Editor’s note: Naomi R. Henderson is founder and president of RIVA (Research In Values and Attitudes), a qualitative market research and training services company in Chevy Chase, Md. Henderson has 20 years of research experience, eight of which have been in market research, and has conducted more than 800 focus groups. She holds a B.A. and Masters degrees in education, is licensed as an NLP (Neurolinguistic Programming) Practitioner, and holds certificates of completion in survey research, group dynamics and psychology from George Washington University.
When the client-researcher relationship is more collegial than adversarial, the research purpose is more easily realized and the value of qualitative research techniques can be maximized. How does a researcher develop a mutually beneficial relationship with a client and minimize the problems?
Focus group projects pose a different set of problems than other types of research and those problems often stem from the short duration of the projects. The ideal project would be one in which qualitative researchers had eight weeks to prepare for the project and six weeks to write the final report. Most focus group projects take less than eight weeks from client request to delivery of the final report.
The benefits of focus group research is fast turnaround time and having clients attend live sessions with target market consumers.
This article is intended to provide some remedies for minimizing the problems of working in a high intensity, short timeline environment with a variety of clients in the focus group process.
Minimizing problems
Qualitative researchers have learned several techniques to minimize problems, some of which are practical and some philosophical:
1. Determine the purpose of the project at the first meeting.
Many times the "first client meeting" is on the phone rather than in person. However, that initial contact is critical. The client is in the "first flush" of interest and is in close contact with the driving factors for choosing qualitative research at this phase.
Many project problems can be minimized right away by finding out these issues in the first meeting:
- Background: Where does this research fit in?
- Intended outcomes: How will the data be used to support client decision making?
- Vision: What is the client's "picture" of what the groups will look like and what might they likely hear from respondents?
Once the researcher has the same "picture" of the research as the client, the clincher question can be asked: "What is the purpose of the research?"
Because of the timelines of qualitative market research, many clients haven't taken the time to write down a clear statement of purpose. Rather, they have a "working purpose" that forms the base for conversations and that working purpose often takes the form of assumptions.
Written purpose
The technique that is most effective in preventing problems with clients is to address the assumptions in conversations with the client team and to quickly formulate a written purpose and have it approved by the client. This seems like such a simple step; just write down the reason for the research. However, in practice it is not so simple. It requires the distillation of many points of view from the client team and there may be overt and covert agendas at work.
The difficulty in obtaining a clear purpose from a client team is a bit like asking a groom why he is getting married. There isn't just one purpose, there are multiple purposes. The trick is to find out which purpose is the "driving purpose."
To support the researcher in writing a clear statement of purpose, I have found this question to be effective: If you could only ask one question of the 10 respondents in the focus group, what would that question be?"
Based on the response and careful listening to the overt and covert agendas in the client conversation, a good researcher can develop a workable written purpose that the client can read and "own."
Some sample purposes that we've developed using that question resulted in purpose statements like the following:
- Determine consumer interest in prepackaged telecommunications services.
- Have target market members evaluate three different proposed print ads.
- Explore concept of beauty products based on family folklore from women in rural America.
- Obtain shopper reactions to new pantyhose display.
- Determine image of imported beer vs. domestic beer and occasions for use of each.
- Compare taste of spicy vs. non-spicy fried chicken and discover what words convey those features to consumers who eat chicken from fast food outlets.
Note the key words in these purpose statements: Determine interest, evaluate, explore, obtain reactions, determine image and compare taste. These "action words" are the clues to the driving purpose of the study. Within each purpose statement are other sub-purposes but with the driving purpose clearly stated, the sub? purposes can be woven into the moderator's guide.
"So that" phrase
In each of the purpose statements, there is also a missing phrase. That phrase would continue the sentence and start with "...so that..." It might end the sentence with "so that new advertising can be developed" or, "...so that product sales can be increased." The "so that" phrase is never written, just implied. It is usually part of the "hidden agenda" that is involved in the discussion with the client team. The term "hidden" is not intended to be a pejorative term. Rather, it is a term to point to that part of the client-researcher conversation that never seems to come to light because it is in the daily fabric of the client's work.
The "driving force" is a bit like a laser beam; it burns a clean hole wherever it is aimed. Problems on projects often arise when new ideas for the focus group research pop up midstream. The source may be new players on the client team or a new set of ideas from the ad agency. Regardless of the source, the study may start to stray away from the laser beam. When this happens, a researcher can ask the question:
"How does this new request relate to the purpose of the study?"
If the response is "on purpose to the purpose," it is appropriate to include it in the study. If not, the researcher is within rights to ask that the new ideas not be included.
2. Communicate regularly with the client.
The first "communication" with the client after the initial meeting should be a written letter proposal that contains the following information:
- Introduction. Overview of the research project under contract.
- Statement of purpose. Clear, short statement.
- Statement of intended outcomes. Clear, short statement that indicates how the research will be used.
- Study logistics. Schedule, number of groups, recruiting specifications, study sites and number of observers in each location.
- Moderator qualifications. Credentials, related experience.
- Description of study tasks (with timeline for completion).
- Outline of what issues will be covered in the guide.
- Project costs.
- "Next steps" section. Clear statement of what moderator will do and what client is expected to complete upon receipt of proposal.
- Summary and closure. After the proposal has been accepted and the purpose agreed upon, it is recommended that the researcher stay in close contact with the client and provide updates on the recruiting process and obtain reactions to the draft guide. On some projects this requires daily contact.
Our experience indicates that a primary source of client-related problems can be traced to poor communication. There is also a strong correlation between poor communication and the growth of assumptions. Regular communication (especially if there is bad news) reduces the possibility of a project going off-line and keeps all the parties moving along at the same pace with the same expectations.
A latter-day philosopher once indicated that an upset is composed of three elements: Undelivered communications, thwarted intentions and unrealized expectations. Researchers cannot do much about the latter two but they can do a great deal about the first one. The ground rule is to communicate all the news and communicate it regularly.
3. Tell the client the truth.
This technique falls in both realms, the practical and the philosophical. Everyone's mother has said: "Always tell the truth." It is never more necessary than in client relationships. Philosophically speaking, the reasons for lying boil down to these elements:
- Desire to be well thought of or liked by another.
- Desire to avoid looking stupid or foolish.
- Response to fear.
- Failure to deliver what was promised.
How to avoid lying in relationships, client or otherwise, goes beyond the scope of this article. However, we can share one technique that keeps the door open to truth telling with clients. Use this maxim: "An informed client is a supportive client." Without client support for a research project, problems are bound to multiply.
Recently, I worked on a project that involved focus groups with government decision-makers. Phase I of the project was with individuals who worked in civil agencies. In Phase II we were supposed to recruit individuals who worked with a specific military agency. As the recruiting process got under way, recruiters had an unusually high refusal rate from qualified respondents. We tried every possible way to recruit respondents and we kept hitting a stone wall. What we needed to do was tell the client the truth:
"We cannot deliver on our promise to recruit Phase II respondents and we will not be able to conduct the research you want. We'll have to refund the deposit you have paid us and we'll have to cancel the remainder of the study."
Talk about difficult communication! It meant loss of face, loss of money and failure to keep a promise. I stalled on making the phone call to the client as long as possible. But I remembered the maxim: "An informed client is a supportive client." When I called, the conversation was a lot shorter than I expected and the client said:
"We had a lot of doubts about Phase II and we're not surprised you've run into problems. I agree, let's cancel this phase. Just write up the results from Phase I and we'll look at some other options to garner the opinions from the military."
Yes, I had to return the deposit and yes, we lost money on this contract.
What we did win, however, was the respect of our client for telling the truth. They have referred us twice for other projects both within their division and outside.
4. Taking responsibility for the whole project.
Passing the buck is an old game that many of us have played in one form or another. With the short deadlines and the fast turnarounds that qualitative research requires, it is a deadly game and one that can lead to a series of escalating problems with clients.
Even though we are consultants to the client team, not employees, the most effective role for us to play is as if we were the senior decision-maker on the project, not just the implementer of the research phase.
When the moderator takes the position of being responsible for every portion of the study, not just the tasks and assignments outlined in the proposal, the project moves forward in the Gestalt mode: In the whole, not the parts. When one works only on "the parts," problems are sure to emerge in areas that are unknown.
A moderator's real role is that of project manager; managing the whole project and delegating tasks among all individuals working on the project. When the moderator holds this position, one can oversee all the tasks and the project functions.
Task delegation even comes down to telling the client what role they need to play in the research process. I can recall making statements like the following to client decision-makers:
"I'll need to have the issues memo by Friday so I can keep your project on schedule."
"My ground rules are not to accept any notes into the focus group for the first 45 minutes. Does that pose a problem with you?"
"There are too many disparate issue areas to cover in the two hours. If you want to have the taste test what can I drop?"
"The list of subscribers needs to be mailed via Federal Express no later than Thursday. Who on your staff will be responsible for doing that?"
"I recommend that we have a conference call one week before the groups with the agency and the brand manager for an update on the issues that will be covered in the groups and to read aloud the concepts to be tested."
If the moderator expects someone else to be responsible for the research tasks, we have abdicated our responsibility as researchers and become research lackeys for clients rather than consultants.
Check the list
It would be wrong to imply that we don't have problems with clients. Sometimes we momentarily forget our own techniques in the swirl of multiple projects or run into a personality type that drives us up the wall. However, before the problem can torpedo a project, we mentally check our list and ask ourselves these questions:
- Are we clear on the purpose of the project?
- Are we in regular communication with the client?
- Have we told the truth to ourselves? To the client?
- Have we passed the buck?
If the answers are "yes" for Nos. 1, 2, 3 and "no" for No. 4 and the problem still isn't solved, we agree that the problem is bigger than all of us.