Orchard at IIEX 2026: Better observations, better insights

After winning last year's Insight Innovation Competition, we returned to IIEX North America energized.

We hosted two different talks: a roundtable discussion with Bryson Cwick about how and why survey respondents lie, plus an exploration into in-the-wild testing with Joe Corace and Paul Scholten of Church & Dwight with a focus on making better observations instead of reverse-engineering the questions you’re asking.

IIEX North America brings together some of the sharpest minds in insights and market research, and this year was no exception. This year was about contributing to conversations that we think are moving the industry forward.

The research industry is at an inflection point. Between data quality challenges and the growing demand for real-world behavioral evidence, the two topics we tackled (respondent honesty and in-the-wild observation) sit right at the center of how insights teams need to evolve.

Why survey respondents lie and what to do about it

The roundtable with Bryson Cwick started with a bold (but proven true) statement: respondents don't always tell us what they actually think, feel, or do. But the more interesting question isn't whether they lie, it's why. 

Bias is everywhere, and it’s muddying up your data. From acquiescence bias to social desirability bias, there’s pressure from all sides for respondents to give a certain kind of answer.

In the wild testing works to curb bias by collecting data from consumers who don’t even realize they’re part of a test.

Why? There’s no querent to assuage. By making real-world observations in-feed, we’re able to capture insights that capture unfiltered thoughts and opinions.

The discussion pushed us to think about survey design not just as a methodological exercise, but as a trust-building one. When respondents feel safe and engaged, the data gets better.

The answer isn't better questions. It's better observation.

Our second session with Joe Corace and Paul Scholten of Church & Dwight explored what happens when you take research out of the lab and into real life.  

How does in the wild testing work from a client’s perspective?: 

The Client POV: 

Speed: More iterations than ever before, in record time 

Discernment: We’re grounded in real consumer behavior 

Environment: We’re testing where decisions actually happen, where influence is felt, and where media dollars are going 

We ask three questions:

1. Are you measuring what people say, or what they do?
2. Does your research process have a decision attached to it, or does it produce content?
3. Is your insights function built for the speed at which your business actually moves, or the speed at which research has always moved?

The core argument: controlled environments can give you clean data, but they can also hide the essential friction, distraction, and context that actually shape the reality of nuanced consumer behavior.

From unpacking the psychology of survey response to watching consumers in their natural environment, IIEX 2026 reinforced something we believe deeply: better research starts with better questions about our methods. 

The insights industry doesn't have a data shortage, in fact, it’s anything but. But there is a lack of quality data. The teams that will lead over the next decade are the ones investing now in more honest, more contextual, and more human ways of understanding people.