Over the last few months, we’ve been speaking with leaders across the research landscape - from boutique strategy firms to internal research teams. While the specific project goals vary, the operational headaches are remarkably consistent.
Invisible taxes have emerged, and are quietly stifling the ability of brands and agencies to work together quickly, transparently and effectively. Often, the issue is less about the existence of these processes and more about a lack of transparency within them. Below are three major friction points defining the current market.
The Onboarding Deadlock
For many enterprise research teams, the barrier to high-quality insights isn't driven by a lack of budget - it's a lack of time, with vendor onboarding at large organizations in some cases taking several months.
When a project requires a specific niche expertise, researchers are often forced into a compromise: wait longer than expected to onboard the right expert, or settle for an already-vetted generalist who can start tomorrow. This onboarding delay, often exacerbated by a lack of clarity in the process, means specialized agencies are often locked out of the projects where they could provide the most value.
The Subscription Mismatch
The current tooling landscape is largely built for enterprise-wide stability, which creates a significant friction point for the project-based nature of agency work.
- From the agency perspective, committing to heavy annual tool subscriptions is a high-risk gamble when project volume fluctuates.
- From the brand perspective, even internal teams are finding that full-seat commitments for tools which are only needed for specific, high-intensity sprints is not the most intuitive approach.
The market is clearly calling out for more agility - tools that scale up for the project and scale down when the work is done or the research objectives change.
From Commodity Bidding to Expertise Matching
There is a growing sense that transactional vetting has become a race to the bottom. When the selection process treats specialized expertise as a commodity, the strategic nuances of a project are lost.
Agencies are looking for ways to move past the bid-and-forget cycle and back toward long-term strategic partnerships. Selection based on proficiency and impact, as opposed to selection being based solely on a price point, would provide much-needed transparency and benefit both parties in the long run.
The Path Forward
The feedback is clear: the industry doesn’t just need faster tools; it needs a more seamless way to remove friction. While no single solution can resolve every institutional hurdle, the future requires a shift away from gatekeeper-led procurement and toward merit-based discovery.
Building a truly modern research landscape requires moving past outdated administrative barriers to create direct, high-velocity pathways to elite talent. Transitioning from rigid, legacy engagement models to more flexible, specialized access is no longer a ‘nice-to-have’ - it is a fundamental requirement for the industry to remain relevant in a rapid-market environment.
Member discussion