1

Case Analysis:

Boston Fights Drugs

MGMC01

Faria Nava

Professor: Tarun Dewan

February 2, 2023
2

Table of Contents

1.0 Drugs in Boston…………………………………………………………………………… 3

1.1 The Creative Marketing Field Study…………………………………………… 3

1.2 STP Analysis…………………………………………………………………… 4

1.3 SWOT Analysis………………………………………………………………… 5

2.0 Research……………………………………………………………………………………. 5

2.1 Assessing the Methods.………...………………….……………………………. 6

2.2 Descriptive Research……………………………………………………………. 7

3.0 What To Do Now?.................................................................................................................. 8

3.1 No Change………………………………………………………………………. 8

3.2 Develop Current Study………………………………………………………….. 8

3.3 Additional Research Method……………………………………………………. 9

4.0 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………….. 9
3

1.0 Drugs in Boston

Around 1985, a thriving black market for illegal substances emerged in Boston, the 19th-largest

city in the United States. Experts claim that the number of narcotics the Justice Department's

Drug Enforcement Agency seized in 1986—over a market value of $250,000,000—was not even

5–10% of the overall amount of drugs consumed in Boston. According to studies, the drug

market in Boston was similar to that in New York City. Because of this, Mayor Flynn sought to

take action following the 1986 "cocaine epidemic" in New York to prevent it from occurring in

Boston.

1.1 The Creative Marketing Field Study

As the Mayor took preventative measures to halt the epidemic and discover the crucial

information regarding the illegal substance market, the Mayor requested a research group. The

study team's major objective is to obtain data on the characteristics of drug users in order to

create an effective communication strategy that works to deter the general population from trying

to continue using drugs. The research team's three key inquiries were:

1) Knowing the driving forces underlying drug use

2) Who is the source of their drug use?

3) Which advertisements have an influence on their drug use?

The research team attempted to use a variety of strategies, including media, education, and

enforcement, to reduce drug usage. After carefully weighing the benefits and drawbacks of

several research techniques, the team decided that focus groups would be a more effective

approach to gathering data than surveys and interviews with drug users. The research team

developed advertising techniques after gathering data to target Boston's major drug abusers,

teens. The study team began to have second thoughts about the viability of the methodology they
4

had chosen. We'll perform STP and SWOT analysis to further understand how the group

conducted their research.

1.2 STP Analysis

Segmentation:

The group chose to organize its focus groups into two age groups: 10 to 13 years old and 14 to

18 years old. If funds permitted, they were also willing to research young adults. Dorchester,

Roxbury, Mission Hill, Charlestown, and South End were the districts they evaluated. The two

groups were then separated into nonusers, experimental users, frequent users, and

drug-dependent.

Targeting:

The youth were the research group's primary target audience as, according to specialists, younger

children were becoming involved in drug use, and as per the Mayor's request. Additional age

groups would only drive up costs, and Boston's youth are the most crucial demographic to reduce

drug use and misuse.

Positioning:

The study teams arrived at the conclusion that community programmes and advertisements

would be the two strategies that would most effectively lower drug usage rates after gathering

critical data from the two focus groups.

5

1.3 SWOT Analysis

Strengths:
● The group's drug model creates a
strong framework and useful
classification of these users
(non-users, experimental etc.)
● To choose the appropriate individuals
and provide them with more accurate
information, they conducted a
screening questionnaire.
● They were able to cut costs by
conducting their discussion in the
community schools since their focus
groups consisted of youth.
Weaknesses:
● Participants in focus groups were
"wealthy and white youngsters,"
which led to incorrect findings
because such people don't represent
the genuine demographics of drug
users.
● Participants had difficulty deciphering
the questionnaires

Opportunities:
● The group could choose a quantitative
survey, which would require a shorter
time, has a lower cost and cover a
larger portion of the population.
● The results of the focus group show
that narrative is important in
advertising campaigns. By combining
the existing strategy of using
celebrities to persuade children to
abstain from drug use, they may use
those same celebrities to appear in an
advertisement that uses storytelling.
Threats:
● The senior population, who habitually
use and abuse drugs, are not taken into
account in the studies.
● The focus groups were longer than
expected, which made the participants
dissatisfied and could alter their
responses.

2.0 Research

Near the end of the project, the Harvard research team started to question if their approach to

gathering important data about drug usage in Boston was the most efficient one. We will evaluate

both the quantitative and qualitative techniques of gathering data on drug use before offering

alternative research strategies to enhance the study's quality.

6

2.1 Assessing the Methods

Quantitative Survey

Pros:
● Covers a large proportion of
population as it is conducted through
telephone or mail
● Able to generate objective data and
avoid biases
Cons:
● Costly option, ranging from
$10,000-$15,000
● Only 5-10% response rate
● Several testing iterations are necessary
to perfect the questionnaire

Qualitative Survey

Pros: Cons:
● Relatively low cost option ranging ● Additional fee for hiring psychologists
from $500-$1500 per session to interpret group discussions
● Participants were paid, generating ● Lengthy screening procedure
more accurate responses as they had
an incentive
● Can be taped and interpreted

One-on-One Interviews

Pros: Cons:
● Alternative with the lowest cost, ● Slow and subjective
ranging around $50-$100 per person ● Hard to find the correct participants
● Open-ended and unstructured format

Focus Group (Chosen Method)

Pros:
● Questions are designed to select the
best participants to best represent the
demographic of drug users
● Participants speak freely as they are in
a group with people similar to them
(age, experiences etc.)
● Easy access to focus groups through
community schools and centers
Cons:
● Participants prefered to talk about
adolescent drug user rather than their
own experiences
● Did not have the budget to study
different age groups
7

2.2 Descriptive Research

We can infer that the Harvard research team selected the best approach for study when compared

to the alternative methods after evaluating the various research methods. Cross-sectional

analysis, a type of descriptive research, is also a potent research technique that the team might

use. Through the use of sample surveys and cross-sectional analysis, they will be able to learn

more about the population at a specific time. Since there is no quick fix for this issue, Boston can

monitor drug usage and misuse over a period of years by using cross-sectional analysis. If data is

analyzed over time, researchers determine whether drug use is changing in Boston and whether

this population is genuinely learning to abstain from drug use. If demographics are altering? Do

their influences shift over time?

The group could also choose to conduct another form of descriptive research which is

longitudinal analysis. Typically this analysis is used to study trends in stock markets and predict

behaviour but could also be utilized by the Harvard research group. Similar to cross-sectional

analysis, with longitudinal analysis the group could compare their information found over a

period of time to show trends in the drug market. In this case, the research team would have to

employ an omnibus panel so the sample would be kept constant, but the data gathered from

participants will change over time and individuals will be selected based on criteria. The most

important information researchers will learn through longitudinal questions is patterns, drug

users' behaviour and characteristics, such as whether they have stopped using drugs or not, much

like brand loyalty and brand switching.

8

3.0 What To Do Now?

With the researcher's concerns, the Harvard group is left with options for improving their

research findings to create the most effective strategy for discouraging Boston's youth from

increasing or continuing their drug usage.

3.1 No Change

It stands to reason for the group to ponder if their study technique is the strongest one they could

possibly employ, but it's crucial to remember that they are nearing their deadline and have little

money left in their allotted budget. Based on these constraints, the group could use their recent

discoveries to develop a message aimed at reducing drug use in Boston based on what they have

discovered about drug users' behaviours from the sample groups.

3.2 Develop Current Study

The group might expand their current study by adding additional surveys for the older age

groups with the limited funding they have left in order to substantially increase the quality of

their research. By doing so the researchers would be able to obtain more accurate data on the

actual drug usage from the demographic that is most likely already addicted to the drugs. With

older participants, they can learn more in-depth information regarding drug use and misuse since,

in contrast to younger children, they may not be afraid to provide important information about

their sentiments and are also better able to express their emotions. It's also critical to keep in

mind that using this approach, finding suitable individuals would be difficult, and prices per

participant would increase.

9

3.3 Additional Research Method

Along with their focus group findings, the research team could also undertake a descriptive

study. They can carry out the study with the cross-sectional analysis that is significantly less

expensive and time demanding while gathering several variables at once and at one particular

point in time. If they decide to utilize longitudinal analysis, they will be able to recognize drug

users' behaviours, perhaps foresee future trends in the drug market, and acquire an understanding

of the causes and effects of drug use, all of which would enhance the quality of their current

research findings.

4.0 Conclusion

After examining the Boston Fights Drugs case, it is clear that the research team used focus

groups to efficiently undertake a substantial quantity of research. They have come to the

conclusion that community programmes and advertising are the most effective ways to lower

drug usage among Boston adolescents. Due to the study team's concerns about the efficacy of

their chosen research methodology, they have the choice to expand upon their existing findings

by including an additional age group (19–30) or by using a descriptive research methodology.

Overall, the group had sufficiently met the Mayor's requirements based on his request.