Be true to your school
Editor's note: Molly Turner-Lammers is vice president of Fieldwork Seattle, a Kirkland, Wash., research firm.
As qualitative researchers, we believe that deep-seated perceptions have an impact on human behavior. It is, quite simply, what our profession is about – getting beyond the surface to the core of what motivates people. We do face-to-face research because we know that body language and facial cues are important to these discoveries. What a respondent says can mean different things depending upon their inflection and non-verbal cues.
But qualitative researchers must also be businesspeople, and in the business world, technology has often replaced face-to-face interaction in the name of efficiency. Telecommuting, videostreaming, virtual conferencing, e-mail ... these and others have replaced much of the face-to-face communication of the business world.
In many cases, the efficiency these technologies have brought has done nothing to diminish the quality of business operations. But for the qualitative researcher, technology presents a problem. How do we preserve the integrity of face-to-face research and still utilize the efficiencies of technology?
Here are some things you can do to utilize the benefits of technology without sacrificing your qualitative researcher soul.
Use online groups for difficult recruits or faraway markets. Online groups – those where respondents use Webcams and meet in a virtual facility – have improved with the current sophisticated software but are still not ideal for reading respondent non-verbal cues. Moderators also say that, compared to in-person groups, it’s not as easy to create group rapport and show materials in online forums. Clark Murray from Churchill Group, a New Canaan, Conn., research firm, adds, “One of our big things here at Churchill Group is having respondents do what we call ‘get up and move’ exercises where they get out of their seats and interact with stimulus, pick things up, physically sort them, etc. We’ve learned this helps keep respondents engaged and their energy levels high. Obviously, a disadvantage of virtual groups is that the respondents are pretty much limited to sitting on their tails looking into a Webcam and that has a risk of fostering passivity and reduced attention.”
However, if you need to talk to a group of people with a rare disease, or cattle ranchers across three states, this may be the only way to go. For example, Mark Stinson of ad agency GSW Worldwide wanted to talk to a group of hospital laboratory directors. “We wanted to have focus groups to compare experiences,” he says, “but could not have facilitated a group in any one city due to the competitive nature of the hospital labs. The Webcams allowed us to have face-to-face interactions with a national sample. I can bring together participants from literally all over the world for two hours – when it would be inconceivable to schedule or budget that otherwise.”
Virtual groups can also cut down on travel costs for a study requiring far-flung markets. If you are going coast-to-coast or further for a project and have limited time and/or funds, utilizing online groups for some markets and face-to-face for others can reduce costs without sacrificing the nuances that face-to-face work reveals.
Offer videostreaming for viewers. All reputable qualitative facilities offer videostreaming services, allowing viewers to watch the groups/interviews live on their computers from anywhere. Convince your penny-pinching clients that if anyone should stay at home and utilize modern communication technology to save money, it should be them. Easy for me to say, I know. But in the end, they are paying you to be the expert in analysis. Point out that debriefing online is a lot easier than conducting a group online.
Prime the pump with online chats. One or two online discussions prior to face-to-face groups can make a drastic difference within a group. Online chatting, in all of its forms, has become so prevalent that many people are now more comfortable talking to strangers online than they are face-to-face. Respondents who feel they “know” each other online are apt to be more candid once they get together in a group. In the best cases, the respondents will be excited about meeting each other and more likely to show. If you do end up with a “conversation killer” or some other undesirable in the group, at least you will know ahead of time and have the opportunity to get rid of that person prior to the face-to-face.
Get the homework up front. Digital cameras and scanners are now common household items, so why not use that to your advantage? Have the homework sent to you electronically prior to the groups. You can make sure everyone does it and you can use the homework to inform your discussion. Added bonus: people who send the homework ahead of time are more likely to show up. People who don’t send it on time (or tech-challenged participants who send a picture of their hand instead of the product being researched, etc.) can be replaced.
Simplify your electronic algorithms so they don’t kill your efficiency. More and more researchers are utilizing technology to screen respondents with computer-driven algorithms. Algorithms are sorting schemes used to divide consumers into various groups based on how they answer a series of questions. For example, when it comes to cleaning the house, are you someone who abhors any kind of clutter and cleans constantly? Or someone who runs around and picks up just before guests arrive? Are you happy with the type of cleaner you are or do you wish you were more tidy or less obsessive-compulsive?
Figuring out someone’s consumer profile prior to groups can be very valuable in the research process. But when algorithms become long and complex, implementing the process becomes inefficient at the recruiting level.
Because algorithm questions typically involve highly specific combinations of personal habits or attitudes, it’s difficult for a recruiting facility to target the people they need. Indeed, facilities are often in the dark regarding what the profiles represent. Algorithms frequently involve 20 or more questions and the programs spit out obscure profile names like “Perpetual Purist” or “Esoteric Egotist.”
Facilities like the challenge of finding the hard-to-find respondent. (I swear it’s true. I work in a recruiting room every day.) We brainstorm about how to find and attract that specific person. Technology has made this process more efficient for us on the whole. If we know that we are trying to find someone who is super tidy when it comes to cleaning the house, we might search our database for certain occupations. Event planners and hospital administrators require high levels of organizational skills. We might look for people with dust allergies. We might focus on households with no kids. But we can’t begin to target a “Perpetual Purist” in our database or online or on the street. All we can do is mindlessly run people through the program and cross our fingers. The result is, we have to screen a lot more people to complete a recruit. Consider this: A long algorithm often adds 10 minutes or more to the screening process and “a lot of people” times 10 minutes means beaucoup hours of work someone (probably you) has to pay for.
I’ll note here that keeping the algorithm simple may do more than just help recruiting efficiency. We have noticed that when we re-ask a long series of algorithm questions, people are likely to change their responses slightly. Sometimes those changes don’t make a difference in which profile comes up but sometimes it does.
If you are going to use long algorithms (despite my pleas), allow for a batch approach. One way facilities have used technology to improve efficiency is through online prescreening. Respondents fill out some key screening questions online – either the algorithm itself or precursors to it. Then we call only those who qualify per the prescreen. Putting the algorithm questions online can save time on the phone but most algorithm programs only allow for one respondent entry at a time. The data entry process is still laborious. The best tools allow us to enter a batch of responses via an Excel form. It increases the efficiency dramatically and clients get their “Purists” at non-Purist costs.
Use the data from online prescreening to inform your research. Online prescreening is an enormous time-saver for certain types of recruits, particularly difficult recruits where one or two specs knock out the vast majority of the population. So this technology can help get that recruit done but there’s an added benefit to researchers that’s rarely utilized: Online prescreens create quantitative data in an electronic format that’s easy to analyze. This data is much more informative than your typical “term and tally” that facilities generate. In particular it can give you insight into the variances between markets.
Let’s say you are looking for adults who play XYZ video game frequently. Tampa gets the recruit done with no problems. Seattle is struggling. No one seems to play that game. Seattle sends you the online prescreen data (without respondent names or contact info on it of course). You notice that in the clustered question asking which games they play, the majority play a competitor’s game that is very similar to XYZ (one that no one plays in Tampa). Why? I don’t know. Let’s add a group of “competitors” and find out!