with. The recent recruiter training days were not as professional as they could have been and, in my opinion (as well as certain others), did not play the role they were intended to play and did not solve any of the issues of poor recruiting.

To return to the question of payment of 50% – 60% of fees on confirmation of the project. I did contact Grant Lindhorst on this issue some weeks ago and had the following reply:
“You raise a valid point! I am hoping to address the members of the user forum soon, and I will definitely raise this point. It will be good to get their feedback on how best to tackle this issue. I am of the opinion that the research industry should become tougher on clients and sing from the same hymn sheet regarding the upfront payment. However to try enforce and maintain this will be a mammoth task. Not all suppliers share the same sentiment”.

Thank you for inviting me to suggest how SAMRA could assist. You make the point, correctly, that monies not paid to interviewers or other sub-contractors is a breach of the Code of Conduct. The only suggestion I have at the moment is that SAMRA give some thought to how members can be expected to avoid breaching the Code when their clients are breaching the contracts that come into being when they sign off a proposal which clearly states that a percentage of the fee is due on confirmation of the project. If practitioners of all sizes could be persuaded to stick to the contract themselves by not commencing a project until the up-front payment is made the problem would be solved!

I am attaching to this letter some examples of mail that has been sent to me about this situation, which may perhaps assist you in understanding the problem on the ground.

I have tried not to be confrontational in this letter. People who know me know that SAMRA is important to me and that I continually encourage membership for all who qualify. Obviously, years of being ignored on certain issues such as a QSIG and payment of up-front fees agreed to by signing off a proposal as well as the awful situation with recruitment has somewhat affected my perceptions.
Kind regards
Jean

Jean Green. Hon Life member, SAMRA.; Member: QRCA; Member: AQR Posted on 22 Nov 2011 20:45
LEGAL DISCLAIMER: This Message Board accepts no liability of legal consequences that arise from the Message Boards (e.g. defamation, slander, or other such crimes). All posted messages are the sole property of their respective authors. The maintainer does retain the right to remove any message posts for whatever reasons. People that post messages to this forum are not to libel/slander nor in any other way depict a company, entity, individual(s), or service in a false light; should they do so, the legal consequences are theirs alone. Bizcommunity.com will disclose authors' IP addresses to authorities if compelled to do so by a court of law.

Subscribe to industry newsletters

Related tweets


Bizcommunity has over 400 industry contributors and we always welcome further contributions and contributors.

Subscribe

Receive free email newsletter

Make us your homepageAdd us to your favoritesRSS feedGet biz on your phoneFollow us

Invite

Tell a friend about us