Stakeholder perceptions of a credit ratings agency

What is shaping information services

Data, ratings and information providers need to understand what users actually need, keep their data fresh and size new opportunities accurately.

• Users want timely, verified data in their workflow
• Data collection at scale needs strong quality control
• New products need validation before launch

A credit ratings agency, working in India & UAE. Client identity is withheld to protect confidentiality.

Organisation

A credit ratings agency

Sector

Information services

Team engaged

Market Research

Services

Business panel, Qualitative research, Reporting & insights

The agency wanted honest feedback on its methodology, communication and research from issuers and investors. The agency competed with larger global firms and needed to understand how its work was perceived. The agency wanted independent feedback on its credibility, research quality and communication, which stakeholders rarely gave directly.

• Deliver on the brief: stakeholder perceptions of a credit ratings agency.
• Uncover the motivations and barriers people do not state in a survey.
• Give the client evidence it can act on within 7 weeks.

Scope: 40 interviews.

Audiences we typically reach in information services

Data users and analystsSubscribers and enterprise buyersData contributorsProspectsPartners

Coverage: India & UAE. Markets: India and United Arab Emirates.

• India
• United Arab Emirates

A qualitative design, built to uncover motivations, decision processes and the language people actually use.

1. 1Brief
2. 2Interviews with issuers, investors and bankers
3. 3Insight

We conducted confidential interviews with corporate finance heads, fund managers and bankers. Interviews were conducted by senior researchers in person and by video, and participants were assured that comments would be reported without names. Findings were grouped by stakeholder type so the agency could see how issuers and investors differed.

Business panelQualitative researchReporting & insights

• Business respondents were screened on role, company size and involvement in the decision before being invited.
• Online respondents were drawn from verified panel members who matched the screening criteria, with quotas on key profile attributes.
• Qualitative participants were recruited purposively to cover the full range of experiences that mattered, rather than for statistical representation.

interviews

40

• The online survey was mobile-friendly and offered in respondents' languages.
• Interviews and discussions were led by experienced moderators using a guide agreed with the client.

• Digital fingerprinting and duplicate checks
• Attention, speed and straight-lining checks
• Review of open-ended answers
• Recordings and transcripts for every session
• Re-screening of qualitative recruits
• Logic and range checks on the final data
• Work carried out under our ISO 20252 quality procedures

• Thematic coding of interviews and discussions
• Journey and decision mapping

• Stakeholders valued its research but wanted faster rating rationales.
• Stakeholder feedback also led to clearer explanations of methodology changes and more regular sector reports.

Confidential interviews produced candid feedback.

• Build on the core insight: confidential interviews produced candid feedback.
• Focus effort where the evidence was strongest: stakeholders valued its research but wanted faster rating rationales.
• Re-measure after the changes to confirm the effect.

• The agency shortened publication timelines.

What changed in the business as a result of the work. Impact is described qualitatively.

• Insight report and management presentation
• Cleaned data file and data tables
• Interview summaries and key verbatims

• Repeat the measure after changes are in place to track progress.
• A natural follow-on question: how accurate and fresh is the data?