A decision to enter a new product category, an assessment of the actual dynamics of the supply chain, or an understanding of why B2B customers make decisions that defy price logic – in these situations, desk research reveals its limitations after just a few days. An expert interview in market research makes it possible to access knowledge that has never appeared in an industry publication because it is too recent, too niche, or too sensitive for anyone to describe. This method is used when interpreting phenomena is needed rather than merely cataloging them.
When does an expert interview in market research provide more than secondary analysis?
An expert interview in market research is particularly effective when the market is fragmented, emerging, regulated, or dominated by tacit knowledge – the knowledge that industry professionals hold in their minds but do not publish. Syndicated reports often describe the state of the market from several or even a dozen months ago. Meanwhile, a company decision-maker needs answers about what is happening now and which weak signals have emerged in recent weeks. An industry expert who works in a given sector every day can identify those signals.
The second situation involves specialized markets in which the population of consumer respondents is too small or too unaware to provide meaningful insights. A manufacturer of components for medical devices will not learn much from end patients. It needs to speak with a clinical or hospital engineer, a procurement specialist, a regulatory expert, or a specialist physician. IDIs with experts then replace traditional consumer fieldwork, because these are the people who shape actual demand and describe real barriers.
The third context is hypothesis validation. The analytical team formulates assumptions based on secondary data but needs to confront them with someone who interprets that data on a daily basis. An expert in-depth interview then serves a validation function: it does not generate hypotheses from scratch, but tests them in a conversation with a specialist who can say, “this does not add up because…” Such conversations often lead to the entire research project being reformulated before the quantitative phase even begins.
An expert interview in market research is also applicable to market entry and competitive benchmarking projects, where it is necessary to understand distribution mechanisms, margin structures, relationships between players, or informal rules for contract negotiations. This type of knowledge is not usually found in financial statements or trade press because disclosing it would be unfavorable to market participants. An expert who has worked for several employers in the sector can reconstruct such a map from memory.
How should an expert in-depth interview be designed to deliver real value?
Designing IDIs with experts begins with precisely defining the interviewee profile, not with the discussion guide. The concept of an “expert” in B2B research is broad, which is precisely why it needs to be broken down into layers. A conversation with a former board member of a competitor company is designed differently from one with a technical specialist, distributor, or regulatory expert. Each of these roles provides access to a different segment of reality and requires a different discussion guide.
Hume’s Institute recommends that the expert sample in a single project include at least three perspectives: the supply side (manufacturers, suppliers), the demand side (customers, end users acting as decision-makers), and an intermediary perspective (distribution, consulting, regulatory environment). This ensures that the market picture is not one-sided, while contradictions between respondents become analytical material rather than a problem.
The second stage is the interview guide. An expert in-depth interview should not be approached with a list of closed-ended questions. It should be approached with a map of problem areas, in which each area has its guiding questions and probing questions. A good guide allows the moderator to depart from the main path if the interviewee opens up a topic not anticipated in the brief, and these digressions often provide the greatest value. As Hume’s Institute experts point out, an hour-long conversation with a properly selected industry specialist can replace weeks of desk research analysis, provided that the moderator knows how to listen and does not try to force the guide point by point.
The third element is recruitment. In B2B projects, a research panel does not work in the traditional sense. Experts rarely sign up for databases hoping to be invited to a study. They need to be found, identified, verified, and convinced. In Hume’s Institute projects, effective expert recruitment combines several channels: proprietary databases, LinkedIn targeting based on job titles and employment history, recommendations from previous interviewees (snowball sampling), contact through industry associations, and direct outreach to companies. The time required to recruit one senior-level expert can exceed the time needed to recruit several dozen consumers for a quantitative study.
The fourth area is remuneration and ethics. The opinion of an industry expert has market value and this should be recognized. Rates vary significantly depending on seniority and the rarity of the profile, but the principle remains constant: experts are compensated for their time, not for the content of their answers. The moderator does not suggest which answers would be desirable, and the interview transcript is anonymized in accordance with the agreed arrangements. This is particularly important in B2B research, as interviewees often comment on former employers, competitors, or regulatory issues.
The fifth stage is analysis. A single expert interview is raw material. Value emerges when several to a dozen or so interviews are compared and coded for recurring patterns, contradictions, and unique themes. Hume’s Institute uses thematic analysis supported by qualitative coding software for this purpose, making it possible to distinguish observations supported by convergence across multiple sources from isolated idiosyncratic opinions.
What mistakes should be avoided in expert interviews, and how does this method differ from FGI?
The most common mistake in projects based on IDIs with experts is confusing an expert with a consumer respondent. An expert does not answer questions about their own purchasing behavior – they describe mechanisms they witness professionally. The question “why do you buy product X?” is inappropriate. The appropriate question is “what factors do you observe among customers when they are making a decision between X and Y?” The difference may seem subtle, but it results in an entirely different type of data.
The second pitfall is overestimating a single opinion. An expert, even a highly experienced one, speaks from their own perspective and within their own cognitive limitations. Their knowledge may be several years out of date, they may have a personal bias against a particular player, or they may generalize based on a single experience. This is why B2B research based solely on one expert interview is risky. Triangulation – comparing multiple sources and multiple types of respondents – is essential.
The third mistake is weak moderation. An expert interview is not a survey. The moderator must know the industry well enough to understand the interviewee’s shorthand, ask about technical details, and recognize moments when the expert says something non-obvious. A moderator’s lack of subject-matter preparation leads to a superficial conversation in which the interviewee responds politely but without depth. In Hume’s Institute projects, moderators conducting expert research receive a subject-matter briefing and a list of industry publications to read before the interview.
It is also worth understanding how an IDI with an expert differs from a focus group interview (FGI). An FGI relies on group dynamics: respondents react to one another, clash over opinions, and inspire each other. In the case of experts, such dynamics rarely work positively. Competing experts will not share sensitive information with one another. Experts with different hierarchical status inhibit one another. This is why individual interviews predominate in B2B research – one moderator, one interviewee, and a confidential setting. An exception may be Delphi-method research or workshops, which have a different methodology and purpose.
The fourth limitation of the method is its scale. An expert interview in market research will not answer the question, “what percentage?” It will answer the questions “why?” and “how?” If a project requires market share estimates or penetration measurement, expert IDIs complement quantitative research rather than replace it. In practice, Hume’s Institute often combines both layers in a mixed methods approach: experts build the interpretive framework, while quantitative research measures phenomena within that framework.
When should you use an expert interview, and when should you use other methods?
The choice between an expert interview and other techniques depends on the nature of the research question. The following situations indicate that this method will be appropriate:
- the market is niche, regulated, or technologically complex, and the end consumer is not the decision-maker;
- an understanding of value chain mechanisms, distribution, and relationships between players is needed;
- the project concerns the assessment of an innovation for which no reference market yet exists;
- the objective is to validate hypotheses formulated based on desk research;
- desk research has exhausted available sources, while the information gap remains significant;
- the project timeline is short, and the depth of findings must be high.
By contrast, using IDIs with experts is not justified when the research question concerns mass consumer behavior, when quantitatively representative data is needed, or when the hypotheses are so preliminary that it is more worthwhile to first conduct qualitative exploration among end users.
Frequently asked questions
Who is an expert in research?
Methodologically, an expert is a person with operational knowledge of a given market that cannot be obtained from publications or from an end consumer. This may be a senior manager, technologist, regulatory expert, industry consultant, former employee of a competitor, or opinion leader in a narrow specialization. Two criteria are key: the currency of their knowledge and direct access to the processes being examined.
How can hard-to-reach specialists be recruited?
Effective recruitment combines several parallel routes: the research institute’s proprietary databases, LinkedIn targeting based on employment history, the snowball method (recommendations from experts already recruited), contact through industry associations, and direct outreach to companies. Attractive compensation appropriate to the expert’s seniority and a clear assurance of confidentiality and anonymization of statements are essential. The actual time needed to recruit one senior-level expert is often measured in weeks rather than days.
How does an IDI with an expert differ from a regular interview?
A regular IDI explores the respondent’s experiences, attitudes, and motivations as a consumer or user. An IDI with an expert explores the respondent’s procedural and observational knowledge of the market, customers, competition, or technology – that is, the world beyond themselves. The guide is less psychological and more analytical, and the moderator must have the subject-matter expertise needed to conduct the conversation at an expert level.
Find out how Hume’s recruits experts for research projects
If you are planning a project in which the value of the findings depends on access to the right industry specialists, contact the Hume’s Institute team – we will discuss the expert profile, recruitment approach, and interview guide structure tailored to your research question.