Boston Fights Drugs Case Study
Kyle Broderick
November 21, 2014
MKTG 390
Boston Fights Drugs Case Study A
1)
The team’s model separates the public into four groups. These groups consist of nonusers, experimental users, regular users, and drug dependent individuals. These groups are based on drug awareness and abuse. The nonusers have little exposure to drugs. Experimental users were people who had an opportunity to try illicit drugs and they were familiar with their names, but they didn’t actively seek the drugs out, nor use them routinely. Regular users were ones that actively sought out and used drugs at predicted intervals. Drug dependent individuals had their lives revolved around the pursuit and consumption of one or several drug products.
The team believed that 10 to 13 year old kids could represent nonusers and experimental users, and 14 to 18 year old kids could speak about regular users, experimental users, and nonusers. They also believed that drug dependent individuals were out of their reach, but they might be able to get some information about them through talks with adults. These three beliefs are basically assumptions that are made saying that these age groups go well with these types of drug users.
2)
I would have also chose to use focus groups for my method of research. This seemed like the best option because it was the most time and cost efficient. Focus groups provoke new ideas, and allow groups to talk about a certain topic in more depth if needed. This is perfect for the Boston fights drugs team because they didn’t have a lot of prior data to work with. The main disadvantage of using focus groups is that people under the age of 18 might be dishonest when speaking because they may be scared of getting in trouble. Interviews might also work well with developing new ideas and talking in depth about a certain topic, but they would be much more expensive and time consuming. If they wanted to do ten in depth interviews in regards to each type of user that would mean they
November 21, 2014
MKTG 390
Boston Fights Drugs Case Study A
1)
The team’s model separates the public into four groups. These groups consist of nonusers, experimental users, regular users, and drug dependent individuals. These groups are based on drug awareness and abuse. The nonusers have little exposure to drugs. Experimental users were people who had an opportunity to try illicit drugs and they were familiar with their names, but they didn’t actively seek the drugs out, nor use them routinely. Regular users were ones that actively sought out and used drugs at predicted intervals. Drug dependent individuals had their lives revolved around the pursuit and consumption of one or several drug products.
The team believed that 10 to 13 year old kids could represent nonusers and experimental users, and 14 to 18 year old kids could speak about regular users, experimental users, and nonusers. They also believed that drug dependent individuals were out of their reach, but they might be able to get some information about them through talks with adults. These three beliefs are basically assumptions that are made saying that these age groups go well with these types of drug users.
2)
I would have also chose to use focus groups for my method of research. This seemed like the best option because it was the most time and cost efficient. Focus groups provoke new ideas, and allow groups to talk about a certain topic in more depth if needed. This is perfect for the Boston fights drugs team because they didn’t have a lot of prior data to work with. The main disadvantage of using focus groups is that people under the age of 18 might be dishonest when speaking because they may be scared of getting in trouble. Interviews might also work well with developing new ideas and talking in depth about a certain topic, but they would be much more expensive and time consuming. If they wanted to do ten in depth interviews in regards to each type of user that would mean they