Use cases
Five assignments where the answer already existed — just scattered.
In four of the five, we collected no new data at all. The material already existed — spread across different sources and formats, with no one looking at the whole picture. In the fifth, the analysis also started with existing material; we added just two open-ended questions because those were the only things nobody had asked.
The value came from interpretation, not from collecting more. Synthesis, thematic analysis and root-cause analysis turned scattered observations into understanding.
The output was shaped for the way it would actually be used: a management team presentation, a report or a video for an international audience.
Root causes in services for neurodivergent people — Wellbeing services county
900 responses to two open-ended questions, combined with background data on what actually happened. A year-long development process produced five concrete recommendations.
Open-ended responses to a member survey — Major Finnish trade union
1,200 open-ended responses on how AI is affecting work, read and classified in two working days. Differences between respondent groups surfaced.
Declining member commitment — Major Finnish trade union
Nine source groups and their long time series combined into one clear picture. A view of changing member commitment without any new research.
Participatory budgeting analysis — City of Lahti
Years of feedback from three different source types combined into one analysis. Report and management-team presentation in four working days.