Why Customer Surveys Fail as Demand Signals

And what to pay attention to instead, according to Hawke Media’s founder, Erik Huberman

There’s a comforting logic behind surveys. Ask customers what they want, get their answers, build what they say, and they’ll buy. But as Erik Huberman, founder of Hawke Media, points out, this logic often leads brands down the wrong path.

“Most market research is misleading. People only want what they know exists. And if they haven’t seen you before, they won’t say they want you.”

Huberman argues that traditional customer surveys and market research are flawed because they rely on backward-looking, self-reported opinions that fail to capture what customers actually want, especially when innovation is involved. 

Insights from our interview with Erik Huberman on customer surveys and market research 

We tapped into five key insights that Huberman shared with us on why customer surveys routinely fail as demand signals and what brands should focus on instead if they want to anticipate real buying behavior.

Insight 1: Customers don’t know what they want

“If you asked people what they wanted, they’d say faster horses,” Huberman quotes, referencing the classic line attributed to Henry Ford.

The insight here is deeper than it first appears. Survey responses are limited by what customers already understand. If they don’t know your product exists or can’t imagine a better way, they won’t ask for it. This is why surveys can be a poor tool for innovation or differentiation.

Insight 2: The way we ask questions is misleading and distorts reality

Surveys may seem objective, but they’re shaped by how their questions are framed.

“It's like asking someone, ‘Would you rather pay $100 or $1,000 for this iPhone?’ Obviously, they say $100. Then brands take that data and make decisions based on it.”

This is a flaw in traditional survey design. They rarely reflect how people actually behave. 

Surveys rely on hypotheticals, which manipulate respondents (intentionally or not) to share preferences and opinions that are often shaped more by the question than by their actual behavior. The framing, the lack of context, and the artificial setting all contribute to insights that look useful on paper but fail to reflect the complexity of real-world decision-making. 

Even subtle shifts in wording can steer people toward certain responses, introduce unconscious bias, or produce answers they think they should give, especially in situations where they’re guessing about future behavior or trying to appear consistent or rational.

Insight 3: Real signals come from real behavior

Instead of asking people what they think, Huberman recommends watching what they do.

“One of my favorite ways to test the market is just to talk to people. See if they’re intrigued. Do they lean in? Do they want to know more?”

Beyond anecdotal conversations, he looks at behavioral data through metrics like ad engagement, site visits, purchases, and referral rates. These are signals rooted in actual interest, not theoretical intent.

“If they’re converting faster, if they’re telling others, that tells me there’s demand.”

Insight 4: Founders often fall into their own survey trap

Surveys aren’t the only source of false validation. Founders themselves can become the worst focus group.

“The biggest mistake I see? Using yourself as a case study and thinking ‘I like this, so everyone else will.’ You’re a sample size of one.”

Even without surveys, it’s easy to project personal preferences onto the market. That’s why Huberman emphasizes external reaction, and not internal conviction alone, as the true test of demand.

Insight 5: If brands that created new categories had run surveys, they might never have launched

“Why would I want a fitness band without a screen? That’s what most people would’ve said. But WHOOP proved that what they really cared about was fitness tracking and long battery life.”

Surveys reflect existing expectations, not unconscious needs. Instead of catering to what users said they wanted, WHOOP identified and solved a need that users didn’t even know they had. The brand challenged the assumption that screens were essential and customers only realized the product’s benefits after experiencing it.

Products like WHOOP reveal the limitations of opinion-led research when entering uncharted territory. People can’t desire what they haven’t imagined. That’s why category creators must resist the urge to validate every idea with a focus group. 

Instead, they need to prototype, launch, and learn in-market because real insights often emerge only through behavior, not surveys.

‍

The real signal isn’t what they say, it’s what they do

Huberman challenges the assumption that surveys are the best way to validate innovation. Customers often can’t articulate what they want, especially if it doesn’t exist yet. Real demand shows up in their behavior through engagement, curiosity, and conversions. 

But to truly observe those signals, you need the right environment and tools to capture them.

If you’re creating a new product or category, chances are, you’re already driving traffic to your site (through social, email, or paid channels) to see if it resonates. But if you can’t tell you who those curious visitors are, what they did, or whether they showed signs of interest, you’re flying blind.

That’s where Tie comes in.

Tie is an identity resolution and data enrichment platform that helps brands identify anonymous site visitors and build complete, intent-rich profiles that go far beyond basic demographics.

It equips your site to capture not just what users do, but who’s doing it, so you can follow up, personalize, and learn faster from real behavior.

Book a demo to see how Tie helps you turn anonymous interest into actionable demand insights.