|
Huh? Don't
surveyors usually start with an aligned compass in order to
do a proper survey? Yes indeed, unless you're an editor
trying to find out how well you are meeting the needs of your
readers. In that case it's proper to flip-flop the process
to make sure the course you're on is taking you in the
right direction.
In October 2003,
we dispatched a short questionnaire dealing principally with
the use of trucks and pickups to help us tailor articles for
2004, but I also wanted to know if there are subjects to which
we ought to be paying more attention or perhaps have neglected
altogether.
People who do surveys
for a living figure that a 10% written response is very good,
that 5–7% is more likely what should be expected, and
that anything approaching 20% is off-the-page terrific. Our
subscriber base is 29,000-plus, so for a survey of this type,
based on 1,000 questionnaires, we'd need more than 75
(7.5%) responses to yield statistically significant results.
So guess what? As I sit down to write this column at the end
of December 2003, we have received 287 responses—so huge
a return that you'd think we were offering some sort
of sweepstakes prize. I thank all of you who took the time
to answer the questionnaire. I would like to think of it as
a validation of the magazine's value among the several
other publications that seek to address your needs.
Although not everyone
addressed all nine of the survey's questions, nearly
three-quarters responded to the question "In what subject
area would you like to see the magazine give more coverage?"
In such an open-ended arena, you can imagine that we received
a wide variety of answers, but a couple of unexpected patterns
emerged, and it seems that many of you are looking beyond
earthmoving tasks. What I think we're seeing is a sort
of "well, we're already going to be there with our
crews and equipment, so we might just as well bid on other
parts of the project" approach to uncovering new opportunities.
For one thing,
it appears that many more of you are involved in quarrying
activities—either in the process itself or at least in
handling the hauling, placing, and compacting of base materials—than
we realized. In reflection, this makes a lot of sense, but
it wasn't obvious until we conducted the survey. No fewer
than 11 people asked us to include articles on different aspects
of quarrying, soils, and gravel work.
Even more surprising
is the number of requests asking that we pay some attention
to asphalt and paving applications—not the large roadway
projects but, rather, the smaller parking lot and driveway
paving jobs that often are a part of residential and commercial
development projects.
The largest surprise,
however, has to do with concrete, where it seems there is
much opportunity for those who do the site work to
continue on and pour footings. In addition to building-related
issues, we had several inquiries about retaining walls—a
subject we cover quite extensively in our companion publication,
Erosion
Control.
Nearly a third
of those who responded to the question tell us they felt that
the magazine is on target with its editorial content, but
33 readers want us to increase our coverage on various aspects
of what I'll call productivity-related subjects—GPS
and laser guidance and control, specialty attachments, and
onboard communications and display equipment—and another
20 want to see more on various kinds of administration and
operations software. Twelve people want to see more
coverage of equipment, while the remainder mostly has
to do with economic issues, such as rent/lease/purchase
decisions, utilities concerns, and specialty projects (a polo
field and two tennis courts).
The survey shows
the need to develop assignments in some heretofore-neglected
areas. Even more, it shows me the value of surveys and the
need to do more of them in the future since we have left untouched
some of the types of projects in which many of you are involved.
For surveys to
be statistically valid, each must be based on a random selection
from the entire subscriber population, which means some of
you who received our first survey might well be tapped again
in the future. First-time or repeat recipient, I hope you
will be as generous with your time and efforts as those who
responded to our inaugural survey.
Send
John an Email
GEC - January/February 2004
|
