Spaces:
Sleeping
Sleeping
| # Market Research Storytelling - Quick Start Guide | |
| ## What's New? | |
| Your TranscriptorAI now generates **professional market research reports** that tell compelling, data-driven stories for business clients. | |
| --- | |
| ## Key Changes in 3 Bullets | |
| 1. **Reports now sound like consulting firms**, not research papers - business language, "So What?" orientation, clear action items | |
| 2. **Participant quotes are automatically extracted and integrated** - brings findings to life with authentic human voice | |
| 3. **Professional visual elements** - stat callouts, insight boxes, quote highlights, color-coded priority recommendations | |
| --- | |
| ## Before & After Example | |
| ### BEFORE (Academic Style): | |
| ``` | |
| Summary of Findings | |
| This analysis includes 12 HCP transcripts with an average quality score of 0.82. | |
| Strong Consensus Findings: | |
| - 10 out of 12 participants (83%) mentioned reimbursement challenges | |
| Majority Findings: | |
| - 8 out of 12 participants (67%) discussed efficacy concerns | |
| ``` | |
| ### AFTER (Market Research Style): | |
| ``` | |
| Executive Summary | |
| THE HEADLINE: Prior authorization delays are creating a 6-month sales cycle gap | |
| and pushing HCPs toward competitor products with faster approvals. | |
| KEY TAKEAWAYS: | |
| β’ Reimbursement Barrier: 10 of 12 HCPs (83%) cite prior authorization as their | |
| #1 prescribing barrier β Your sales team needs patient assistance resources | |
| during the 4-6 week approval window β Launch patient bridge program (IMMEDIATE) | |
| As one oncologist noted: "By the time insurance approves, the patient's | |
| cancer has often progressed to the point where we need more aggressive options." | |
| β’ Competitive Threat: 7 of 12 HCPs (58%) mention switching to Competitor X | |
| specifically due to their co-pay card program β Market share at risk without | |
| similar offering β Evaluate co-pay assistance program (WITHIN 60 DAYS) | |
| ``` | |
| --- | |
| ## How To Use | |
| ### Option 1: Standard Analysis (App Tab 1) | |
| 1. Upload transcripts as usual | |
| 2. Select interviewee type (HCP/Patient/Other) | |
| 3. Click "Analyze Transcripts" | |
| 4. **NEW:** Reports now automatically include quotes and business-focused language | |
| 5. Download CSV and PDF as before | |
| **What's Different:** | |
| - Summary text now has "THE HEADLINE" and business implications | |
| - PDF has visual callout boxes for key stats | |
| - Quotes are woven into findings | |
| ### Option 2: Narrative Report (App Tab 2) | |
| 1. First run analysis in Tab 1 | |
| 2. Go to "Narrative Report" tab | |
| 3. Upload the CSV from step 1 | |
| 4. Select report style: | |
| - **Executive**: Concise, C-level focused (best for stakeholder presentations) | |
| - **Detailed**: Comprehensive analysis (best for product/marketing teams) | |
| - **Presentation**: Slide-ready format (best for sales enablement) | |
| 5. Click "Generate Narrative Report" | |
| 6. Download PDF, Word, or HTML | |
| **What's Different:** | |
| - Reports follow management consulting structure | |
| - 5-8 participant quotes integrated throughout | |
| - Visual elements: stat callouts, quote boxes, priority recommendations | |
| - Actionable recommendations with timelines (IMMEDIATE/30d/90d) | |
| --- | |
| ## Report Structure (New Format) | |
| ``` | |
| π EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | |
| ββ THE HEADLINE: One sentence, most important finding | |
| ββ KEY TAKEAWAYS: 3-4 bullets (finding β implication β action) | |
| π RESEARCH CONTEXT | |
| ββ Who we spoke with, data quality | |
| π KEY INSIGHTS (3-5 sections) | |
| ββ Each finding with: | |
| β’ Specific numbers and percentages | |
| β’ Business implication ("why this matters") | |
| β’ Supporting quote from participant | |
| β’ Connection to competitive landscape | |
| π MARKET OPPORTUNITIES & BARRIERS | |
| ββ Unmet needs (with frequency) | |
| ββ Competitive vulnerabilities | |
| ββ White space opportunities | |
| π PARTICIPANT PERSPECTIVES | |
| ββ Points of consensus (80%+ agreement) | |
| ββ Areas of divergence (where opinions split) | |
| ββ Notable outliers and why they matter | |
| π STRATEGIC RECOMMENDATIONS | |
| ββ π΄ IMMEDIATE: Launch patient bridge program | |
| ββ π WITHIN 30 DAYS: Develop early follow-up protocol | |
| ββ π‘ WITHIN 90 DAYS: Evaluate co-pay assistance program | |
| ``` | |
| --- | |
| ## Visual Elements (Automatically Added to PDFs) | |
| ### 1. Key Stat Callouts | |
| Large, bold numbers with context - perfect for opening the report | |
| ``` | |
| βββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββ | |
| β β | |
| β 12 β | |
| β HCPs Interviewed β | |
| β In-depth qualitative research β | |
| β β | |
| βββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββ | |
| ``` | |
| ### 2. Quote Boxes | |
| Participant voice highlighted and styled | |
| ``` | |
| βββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββ | |
| β "By the time insurance approves, β | |
| β the disease has often progressed." β | |
| β β | |
| β β Oncologist, Transcript 3β | |
| βββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββ | |
| ``` | |
| ### 3. Recommendation Boxes | |
| Color-coded by priority for quick scanning | |
| ``` | |
| ββββββββββ¬βββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββ | |
| βIMMEDIATβ Launch patient bridge program β | |
| β E β Address the 4-6 week prior auth β | |
| β (RED) β gap identified by 83% of HCPs β | |
| ββββββββββ΄βββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββββ | |
| ``` | |
| --- | |
| ## Writing Style Rules (What the LLM Now Follows) | |
| **DO:** | |
| - β Lead with impact: "THE HEADLINE: [most important finding]" | |
| - β Active voice: "HCPs prefer..." not "It was found that..." | |
| - β Specific numbers: "8 out of 12 (67%)" not "most" | |
| - β Business implications: Every finding β "What this means for you" | |
| - β Participant quotes: 5-8 per report, naturally integrated | |
| - β Prioritized actions: IMMEDIATE vs. 30 days vs. 90 days | |
| - β Skimmable: Key points visible in headers and first sentences | |
| **DON'T:** | |
| - β Vague language: "many", "most", "some", "often" | |
| - β Academic style: "Findings indicate that..." | |
| - β Data without context: Numbers need interpretation | |
| - β Generic recommendations: "Consider exploring options" | |
| - β Passive voice: "It was observed that..." | |
| --- | |
| ## Quote Extraction (How It Works Behind the Scenes) | |
| **Automatic Process:** | |
| 1. System scans all transcripts after analysis | |
| 2. Identifies quotes using patterns: | |
| - Direct quotes: "quoted text" | |
| - Speaker labels: `HCP: statement` | |
| - Narrative references: `As one patient noted, "quote"` | |
| 3. Filters out greetings, administrative text, too short/long | |
| 4. Scores each quote for storytelling impact (0.0 to 1.0): | |
| - Higher scores for: emotional language, specific details, numbers, comparisons | |
| - Lower scores for: generic phrases ("it depends", "maybe") | |
| 5. Categorizes by theme (e.g., prescribing, barriers, symptoms, QoL) | |
| 6. Selects top 10-15 quotes for inclusion in reports | |
| 7. LLM weaves quotes into narrative naturally | |
| **You don't need to do anything** - it happens automatically! | |
| --- | |
| ## Report Styles Explained | |
| ### Executive Style | |
| **Best for:** C-suite, investors, board presentations | |
| **Characteristics:** | |
| - Concise (1000-1200 words) | |
| - ROI focus | |
| - Strategic recommendations | |
| - Minimal methodology detail | |
| - 3-5 key insights maximum | |
| ### Detailed Style | |
| **Best for:** Product managers, marketing teams, researchers | |
| **Characteristics:** | |
| - Comprehensive (1400-1600 words) | |
| - Full analysis depth | |
| - All supporting data included | |
| - 4-6 key insights | |
| - Detailed methodology notes | |
| ### Presentation Style | |
| **Best for:** Sales teams, field force, client briefings | |
| **Characteristics:** | |
| - Slide-ready format (1200-1400 words) | |
| - Talking points emphasized | |
| - Visual elements maximized | |
| - Key messages highlighted | |
| - Quote-heavy for impact | |
| --- | |
| ## Troubleshooting | |
| ### "Reports still sound too academic" | |
| **Fix:** Make sure you're using the narrative report tab (Tab 2) with report style selected. The basic analysis (Tab 1) is improved but not as dramatically transformed. | |
| ### "Not seeing participant quotes in my report" | |
| **Check:** | |
| 1. Do your transcripts have speaker labels or quotation marks? | |
| 2. Are quotes at least 30 characters long? | |
| 3. Check console output for "[Quotes] Extracted X quotes" message | |
| 4. Try different transcripts to verify quote extraction is working | |
| ### "Visual elements not showing in PDF" | |
| **Try:** | |
| 1. Update reportlab: `pip install --upgrade reportlab` | |
| 2. Check that all imports succeeded (no errors on startup) | |
| 3. Try generating HTML version instead (always works) | |
| ### "Recommendations are all labeled 'MEDIUM'" | |
| **Reason:** LLM needs clearer priority signals in the data | |
| **Fix:** In your analysis instructions (Tab 1), mention specific urgency or timing requirements | |
| --- | |
| ## Tips for Best Results | |
| ### 1. Provide Business Context in Analysis Instructions | |
| Instead of: | |
| > "Analyze these HCP interviews" | |
| Try: | |
| > "Analyze these interviews focused on understanding barriers to prescribing. | |
| > Our client needs to know what's blocking sales and what to prioritize for Q1." | |
| ### 2. Use the Right Report Style | |
| - Busy executive who'll spend 5 minutes? β **Executive style** | |
| - Team doing deep dive? β **Detailed style** | |
| - Preparing talking points for field team? β **Presentation style** | |
| ### 3. Review Quote Quality | |
| Check the console output after analysis: | |
| ``` | |
| [Quotes] Extracted 47 quotes, top impact score: 0.87 | |
| ``` | |
| - 20-50 quotes extracted is typical for 10-12 transcripts | |
| - Top scores above 0.70 indicate high-quality quotes | |
| - If top score < 0.50, transcripts may lack substantive quotes | |
| ### 4. Customize for Client Industry | |
| In analysis instructions, mention: | |
| - Client's industry (pharma, medical device, payer, etc.) | |
| - Competitive landscape | |
| - Specific business questions they need answered | |
| --- | |
| ## Examples of Good vs. Poor Quotes | |
| ### β HIGH IMPACT (Score: 0.85) | |
| ``` | |
| "By the time insurance approves, the patient's cancer has often progressed | |
| to the point where we need to consider more aggressive options." | |
| ``` | |
| **Why:** Specific, emotional, causal reasoning, medical detail | |
| ### β MEDIUM IMPACT (Score: 0.65) | |
| ``` | |
| "I've switched three patients to Competitor X this month because | |
| of their co-pay assistance program." | |
| ``` | |
| **Why:** Specific numbers, comparative, action-oriented | |
| ### β LOW IMPACT (Score: 0.30) | |
| ``` | |
| "It depends on the situation." | |
| ``` | |
| **Why:** Generic, vague, no detail | |
| ### β FILTERED OUT (Not included) | |
| ``` | |
| "Thank you, that's interesting." | |
| ``` | |
| **Why:** Administrative, non-substantive | |
| --- | |
| ## Need Help? | |
| **Documentation:** | |
| - Full details: `MARKET_RESEARCH_ENHANCEMENTS.md` | |
| - This guide: `STORYTELLING_QUICK_START.md` | |
| **Code Reference:** | |
| - Quote extraction logic: `quote_extractor.py` | |
| - Narrative prompts: `story_writer.py` lines 10-100 | |
| - Visual elements: `narrative_report_generator.py` lines 19-255 | |
| **Common Questions:** | |
| - "Can I disable quotes?" β Yes, they're optional. Edit `app.py` line 242 to skip extraction. | |
| - "Can I adjust quote scoring?" β Yes, edit `score_quote_impact()` in `quote_extractor.py` | |
| - "Can I change visual colors?" β Yes, edit hex codes in `narrative_report_generator.py` | |
| --- | |
| ## Quick Wins Checklist | |
| - [ ] Run a test analysis with 3-5 transcripts | |
| - [ ] Review the "THE HEADLINE" in the output | |
| - [ ] Check console for "[Quotes] Extracted X quotes" confirmation | |
| - [ ] Generate a narrative report in all 3 styles (executive, detailed, presentation) | |
| - [ ] Compare PDFs to see visual elements (stat callouts, quote boxes, recommendation boxes) | |
| - [ ] Share with one internal stakeholder for feedback | |
| - [ ] Run full production analysis with client transcripts | |
| --- | |
| **Ready to create compelling client deliverables!** π | |
| Your reports now tell stories that drive business decisions. | |