In today’s rapidly changing markets, traditional brand studies often fall short, offering only surface-level insights at a high cost. That’s where Brand Triangulation, a new holistic research offering from Leap Group comes in. By integrating multiple data sources—including surveys, AI-driven competitor analysis, and in-depth consumer panels—Brand Triangulation delivers a more nuanced, cost-effective approach to brand research and gives brands the insights they actually need.
To learn more about this innovative methodology, we recently sat down with Dr. Timothy Sauer, VP of Research + Consumer Strategy, and Laura Valentine, Senior Marketing Research Analyst at Leap Group. In this conversation, we talk about how the concept of Brand Triangulation came to life, why blending qualitative and quantitative research is essential for deeper brand understanding, and how companies can strike the right balance between data efficiency and insight depth.
How did the idea for brand triangulation come about?
Tim: I started thinking about what Leap Group really excels at, which is diving deep into a topic and spending time talking to consumers, and also what we don’t do, which is more traditional brand studies that tend to cost clients $60,000 to $100,000 for just one run of data. The problem with those studies is that they require huge sample sizes to feel confident that your findings are statistically significant and generalizable—plus, you’re only getting surface-level insights.
What our research team does is something better, and much more holistic, but we’d never put a name to it until now. With Brand Triangulation, we’re taking multiple data points and standing them up together. We’ll still do a survey, which might not have the same level of targeting as a $90,000 study that reaches every demographic, but that’s okay because we’re supplementing our survey with competitor and landscape analysis using AI and machine learning, as well as in-depth panel discussions with real consumers. This allows us to go much deeper than a traditional surface-level survey.
Can you tell me more about the third component of Brand Triangulation, the in-depth panel discussions?
Tim: The third component is so important, because that’s where we’re actually talking to consumers. Instead of just running a survey of 500 people, we conduct focus groups or in-depth interviews with 25 to 40 people.
We often start with these panels, using them to explore how consumers perceive a brand, what their journey looks like, and what they like or dislike. We can ask things like, “If it were up to you, where would you take this brand?” or “What kind of messaging and tone would resonate with you?”
Surveys are great, but they’re static. They capture one moment in time, and they don’t allow for probing deeper. Let’s say a survey finds that people who like tacos also enjoy reading history novels. That’s an interesting insight, but a survey can’t tell us why. With panels, we can follow up: “Why does that matter to you? Is it a connection to tradition? A sense of familiarity?” We can keep going deeper and deeper in ways a survey simply can’t.
Is there a specific order in which you tackle these different aspects, or does it depend on the client and project?
Tim: It depends on the client, but our typical approach is to start with a deep dive using consumer panels. We gather preliminary insights and then use the survey to validate them. For example, we might uncover key themes from a sample of 42 people in our panels. Then, we validate those findings with a larger sample—500, 700, or even 1,000 survey respondents. This allows us to ensure that our insights are both deep and reliable.
Are there certain clients and industries where Brand Triangulation works particularly well?
Laura: Brand Triangulation is especially useful for discovery research. Many industries are changing because consumer behavior is changing. That was the primary challenge for one of our global moving clients—they’re a premium competitor in an already expensive industry, and fewer people are moving overall, which means fewer people are hiring movers. So, they had to reevaluate their entire positioning to determine who their ideal customer is now, how they should update their messaging, and what creative they should use.
In cases like this, when a company is trying to understand a shifting market, a mixed-method study is the best approach. We did a survey with this client, but they were more involved in that part. The real discovery came from layering on qualitative methods to uncover deeper insights.
Tim: Exactly. Brand Triangulation is most effective during that initial immersion phase—using multiple methodologies to get a complete picture. The approach is designed to answer questions like, “Where does our brand sit in the marketplace at this moment?” That’s something every company should be revisiting periodically.
I’m not saying companies need to do a deep-dive study every year, but it’s valuable to pulse-check your positioning. Maybe you do a full study once and then follow up with smaller pulse surveys every 18 months or two years to validate changes. Then, after five years, you might do another deep dive. And the frequency depends on the industry and how dynamic the audience is. Some industries change rapidly, while others remain stable for longer periods.
Data analytics can often be filled with jargon, acronyms, and complexities. How do you effectively communicate the value of your work to non-technical stakeholders, such as clients?
Our priority is to make our reporting and storytelling both relevant and digestible. We start by clearly defining key performance indicators (KPIs) with the client during the onboarding process. For example, tonight we’re hosting a KPI workshop with a new outdoor entertainment client. Whether the project is enterprise-level or campaign-based, we’ll establish upfront what success looks like for them. This way, when we deliver reports, there’s no confusion about the metrics we’re focusing on.
We also strive to keep our reporting familiar and aligned with their goals. For instance, while optimizing campaigns toward primary KPIs like click-through rates or conversion rates, we often identify secondary insights—like cost per acquisition—that add further value. By tying these insights back to the established KPIs, we maintain consistency and relevance in our storytelling.
Laura, you used the word “discovery.” Can you give a few examples of questions that fall under that category?
Laura: This is a conversation we have with clients all the time. They often come in with a very specific question, like: “We want to understand the customer journey.” or “We already know our audience, and now we just want to test creative.” But sometimes, when we dig deeper, we realize they actually need broader discovery research first.
For example, a client might believe they already know who their audience is. But then they send us research from 2015, and we have to explain that a lot has changed since then. Consumer preferences shift, demographics evolve, and behaviors adapt. So before testing creative, it’s important to validate who the audience actually is today.
For example, one of our national clients had a core audience that was 90% women over 60 for many years. But through brand tracking surveys, they discovered a rapidly growing younger audience. The problem? They had no idea what that younger audience wanted or how to engage them. That’s where discovery research comes in. It helps brands confirm whether their audience is still who they think it is, understand how their audience perceives them, and identify gaps in their marketing approach. Sometimes, discovery research uncovers completely unexpected insights that reshape their strategy.
What are some different ways that clients approach research?
Laura: Some are extremely data-driven and research-forward—they can’t make a decision without endless validation. They clearly know and care about their audience and want to serve them well. On the other hand, we also get clients who are more focused on efficiency. They’ll say, “We already asked this in the survey. We already know our consumers use a web search. So why are we asking about this in a focus group?”
But a focus group isn’t just about confirming what we already know. It’s about understanding why people behave the way they do. What were their pain points? What were they thinking, feeling, and doing at each stage? It’s not just about data efficiency—it’s about data quality. Anyone can put a survey into the world, but that doesn’t mean it will be useful or well-written. The questions themselves matter.
That’s why I think there’s value in finding a balance. Some clients lean too far into endless research when sometimes they just need to make a decision and try something. But other clients assume they know enough when, in reality, they don’t. Investing in research can uncover insights they never expected, and a focus group provides a rare opportunity to engage directly with their audience.
How can Brand Triangulation help clients strike that balance?
Tim: Traditionally, if someone wants to assess brand awareness within a specific segment, they conduct a large-scale survey. That’s been the standard approach because it provides a broad, highly generalizable sample. There’s nothing inherently wrong with that—it answers certain questions. But it doesn’t go very deep. You get a representative sample that provides statistics on brand awareness and associated traits. You might see where you stand within a competitive set, but only from the perspective of a single survey.
That’s where we take it further. Instead of relying solely on surveys, we add other layers of insight. Our approach might not be as generalizable, but it’s faster, more cost-effective, and significantly deeper.
One of the key differentiators is how we leverage AI and large language models. We process massive, unstructured datasets and use machine learning to thematically code information in real time. That additional depth allows us to validate findings across multiple sources—survey data, AI-driven analysis, and qualitative insights from consumer panels. It’s true triangulation: if the same finding holds across all three methods, we can be highly confident in it.
Even with the use of faster AI-powered software, it sounds like interviews and qualitative research are where the real human insights are.
Laura: Well, that’s another benefit of Brand Triangulation—no single method is superior to another. It’s about choosing the right tool for the right question. Surveys are great when you need generalizable data, but sometimes, you also need to get people in a room and ask, “What was your actual experience with this?”
The most impactful insights often come from qualitative research, but that doesn’t make it a superior method. It just makes it the right method for certain types of questions. Other times, a quantitative approach is better suited. That’s why a mixed-method approach works so well—it allows you to answer different types of questions with the right level of depth.
Tim: I think insights come from both places. We always use multiple data inputs, but the richest insights tend to come from qualitative research.
When I came out of grad school, I was all about quantitative research. But over time, I realized that real depth—the “aha” moments—often come from qualitative data. Whether it’s unstructured transcripts, open-ended survey responses, or even online reviews, qualitative research provides a level of nuance that quantitative data alone can’t capture.
There’s so much published content online that we can now scan and analyze as qualitative data points. AI helps us process that information faster, but human analysis is what brings real insights to life.
Learn more about our research capabilities at the link here.
