Strategic Insight

StrategyOne Named to the Honomichl Top 50

2010-06-21T21:48:35Z

We are pleased to announce that StrategyOne has been ranked among the Honomichl list of top 50 market research firms across the United States. This annual list is published each year in AMA’s Marketing News magazine. Honomichl chose the top 50 market research companies based on their 2009 U.S. revenues. StrategyOne, listed at number 45, reported US revenues of $12.8 million, up 4.9% over 2008. While StrategyOne showed strong growth in 2009, America’s top 50 research firms saw domestic revenues fall 3.5% in 2009, compared with a 1.6% increase in 2008. This represents a significant journey for StrategyOne from five years ago, when we were a $2.5 million US firm. The "Top 50 U.S. Market Research Ranking and Review" is a report published by the American Marketing Association (AMA), North America's largest professional marketing association, and Inside Research(R), a one-source authoritative report founded in 1990 by Jack Honomichl, the leading market research industry authority.

The Barcelona Principles of Measurement - Approved

2010-06-17T17:03:34Z

The international Association of Measurement and Evaluation Companies (AMEC) kicked off its 2nd European Summit on Measurement in Barcelona today, where two hundred delegates from 33 countries have agreed on the following 7 Guiding Principles of Measurement: 1.Goal setting and measurement are fundamental to doing PR 2.Goals should be as quantitative as possible and address who what when and how much the PR program is intended to affect 3.Measurement should include representative traditional and social media as well as target audience changes in awareness comprehension attitude and behavior as applicable. 4.Aves are not the value of public relations 5.Social Media Can and Should be measured 6.Measuring Outcomes is preferred to measuring media results 7.Business results and outcomes should be measured whenever possible (KD Paine provides the sub bullets to each of the 7 principles above here) If you want to follow the discussion on Twitter: #AMEC10

InsightsNow Interviews Simon Chadwick

2010-06-15T15:27:24Z

Simon outlines the transition from the "Asking Epoch" defined by the survey, to the “Listening Epoch” defined by observational analytics (social media “lifestreaming”, MROCs, co-creation, etc.) For more on the Market Research evolutionary stages visit the Future of Insight blog.

Market Research Evolutionary Stages

2010-06-15T15:20:54Z

From Robert Moran at the Future of Insight blog... ___________________________________________________________________________ Reading Joel Rubinson’s excellent post over at his ARF blog, recalls some futuring I’ve been doing around the likely evolution of the industry. Rubinson takes a look at the evolution of the ad agency and applies this evolutionary footpath to MR with media buying the analog to the data collection side of the business and creative the analog to the full service, analytics side of the business. It’s worth a read. In my thinking about the future of the MR agency, I have developed at least five (5) plausible futures (not mutually exclusive): 1. Army of Davids: In this scenario, the larger firms keep consolidating and attempting to buy their future by acquiring hot new companies, but the systemic change and “free agent nation” overwhelms them. The goliaths are killed off by the Davids. The carriagemakers can’t adjust to the age of the automobile, and they are overhwelmed by new entrants, new technologies, new approaches (social media listening, etc.) and agile specialty firms. 2. Whuffie-Driven Free Agency: A second and more extreme “Army of Davids” scenario, Whuffie-driven free agency develops when individual researchers band together under a kind of digital guild in which each is rated by his-her clients. The resulting client score, their Whuffie (hat tip to Cory Doctorow’s “Down and Out in the MagicKingdom”) roughly determines an individual researcher’s compensation if and when they are chosen to do the work. Sound fantastical? Hardly. Consider: (a) eBay feedback profiles and (b) the mechanical turk. Now assume that a community of credentialed researchers (think PRC or similar) build an elance site on these principles. Insights rockstars, as opposed to large companies or even specialty firms, dominate the scene. 3. Convergence: Under the convergence scenario the MR industry is renamed, rebranded and redefined by a much larger collection of data-driven strategic consultants, including: management consulting, social media listening and analytics firms, predictive markets, game modelled consumer behavior research, foresight practices and IBM. Under this scenario, the first to combine all fields in an integrated way gains a significant advantage. The deepest pockets are the most favored here. 4. Incredible Shrinking MR: In this scenario the market research industry retains its current, distinctive, identity. It is not reinvented or transformed. Plenty of new innovations come along, but they’re not part of MR. MR labors on, like the dinosaurs after the first asteroid strike, oblivious of their doomed future. 5. DIY: Google, Facebook and future social media platforms enter the consumer research business by offering unimaginably massive panels of their users-members. With MR now a simple page on these social media sites, the era of DIY research is fully unleashed. Need a quick, global survey of fashion conscious, well-educated women? No problem. GoogleSurvey will collect data for you in 30 minutes after you have posted your (mandated) 5 questions or less survey. Need some collage-based qual done in 20 countries on a new tourist destination? No problem. 3 hours. Survey quality suffers, but the data is abundant. Insights? Well, those are a bit tougher to come by.

StrategyOne at a Glance

2010-06-07T20:49:14Z

More strategyone

Measuring the Future of Market Research

2010-06-07T19:57:29Z

From Robert Moran at Future of Insight. Will 50% of the work being done at market research firms today become “unnecessary” in three years? Marshall Toplansky, President of WiseWindow, explores this question and scans the horizon of market research in a new MRA Alert article. For those MRA members, I highly recommend reading Toplansky’s article titled “Measuring the Future of Market Research.” Reading this article reminded me very much of the things I’ve been writing on this platform and in my white paper (“Insight’s Future; From Market Research to Strategic Insight”) and I’m glad to see others thinking along similar lines. One area of considerable agreement is what he titled “the new expectations.” Here Toplansky is, at base, writing about organizations’ increasing “need for speed” and how this is impacting traditional market research. Think James Gleick (of Faster book fame) meets Simon Chadwick. As Toplansky colorfully puts it: “To today’s CEO, a six week qualitative study to find a simple answer is a slow moving elephant in a race for gazelles.” I believe that clients now have 8 demands of market research: 1. Strategic Recommendations 2. Concise Deliverables 3. Deeper Insight into the Whole Consumer 4. Speed 5. An Integrated Understanding of the “Infoverse” 6. Truly Understanding the Role of Emotion in Human Behavior 7. Insights Management 8. Value And speed is #4 on my list. Given the compressed decision making cycle in corporations, there is certainly a need for faster data collection, analysis and reporting of insights. Of course, “fast” and “deep thinking” are difficult to combine. And, there are limitations on how quickly good research can be conducted. But, there is strong client demand for speedier delivery of research based insights and firms that can work quickly, using a 24 hour “global clock”, will be at a significant long term advantage. As I noted in my white paper, this threatens the large traditional suppliers who do not appear to be built for speed. For them it will be imperative to argue for a deliberative process that tests assumptions as well as hypothesis. But, when it comes to speed, these large suppliers will be at a disadvantage relative to smaller, nimbler firms. Of course, Toplansky takes his speed argument further and merges it with the emergence of what some have called social media “listening posts.” Here he rightly argues that mass analysis of unstructured, “unsolicited and unexpurgated” comments across social media platforms can provide organizations with a new kind of real-time tracking system – a trends and insights stream. I generally agree with Toplansky’s argument. We have certainly seen a rapid development of social media research tools, and in time these will become incredibly powerful. To my thinking there are two key hinge points in the development of social media listening. The first is improvements in the analysis of unstructured text. The progress being made here is impressive, but the human element is still needed. The second is the representativeness of social media engagement. We assume that social media usage will continue to explode and eventually become ubiquitous across generational, gender and SES lines. This seems to be a solid assumption, but we’re not there yet and participation frequency rates can differ dramatically. I freely admit that projectability in the survey sense may not be a valid critique in this instance. My second concern about participation rates is the privacy issue. In my scenario building for the futures of market research, at least one scenario has privacy concerns reversing some of these basic assumptions and challenging the development of “listening posts” altogether. In fact, Jeffrey Henning is giving a speech on this very issue today at the CASRO Technology Conference. The title of this speech is “Um, We Didn’t Know You Were Listening.” As Henning puts it in his synopsis, “Unlike the traditional ethnography, consumers have not given researchers explicit permission to study them online. "What do individuals think about this?” Good question. Toplansky outlines the three “seminal” methodologies that he sees driving a “new era” of market research. I’m glad he uses this “era” terminology. In my thinking on the futures (thanks to Peter Bishop at the University of Houston) of market research I have segmented market research into historical and evolving eras and epochs. The “Data Collection Epoch” which we are now exiting, began with face-to-face interviewing, advanced to telephone and then advanced again to online. I have also named this epoch the “Asking Epoch” because it was defined by the utilization of the structured survey instrument. But, there are now two epochs on the market research horizon. The first is what I call the “Listening Epoch” and the next I have termed the “Simulation Epoch.” The “Listening Epoch” is defined by observational analytics, a movement away from the survey instrument as the primary research vehicle and a significant shift to social media analytics and other observational technologies (such as fMRI, eye tracking ,etc.). The “Simulation Epoch” is defined by anticipatory research. It is this market research epoch that I am most excited about. I see the “Simulation Epoch” as one defined by mass simulation gaming, predictions markets like those designed by Inkling, MROC Delphi panels and strategic foresight. In fact, when market research enters this era, I believe that the survey instrument will be replaced by the online game and that market research game designers will replace today’s survey writers. This may sound a bit strange, but consider that this would mesh with the gaming behaviors of younger people today and would be more observational and less intrusive. One company that may epitomize this new Simulation Epoch is Simulex. In essence, the “Asking Epoch” was about the survey instrument. The “Listening Epoch” is about real-time observation, and the “Simulation Epoch” is about modeling future behavior. One could argue that this progression takes us from a focus on the past (reported behavior in surveys) to the present (observed behavior and social media sentiment in real-time) and on to the future (gaming, prediction markets and scenario building). Finally, Toplanksy discusses marketing eras. His thinking very much tracks with that of noted futurist Jim Dator and author Virginia Postrel. I think his taxonomy (industrial to information to relationship) is excellent, although I would not name the current marketing era the “relationship era.” Instead, I would christen it the “, "dream" or “experience” era. Market research, neuromarketing, fMRI and behavioral economics are significantly chipping away at the notion of the “rational man” and instead revealing the power of the creative and emotional elements of the human psyche. Toplansky gets at this in his piece in a shorthand way.

Social Entertainment Data Fest

2010-05-20T19:53:30Z

This post comes from the Edelman UK Technology team's blog The Naked Pheasant, and is based on new research conducted by StrategyOne. __________________________________________________________________________ We love data here at Edelman. Technology floats our boat and aguably we’re pretty interested in Social Entertainment. You might have noticed that we like Trust as well. So is there anything more awesome than a presentation of data that shows the relationship between the Entertainment Industry, Social Networks and Trust? We think not. Except perhaps bacon sandwiches. We like those as well.

Edelman Social Entertainment &Trust in the Entertainment Industry

View more presentations from Edelman .

National US Poll Update: (AP-GfK 5/7-11)

2010-05-13T18:26:37Z

AP-GfK 5/7-11/10; 1,002 adults, 4.3% margin of error Mode: live telephone interviews (AP-GfK release) Do you favor, oppose, or neither favor nor oppose increasing drilling for oil and gas in coastal areas around the United States? 50% Favor, 38% Oppose Which is more important to you as you think about increasing drilling for oil and gas in coastal areas around the United States? 49% The need for the U.S. to provide its own sources of energy 47% The need to protect the environment Approval/Disapproval on Handling Oil Spill Obama: 42 / 33 British Petroleum: 32 / 49 Party ID 35% Democrat, 26% Republican, 25% independent, 14% Don't know

US Generic Ballot: Zogby, Gallup & Rasmussen

2010-04-20T17:49:35Z

Zogby 4/16-19/10; 2,018 likely voters, 2.2% margin of error Mode: Internet (Zogby release) 2010 Congress: Generic Ballot 44% Republican, 42% Democrat Obama Job Approval 49% Approve, 51% Disapprove Gallup 4/12-18/10; 1,600 registered voters, 3% margin of error Mode: Live telephone interviews (Gallup release) 2010 Congress: Generic Ballot 46% Republicam, 43% Democrat Rasmussen 4/12-18/10; 3,500 likely voters, 2% margin of error Mode: Automated phone (Rasmussen release) 2010 Congress: Generic Ballot 46% Republican, 36% Democrat

Voting With Their Wallets

2010-04-19T21:30:18Z

New Research Finds Younger Americans, Liberals and West Coast Consumers Most Likely to Report Boycotting and ‘Buycotting’ Based on Values View the full release here. According to a national survey released today, one in three (33%) American adults report boycotting; and one in four (27%) report “buycotting,” a product or service in the past 12 months because of the social or political values of the company that provides it. The national telephone survey, which was conducted April 8-11, 2010 by StrategyOne, explores the social attitudes and behaviors of more than 1,000 American adults. The survey finds younger Americans, Liberals and West Coast consumers to be the most likely segments to consistently vote with their wallets by engaging in values-based consumption. The survey asked whether or not respondents had, in the past 12 months, bought a certain product or service because they liked the social or political values of the company that provides it (“buycotting”). Conversely, respondents were also asked if they had decided NOT to buy a certain product or service because they disagreed with the social or political values of a company (boycotting). Similar research was conducted in January, 2010, by the Pew Research Center. Respondents also indicated which company or companies they had decided to buy, or NOT buy, products or services from as a result of their social or political values. Generational Divide: While there is a greater prevalence of boycotting than “buycotting” across all generations, younger Americans (age 18-34) are the most likely to do both. Forty percent of younger Americans surveyed said they had boycotted, and 36% had “buycotted” a product or service in the past 12 months based on social or political values. Older generations are significantly less likely to report boycotting and “buycotting;” age 35-44 (33% and 24% respectively), age 45- 54 (31% and 26%), age 55-64 (34% and 25%), and age 65+ (26% and 18%). Party Affiliation, 2008 Vote and Ideology: In comparing levels of politicized consumerism between Democrats and Republicans, the survey finds that while both parties are equally likely to boycott a service or product because of conflicting social or political values (35% and 34% respectively), there is a greater tendency for Democrats to report “buycotting” behaviors than Republicans (31% and 23%). The survey also finds that while liberals boycott and “buycott” at about the same level, conservatives are much more likely to boycott products or services than to “buycott” them. Interestingly, although liberals tend to “buycott” more than conservatives, very liberal and very conservative consumers tend to boycott at about the same level. Regional Differences: Consumers on the West Coast are the most likely to purchase, or NOT purchase, a service or product because of their social or political values. The survey finds that roughly one in three West Coast consumers have “buycotted” (33%) or boycotted (37%) a product or service in the past 12 months. Americans on the West Coast are the most likely to “buycott” a product or service; however, both Midwestern and West Coast consumers are most likely to boycott. Interestingly, a much larger percentage of Midwesterners have boycotted a product (39%) than “buycotted” one (26%). The least likely Americans to report either form of consumer activism are those in the North East, with only 22% “buycotting,” and 23% boycotting in the past year. Education Level: In comparing consumer activism by education level, the survey finds that boycotting increases somewhat with education level, reaching 43% among college graduates. “Buycotting” does not appear to be linked to educational attainment. Question text and data: Here are some activities that some people do and others do not. For each, please tell me if you have done this in the past 12 months or not. In the PAST 12 MONTHS, have you... A. Bought a certain product or service because you like the social or political values of the company that provides it 27% - Yes, Did this 72% - No, did not 1% - Don’t know/Refused B. Decided NOT to buy a certain product or service because you disagree with the social or political values of the company that provides it 33% - Yes, Did this 66% - No, did not 1% - Don’t know/Refused Survey Methodology: StrategyOne conducted 1,013 telephone interviews among a representative sample of Americans. The overall margin of sampling error is =+/-3.09%. Interviews were conducted between April 8 and 11, 2010. Statistical weights were designed from the United States Census Bureau statistics.

National US Poll Update: (Washington Post 3/23-26)

2010-03-29T18:32:56Z

Washington Post 3/23-26/10; 1,000 adults, 3% margin of error 903 registered voters, 3% margin of error *Results are for all adults except where otherwise indicated Mode: Live telephone interviews (Post: story, results) Obama Job Approval 53% Approve, 43% Disapprove Health Care: 48 / 49 Economy: 45 / 52 Afghanistan: 53 / 35 Federal budget deficit: 43 / 52 Immigration: 33 / 43 2010 Congress: Generic Ballot Adults: 47% Democratic candidate, 43% Republican candidate Registered voters: 48% Democratic candidate, 44% Republican candidate Favorable / Unfavorable Democratic Party: 50 / 45 Republican Party: 40 / 55 Sarah Palin: 37 / 55 (chart) Tea Party Movement: 41 / 39 On another subject: overall, given what you know about them, would you say you support or oppose the changes to the health care system that have been enacted by Congress and the Obama administration? 46% Support, 50% Oppose (IF OPPOSE) Would you support or oppose an effort to cancel these changes in the health care system, either by a new vote in Congress or through the courts? 86% Support, 9% Oppose Do you think the Republicans in Congress did or did not make a good faith effort to cooperate with Obama and the Democrats on health care reform? 31% Did, 63% Did not Do you think Obama and the Democrats in Congress did or did not make a good faith effort to cooperate with the Republicans on health care reform? 48% Did, 47% Did not Party ID 34% Democrat, 24% Republican, 38% independent

From Pollster.com: Pew Millennials Data

2010-03-08T16:51:03Z

View original post here. The Pew Research Center recently published its report titled "Millennials, A Protrait of Generation Next. Confident, Connected, Open to Change." It's a wide-ranging, data-driven portrait of the roughly 50 million Americans between the ages of 18-29. Of course, one of the larger differentiators between Millennials and other American generations is technology. Six in ten (61%) Millennials say that their generation is "unique and distinct from other generations" and those that say their generation is distinct cite "technology use" as their greatest differentiator. In this regard, the data support what most Americans observe on a daily basis. Millennials have slightly more positive views of technology than Xers and Boomers (see page 126) and they certainly use technology to stay connected. For example, 88% of Millennials use their mobile phone to text (see page 126), 83% have placed their mobile phone next to their bed before sleeping (see page (see page 135), 75% have a profile on a social networking site (see page 125), 32% have watched a video online in the past 24 hours (see page 127) and 14% are on Twitter (page 125). But what of Millennial's political and ideological distinctiveness? Much has already been made of the party identification chart on page 3 of the Pew report, which shows Democratic party identification among registered Millennials dropping from a 62%-30% Democratic advantage in 2008 to a 54%-40% advantage today. While much of the focus of discussion has been this drop, it is fairly clear from the data that Millennials have a greater affinity to a liberal ideology. Jed Lewison makes this point well. In fact, Republicans rejoicing at the decline of Democratic party identification among Millennials may be missing the forest for the trees. First, the Pew data shows that the recent narrowing of the party identification gap brings things back to roughly where they were in 2004 (53% Dem - 37% Rep in 2004 and 54% Dem - 40% Rep in 2010). For an even deeper dive on this issue, see page 67 of the report where Pew displays yearly (leaned) party identification averages based on ALL of its polling. As Kristen Soltis has pointed out, the GOP certainly has an age gap problem. And the internals suggest that Millennials are more politically liberal than Xers, Boomers and the Silent Generation. For example: 1. In a forced choice between government doing more or less (see page 116), Millennials lean toward government activism 53%-42%. 2. When asked to describe their political views, Millennials are split 29% conservative to 29% liberal. In comparison to Xers (+13 net conservative), Boomers (+27 net conservative) and 65+ (+38 net conservative), Millennials appear to be much more politically liberal (see page 140). In fact, this data shows that while 29% of Millennials classify themselves as politically liberal, this classification declines to 25% among Xers, 17% among Boomers and 12% among those 65+. These attitudes could certainly change over time based on economic and social events. We don't yet know how the "Great Recession", the likely collapse and reinvention of American entitlement programs, and the Obama Presidency will shape the attitudes of Millennials over the long term. But GOP rejoicing does not seem in order.

Research Industry Trends Monitoring Group releases RIT 2009 Qualitative Report

2010-02-19T15:01:22Z

Since 2003, Rockhopper Research has collaborated with select industry partners to produce the annual Research Industry Trends (RIT) report – covering trends in data collection, technological advances, and the state of the industry. RIT 2009 partners were Cambiar, The Greenbook Marketing Research Directory, iModerate, Market Research Global Alliance, Peanut Labs, Pioneer Marketing Research, Qualitative Insights, RFL Communications, Rockhopper Research, & StrategyOne. Quantitative data collection was completed in early fall 2009, and the survey report was issued in late November. To illuminate and elaborate on themes that emerged in the survey, six focus groups were conducted in early December, three with research buyers and three with research providers. Groups were conducted on the Rockhopper Research TruVirtual® online interview platform, using both voice and webcams. Full Press Release To download the 2009 Qualitative report, click here: http://rockhopperresearch.com/reports/ResearchIndustryTrends2009QualitativeReport.pdf To download the 2009 Quantitative report, click here: http://rockhopperresearch.com/reports/ResearchIndustryTrends2009FinalReport.pdf More details on the results of this survey may be obtained by contacting: Leonard F. Murphy Rockhopper Research lmurphy@rockhopperresearch.com 866-545-3216

THE BELTWAY PONDERS US GLOBAL INFLUENCE

2010-02-17T18:00:10Z

Was the financial crisis of 2008 a global turning point? Did it mark the earliest stage in the decline of US power? Will historians view the financial crisis and the Great Recession as the beginning of a multi-polar world? StrategyOne explored this issue further by using its proprietary Beltway Barometer survey to track elite Washington opinions on the subject. The data we collected over two years and across three survey waves paints a picture of Washington's elite attempting to contextualize the financial crisis and global recession. With one in four elite Washington Democrats and Republicans believing that the financial crisis "marked the end of American international dominance," American citizens and global policy elites should pause and consider the implications. As the table below details, StrategyOne leveraged its Beltway Barometer survey of Washington elites to gauge policy influencer sentiment on this question on three occasions: • September, 2008 • July, 2009 • January, 2010 We asked. Some people believe that the financial crisis of 2008 marked the end of American international dominance. Do you agree or disagree? The results (% agree below) were surprising. Sep., 2008_____________39% (Democrats Agree) /// 15% (Republicans Agree) July, 2009_____________ 25% (Democrats Agree) /// 20% (Republicans Agree) Jan., 2010_____________24% (Democrats Agree) /// 28% (Republicans Agree) As you can see, at the present time one in four DC elites truly think that historians will look back on the financial crisis as marking the end of US hegemony on the world stage. They would likely point to massive deficits, sluggish growth and deterioration of the US dollar as a global reserve currency. It is interesting to note that one in four Washington elites, those with the most to gain or lose from America's position on the world stage and those with the greatest firsthand knowledge of the situation, believe that America's influence is in decline. Depending on one's viewpoint, this data can be startling, but for two very different reasons. Those who acknowledge America's present difficulties, but see the country's strengths in an optimistic light are likely to be surprised that so many of the nation's capital elite view America's influence as in decline. They may view the opinion of this group as unpatriotic. They may also point out that the United States has had many bouts of doom and gloom in its history, including post-Sputnik fears of losing its science and technology lead and 1980s era concerns about Japanese competition. But, natural geographic advantages (a nation that can feed itself, good relations with its neighbors, large oceans to its east and west), a strong military, a large domestic economy, the rule of law and business innovation seem to give America significant staying power. Those who focus on a surging Pacific Rim and an America deeply in debt, with an aging workforce and a devaluing currency are likely to be surprised that so few Washington elites see the writing on the wall. Like Martin Jacques, author of "When China Rules the World", this group views the rise of a multi-polar world as an inevitable product of economies like Brazil, China, India and others "catching up." They might ask how Washington elites are blind to this inevitable change. And, as one might expect inside Washington, there are differences of opinion based upon party affiliation. The Democratic Perspective: Elite DC Democrats are modulating their thinking over time on this question. In the heat of the meltdown in 2008, with Bush as President, 39% agreed that the financial crisis marked the end of US international dominance. Now that number is 24%. The intervening variables are likely (a) the election of Barack Obama and (b) a perception that the worst economically is behind them. The Republican Perspective: On the other side of the aisle, elite Washington Republicans are now 13 points more likely to say that the financial crisis marked the end of US dominance. This is in line with their more pessimistic assessment of the US economy generally. It also may reflect a sour mood with President Obama now in the White House. No matter the perspective, this is certainly one of the great questions of the age and StrategyOne will continue to track elite Washington sentiment on this question. View the full release here. Tweet it!

National US Poll Update: (CNN 1/22-24)

2010-02-01T15:33:06Z

CNN / Opinion Research Corporation 1/22-24/10; 1,009 adults, 3% margin of error Mode: Live telephone interviews (CNN release) Do you think the policies being proposed by Barack Obama will move the country in the right direction or the wrong direction? 49% Right Direction 49% Wrong Direction Thinking about the following characteristics and qualities, please say whether you think it applies ordoesn't apply to Barack Obama: Is a good speaker and communicator 90% Applies, 10% Does not apply Do you favor or oppose new government regulations that would limit the size and activities of the country's largest banks? 62% Favor 35% Oppose Do you think the U.S. government has done too much, too little, or the right amount in providing assistance to Haiti after the earthquake in that country? 10% Too much, 11% Too little, 74% Right amount Do you think the actions Barack Obama has taken as president have increased the chances of a terrorist attack against the U.S., or don't you think so? 35% Increased 65% Decreased Asked before State of the Union: In that speech, would you like to hear Obama address the same goals and priorities that he had in his first year in office, or would you rather see Obama put forward proposals that would move his administration in a new direction in the coming year? 28% Same goals and priorities 70% New direction Favorable / Unfavorable Joe Biden: 44 / 39 Nancy Pelosi: 30/ 50 Harry Reid: 22 / 38 Hillary Clinton: 62 / 35 John McCain: 58 / 36 George W. Bush: 43 / 54