Since the middle of the 20th century, the discipline of research has been dedicated to understanding 'how people work'. In order to answer this huge question - one that philosophers, writers, artists, religious leaders and scientists of all kinds have also grappled with - the enquiry has taken different forms. Smaller 'big' questions have been asked - how market competition works, how advertising works, how direct marketing works, how global brands work, how loyalty works, how customer satisfaction works, how CRM works, how the new e-world works and so on. In the last decade, professionals in fields outside business and marketing have felt increasing pressure to understand how people relate to 'brands' in non-traditional contexts -- broadcasting, design, higher education, the arts world, politics, social policy, medicine and even religion. Brand thinking has become a topic that has entered the boardroom of many different organisations and institutions from universities to museums, from program-me producers to hospital managers.
             Despite the different questions and focus, there is an underlying common endeavour - to find a way of understanding how human beings relate to businesses, services and brands such that the tools of marketing can influence their ways of thinking and behaviour. The history of market research reveals the separate development of two disciplines of brand enquiry and evaluation -- contemporary qualitative methods and sophisticated quantitative techniques. For many decades proponents of these disciplines pitted themselves against one another in providing `the right answers' to brand questions. More recently, a rapprochement has occurred. Although many business professionals continue to trust quantitative data more than qualitative approaches, the latter are acknowledged for providing essential learning in the quest to understand how people work.
             So what is the current situation? Despite the power of technology to...