GPDA's Survey

[Mike Harte]

I don't know if anyone of you has tried to complete the driver's survey, but it seems to be a lot of nonsense as it is not interactive, if that is the correct word. I thought that I should try to complete it, but it seems to totally ignore my previous answers, for example, 'Do you watch the GPs on TV', to which I clicked on 'No'. The next page or so then stated that I replied that I watched on TV, so how has my viewing changed since the Pay TV started and what is my prefered time to watch and so on. At that point I gave up as I would have to make up answers to just suit the survey.

Anybody else tried?

[Richard C]

I tried yesterday but it was not working. Autosport along with some others is running an online pole as well. I filled that out yesterday. I may try the GPDA one again later today.

Richard

[chillibowl]

i tried it and thought the questions were kind of basic and not personalized enough. Mike you are correct in that the answer you give to previous questions should effect the type of question you get asked next.

Joe Saward suggesting they should ask questions to people who dont watch.

https://joesaward.wordpress.com/2015...king-the-fans/

not sure what i think of that approach. seems typical F1 thinking...lets fleece new people and ignore those who were already fleeced.

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

i tried it and thought the questions were kind of basic and not personalized enough. Mike you are correct in that the answer you give to previous questions should effect the type of question you get asked next.

Joe Saward suggesting they should ask questions to people who dont watch.

https://joesaward.wordpress.com/2015...king-the-fans/

not sure what i think of that approach. seems typical F1 thinking...lets fleece new people and ignore those who were already fleeced.

Not (overtly) just sticking up for Joe, but I think the point he was making was that F1 needs new people to watch, so it may be more productive to ask people who don't currently do so why they don't, instead of asking the people who do already watch (if you see what I mean?)

[chillibowl]

i suppose thats where my concern stems from as i dont think it would be more productive as im inclined to think the answers they (the uninitiated) would give would just reinforce what the powers that be are already doing...make it faster, louder and add more turbo boost.

anyways this sort of gets to what Mike was saying. make the survey 'interactive' and effectively have multiple surveys for multiple different groups. surely only going for one groups answers over the the other is the least productive thing they could do here.

[Richard C]

I just finished the GPDA survey. It seemed OK. My impression is that it allowed for very granular answers in some areas and in others you had only a few things to select from and none of them seemed to give me an option I liked. I had a bit of a laugh at the one that asked about sprinklers to create random rain races.

I do agree that in general they need to talk to those who are not current fans or might not happen to run across a link to the poll.

Richard

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

Not (overtly) just sticking up for Joe, but I think the point he was making was that F1 needs new people to watch, so it may be more productive to ask people who don't currently do so why they don't, instead of asking the people who do already watch (if you see what I mean?)

That may well be true, but I would have thought that it was even more important to ask those who have stopped viewing for their opinions. As far as I can see, the immediate problem F1 needs to face is that it is losing it's core enthusiasts, and it needs to address that as a matter of urgency. Just reading the threads on this forum would seem to suggest that more and more long-time followers of F1 are ceasing to be enamoured with the sport, and are finding other things to spend their time on.

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by Mike Harte

That may well be true, but I would have thought that it was even more important to ask those who have stopped viewing for their opinions. As far as I can see, the immediate problem F1 needs to face is that it is losing it's core enthusiasts, and it needs to address that as a matter of urgency. Just reading the threads on this forum would seem to suggest that more and more long-time followers of F1 are ceasing to be enamoured with the sport, and are finding other things to spend their time on.

Yes, fair comment Mike.
So really, the ones who should be being asked the questions are either those who have stopped watching, or have never watched in the first place. There is nothing much to learn from those who still watch?

[Paradise City]

If I had asked my customer what they wanted, they would've said a faster horse.


-Henry Ford

[Mekola]

I 've just did the survey. Very interesting. But almost no mention of minor formulae, even GP2, FR 3.5 or F3.

[bauble]

The questionnaire is the work of the Grand Prix Drivers Association, not the FIA or Mr Eccles, so it might not have the same expertise as some such ventures, I completed it relatively easily, but agree with those who found anomalies.

Certainly there are comments I would liked to added had there been the opportunity, but I suppose it all adds to the current debate on the state of the 'sport' (as opposed to the business.) of Formula 1.

Personally I can not see the point of asking people who don't watch what they think, how could they possible add anything worth while. Better to ask those who have stopped watching, and the those grimly hanging on.

[Greem]

Infuriatingly, after filling the survey in it told me that my email was not valid (I use 'disposable' addresses of the form graeme+something@...)

I hate lazy application design.

Anyway, I'm not 100% sure what the GPDA are expecting from their survey - it seemed to chop and change focus. I do hope they've got some decent people behind the design and subsequent analysis, as it seems to me there was an underlying couple of threads about trust and honesty which might well show a certain degree of bias in the responses.

[Woolley]

As with F1, I got bored after a few questions and gave up.

The answer to what I want can be expressed more simply. Look at the early 80s but make it safer.

Oh, and not 18" front wheels. Dear God, I thought F1 had exhausted the ugly cabinet but apparently there's a few ideas left in there.

[Adam43]

Asking the fans. I wish they wouldn't. Nothing good could come from it.

[alan1302]

Originally Posted by Woolley

The answer to what I want can be expressed more simply. Look at the early 80s but make it safer.

F1 to me is about the best - going retro and back to the 80's is not what I want.

[Woolley]

Not saying we go back to the 80s, but something that can race like that should be the target of any regulations. Then you make the best you can within those regs and stop penalising people for being good.

[Richard C]

This can quickly turn into another "how to fix F1" thread (we have a few of those already). But while we are on the topic (i.e. make it like the 80's), I think one struggle with that is that I know as a software developer that sometimes you are told to make it just like X and then add Y. But what "X" is exactly can be vague and ultimately up for debate.

I think the 1000HP engine is someone's attempt at doing exactly that. Imagine someone picking a handful of random "80's elements" tossing them together and creating a new mess. We might end up with large cell phones, parachute pants, thin ties and... no improvement in the racing. I will say the music was good.

My point is that it might be difficult to capture the right recipe to recreate that era even if some here may think it would be a few easy steps.

As to the surveys, I am not sure what I think about them. I do think it is good that they are looking outward to get ideas, but I don't think there is a shortage of ideas, or even a shortage of understanding which way the wind is blowing from a fan perspective. But I guess you do occasionally need to stick your finger in the air to double check. I still think they will do whatever they want regardless of what we say. Or if they do try to use our feedback they will twist it somehow (1000 HP engines).

Richard

[Paradise City]

Survey comes out. People do the survey. Survey results are collected. They integrate some of the findings into the sport. Universal uproar from fans who then HATE the changes. Smart alecs on social media then chorus "well, you wanted it that way"...etc

You can set your watch by it.

Look, I'm not categorically saying you shouldn't test people's views on this, that or the other. But you need someone with a bit of intuition looking at all aspects and who has a nuanced understanding that often what people say or think they want in theory, isn't what they really want in practice.

I'd much prefer one question and a box where you could fill out a nuanced paragraph and that's it. And have a clever person on the other end separating the wheat from the chaff.

[Adam43]

A clever and patient person. It would be 99% chaff.

[JeremySmith]

Perfect response Adam.. Can you imagine the hours spent having to read through all of that verbage, My head would explode ..

[fredd1]

Actually, I did it FWIW, didn't take but a couple of minutes, but as stated by JS, verbage. More concerned now about getting unwanted emails, but hey, what's the spam button for?.....

[Richard C]

Talk of the free form "single question" survey and the difficulty to generate good data from that caused me to remember an interesting thing I heard awhile back. It is from a radio program/pod cast that talked about the difficulty that Facebook has with respect to processing requests to review "reported" photos. Given the large amount of respondents and ability to adjust the survey on the fly, they learned a large amount about getting usable categorization data about why photos were reported as inappropriate.

In short it speaks to survey design, the questions that are used and how it all can work or not work. It is a great listen. But while not directly related to F1 or the recent surveys, I do think it should show how given the structure of your survey you might reach wrong conclusions from the data provided....

http://www.radiolab.org/story/trust-engineers/

Richard

[Mike Harte]

Richard, the same sort of principles apply with such things as psychometric tests that many companies use in their recruitment process, and some companies also use on an ongoing process to weed out unsuitable employees. In both cases, if you don't ask the right questions, then you don't get the right responses - i.e. garbage in, garbage out.

Also the same questions need to be asked a number of times, but in different ways. With a poorly devised test/survey, it is quite possible to cheat the system and give the answers that the tester wants to see.

[djinvicta]

Just reading a few of these...Im confused.com

[fourWheelDrift]

Originally Posted by Richard Casto

Talk of the free form "single question" survey and the difficulty to generate good data from that caused me to remember an interesting thing I heard awhile back. It is from a radio program/pod cast that talked about the difficulty that Facebook has with respect to processing requests to review "reported" photos. Given the large amount of respondents and ability to adjust the survey on the fly, they learned a large amount about getting usable categorization data about why photos were reported as inappropriate.

In short it speaks to survey design, the questions that are used and how it all can work or not work. It is a great listen. But while not directly related to F1 or the recent surveys, I do think it should show how given the structure of your survey you might reach wrong conclusions from the data provided....

http://www.radiolab.org/story/trust-engineers/

Richard

Many years ago before they were commonplace I developed and supported a generic web based survey solution designed to allow non-technical managers to create surveys, of course I went on to support the users. I remember almost coming to blows with someone who wanted to ask, in essence, is the new deal I've introduced, the same, better or much better. It took a certain amount of effort to convince him that if he didn't also offer options for worse and much worse he would have no useful results and no credibility.