From the perspective of an economist in a private basic and applied research firm, this article examines the evolving structure of social science research firms that contribute to the theoretical and empirical literature on measuring the nation’s well-being. A distinction is made between the terms consultant and research firm in the context of historical and contemporary research practices. Visible examples and possible implications of new structural arrangements within the research industry are provided, including ethical standards. It is argued that social science research—no longer conducted in the monastic tradition—is dynamic and competitive, yielding significant contributions to our knowledge about basic and applied research techniques.

The structure of work and workplaces transformed at an accelerating rate throughout the 20th century. Modern firms are experimenting with flexible employment arrangements, telecommuting, virtual workplaces, team-based performance reviews, the unbundling of compensation packages, self-insurance health systems, Internet-based communication strategies, outsourcing, and the absence of secretaries. These and other innovations affect the nature of employment arrangements as well as how and where work is performed. Nowhere are these changes more evident than in the social science research industry, where not only employees and employers but also the entire structure of the market are affected. As a result, this article argues, basic and applied research practices have become more efficient and competitive. Creative and dynamic social science methodologies are unfolding, and rigorous empirical research is increasingly accessible and relevant to sponsoring organizations, practitioners, policy makers, foundations, and citizens interested in the nation’s social and economic well-being.

The article begins with a brief history of the social science research industry and then identifies key innovations in the structure of the social science research industry of the 1990s. A distinction is made between the terms consultant and research firm. The second section provides examples of how the research craft is impacted by the restructuring of the industry and the demand for practical, straightforward analysis by public and private organizations. Issues considered include the decentralization of knowledge, contracting requirements, the structure of work, and accountability for research products. The third section reviews some of the contributions to knowledge being made through the advent of new analytical tools and participatory workplaces. The fourth section considers implications for practice regarding competition, pricing of research projects, and taxes. The article leaves the reader with a greater appreciation for what the industrial changes portend for creative research, employment opportunities, and scientific advancements in empirical social science research.