Boots-on-the-Ground Country Research
Visit a market and triangulate policy, business, and investor evidence
- Difficulty
- Moderate
- Time to result
- ~weeks to results
- Steps
- 6
- Confidence
- 94%
The method starts with conventional desk research and then uses an in-country visit to concentrate attention and test the emerging thesis. During the visit, the researcher triangulates top-down evidence from policymakers, government officials, and central bankers with bottom-up evidence from CEOs, investors, and other market participants. Direct observation supplies small but decision-relevant details that formal reports frequently omit. Afterward, the researcher compares field evidence with prior assumptions, records contradictions, and updates the country assessment. The output is not merely a travel impression; it is a more grounded investment thesis built from policy, corporate, market, and observational evidence. Repeated visits to strategically important countries make it possible to detect changes that one-time research may miss.
Origin
Sharma developed this approach through roughly twenty years of visiting about one country per month, with repeated trips to major markets such as China and India. Extracted from Masters in Business.
Core principles
- 01Direct observation sharpens attention and reveals overlooked details.
- 02Country research should span both top-down and bottom-up evidence.
- 03Multiple stakeholder groups expose gaps between policy and reality.
- 04Desk research prepares the visit but does not replace it.
How to run it
- 1
Build a Desk-Based Thesis
Review the country's economy, politics, markets, companies, and current risks before traveling. Write down assumptions that can be tested on location.
Pro tip Turn broad impressions into explicit questions for each stakeholder group.
Watch out Do not arrive with a conclusion that you are only trying to confirm.
- 2
Gather Top-Down Evidence
Meet policymakers, government officials, and central-bank representatives. Test official priorities, constraints, and the likelihood that announced reforms will actually be implemented.
Pro tip Ask different officials the same core questions to identify inconsistencies.
Watch out Official accounts may understate implementation problems.
- 3
Gather Bottom-Up Evidence
Speak with company executives about demand, investment, labor, regulation, and financing. Compare corporate experience with the official economic narrative.
Pro tip Include businesses of different sizes and sectors when possible.
Watch out Large listed companies may not represent the broader economy.
- 4
Test Market Sentiment
Meet local investors and other market participants to understand positioning, expectations, and practical execution constraints. Identify where consensus differs from the data.
Pro tip Ask what would make participants change their minds.
Watch out Sentiment can be informative without being correct.
- 5
Observe the Unreported Details
Pay attention to infrastructure, commercial activity, consumer behavior, and visible institutional friction. Record details that would not appear in a standard research report.
Pro tip Keep contemporaneous notes rather than relying on memory after the trip.
Watch out A vivid observation is still anecdotal and must be triangulated.
- 6
Revise the Thesis
Compare the collected evidence with the original assumptions and identify confirmed, rejected, and unresolved claims. Update the investment view and specify what should be monitored next.
Pro tip Preserve disconfirming evidence in the final write-up.
Watch out Do not generalize from one visit without considering regional and temporal variation.
In the wild
A researcher can read extensively about the Philippines without becoming deeply engaged with its realities. Visiting the country, meeting officials, executives, and investors, and observing local conditions focuses the inquiry and exposes details that desk research misses.
→ The resulting country thesis incorporates both formal indicators and grounded local evidence.
Sharma repeatedly returned to China and India rather than treating an initial visit as permanently definitive. Recurring fieldwork allowed him to compare current conditions with prior observations as policies, debt, companies, and sentiment changed.
→ Repeated visits support earlier recognition of structural changes and thesis deterioration.
Common mistakes
Treating Travel as Tourism
A visit adds little unless it is organized around explicit questions, varied stakeholder meetings, and post-trip synthesis.
Listening Only to Officials
A top-down account can miss how policy affects companies, investors, and ordinary commercial activity.
Overweighting Vivid Anecdotes
Memorable observations should challenge or refine data, not replace systematic evidence.
Is it for you?
Best for
It is best for investors and operators making consequential decisions about unfamiliar countries.
Not ideal for
It is not ideal for low-stakes screening where travel costs exceed the value of the decision.
From the transcript
“when you're on the ground, it focuses your mind like never before.”
“you end up always picking up little details about that country which you wouldn't have if you were just doing an office in a dry…”
From the episode
Interview With Ruchir Sharma: Masters in Business (Audio)
Ruchir Sharma