Great piece! I completely agree, but more than this, I hope this becomes an invite for planners to move away from traditional research of insights, or at least to use new - the one you suggest - way to get under the skin of a prototype customer. I think is no longer an option avoiding to investigate the 'why', because even similar profiles will have different reasons to buy the same product, in the same place at the same time. And that's why the future is more and more one-to-one conversation with consumers.

Loved this weeks ramble...and completely agree with what both you and John Le Carre are saying!FYI http://bringtheloveback.com/ is the guy who started the consumer / advertiser video viral that you posted in your post this week - his name is Geert and he actually works for Microsoft in Singapore. It's great to see his motivation behind why he produced this piece of digital video content.

lets get him to speak to us!

Insight. I like insight as foresight but seldom has this been the case for me. "Insight as hindsight" is OK for a journalist or historian, but 'the hopeful we' hope to build the future, or some part of it (with the client). Insight from the tillerman, not from an inquest...

[Need to post this, too]. The esteemed economist Robert Solow established (in the 50s) that over 80% of economic growth arose from "technical progress", not labor, capital or organisation. "Technical progress" meant innovation plus insight (in the hindsight sense, unfortunately). Doing something clever, wierd and wonderful isn't enough. The insight in this case is that the PARTICULAR innovation has a good place in the world (and other "clever ideas" don't). That kind of insight, if foresight and even a tad reliable, is tradeable, and not a simple commodity...