New is not always better

Editor's note: Naomi R. Henderson is CEO of RIVA Market Research, Bethesda, Md. She is also a member of the Qualitative Research Consultants Association (QRCA).

Qualitative research tools have been around for centuries. Cavemen probably had a focus group to decide alternative uses of the wheel by asking: "What is the value of a wheel and how can we use it best?" Caesar used a qualitative line of questioning when he asked his open-ended question: "Et tu, Brutus?" Shakespeare asked: "What is the quality of mercy?" These kinds of questions lead to a discussion of POBAs - perceptions, opinions, beliefs and attitudes - the four corners of qualitative research.

Focus groups, the premier interviewing model in qualitative market research (QLMR), involve writing screeners, recruiting, booking facilities, moderating groups and writing reports. All these tasks are 20th century innovations. Early focus groups in the U.S. were conducted in the 1930s and legend has it that the first clients to buy the service were soap and car manufacturers. Dr. Richard Merton's book The Focused Interview was first released in the 1940s and an updated edition was released in 1994. It still serves as the standard textbook for the principles that govern the qualitative research model.

Most of the same QLMR elements that were present in the 1930s are still true today: two-hour timeframe; one moderator with good skills; paid respondents; and a research setting conducive to a good discussion.

These days, new models such as large groups (more than 12 respondents) or mini-groups (four to six respondents) or dyads and triads are used to collect data. New group sizes have timelines that run from 30-minute sessions to all-day events and are custom tailored to fit an increasing set of client needs.

  • What is still true in all qualitative research is the need for a line of questions designed to get respondents to open up and share their beliefs, their attitudes, their thinking, and their reactions to a wide range of client-driven options about products, services and ideas.
  • What is still true of qualitative research is a desire to get the best data possible from respondents so that the data can be accurately projected.
  • What is still true is that researchers talk to real people and translate the findings into action reports so clients can make more informed decisions.
  • What is still true is that the imperfect science of asking questions of strangers helps clients understand more than top-of-mind behaviors of the very people who eventually buy or don't buy what clients have to offer.

Dazzling array

There is a dazzling array of new technologies that are available for researchers. The business world is fueled by the speed of computers, software, fax machines, and presentation graphics. The Internet provides incredible opportunities for primary and secondary research. The research world experiments with hand-held devices for respondents to tally answers right in the group, blurring the line between qualitative and quantitative research. On-line focus groups bring the Delphi technique up to a new level. Faster and faster report cycles for clients who want the findings instantly are possible with and laptops and e-mail. With all this speed and technology it is easy to keep thinking that the best research project is one that uses the newest tools.

But, as we will explore, the best research tools are not always the newest ones. While the spotlight will be on focus groups, the reader can make applications to the other QLMR models in use today.

In qualitative research, there are nifty tools available to moderators like laddering, picture sorts and role playing opportunities. There are drawing exercises, projective techniques, sentence completions and worksheets aimed at getting below top-of-mind responses.

There are other tools like "sharing pairs," in which respondents work in teams and look for solutions. There are collage exercises, and the writing of product obituaries. Respondents can pretend to be members of an advisory board or a board of directors. They can use a light bulb or a magic marker or an ashtray as stimuli to see what those unrelated items could bring to a creative solution. They can use mind-mapping or hand-held recording devices to get private answers before public disclosures.

There is so much that a moderator can do. It is possible to use the full two hours of a traditional focus group just setting up tasks, giving directions and making sure respondents are doing what you asked!

It is very seductive to keep looking for "more, better and different" tools to go deeper with respondents or get them to "confess" early and often and to share what they are really thinking or feeling. Sometimes moderators ask me: "Do you know any tools or techniques that will help me get more information faster?" There may be a nifty little tool or technique to do so, but that's just what it is: a nifty little thing, like a Band-Aid. Maybe researchers really want to know if there is an MRI machine to look deep into the minds/hearts of respondents to get the needed data.

There is no QLMR MRI machine. What is available is the opportunity to build a moderator toolbox of simple, ordinary techniques that create this environment:

  • trust between moderator and respondents;
  • respect for what respondents have to say;
  • a steady pace to keep discussion moving along;
  • a variety of simple activities that hold interest ; and
  • a method of asking questions that do not lead the witness.

Trust

The easiest way to create trust in focus groups is to meet the respondents as early as possible. One way is to go to the waiting room and just say, "I'm the moderator for the group with the blue name cards. We are going to be starting in a few minutes, the hostess will let you know when. I promise you'll be out on time." Next, greet them at the door with a handshake and a simple generic statement: "Welcome to the discussion on cars" (or cold medicines, or the next election). After all are seated, restate the purpose of the discussion, give all disclosures (mikes, mirrors, observers, etc.) and clear, simple ground rules for participation. Ask quick, easy, self-introduction questions, introduce yourself and start the group with a question that anyone can answer.

Respect

One of the most seductive things in communication is to have a listener who really listens! A good moderator or interviewer who asks a question and really, really listens, while looking at respondents, gets a lot more data than one who asks questions and looks away while respondents are talking! That is called "listener interruptus," and like the phrase it copies, it is not very satisfying! When moderators or interviewers show true, active listening skills - listening without judging - respondents are motivated to say more, to divulge deeper and deeper levels of information. It is an addictive process: The more the moderator listens, the more respondents talk. The more respondents talk, the more they want to share beyond top-of-mind responses. The "doorway" into that respect is good, clear questions and good listening skills.

Steady pace

A boring focus group is one that jerks along in fits and starts - some good questions and probes and some poor questions and limited probes. Another contributor to a poor focus group is a moderator who doesn't vary the pace of the discussion, using the "I ask...you answer." model. A good focus group has a slow build - from foreplay to climax and then time for a cigarette afterwards! The flow moves from easy to more difficult questions and from activities that are low-risk to those with a higher risk. A good ground rule for moderators is to vary the process about every 20 minutes. Since groups last about 100 minutes out of a possible 120 minutes, that means just five changes of pace. One model to consider is shown in Figure 1.

Variety of simple activities that hold interest

The key obstacle in focus groups is using a 60-year-old model of a two-hour session and fitting in everything that a client wants! A 1937 client probably wanted to cover two to three key issues. A 1999 client wants five or six issues covered! With the added charge of keeping the pace moving, keeping respondents interested and getting the data, there is a need for simple activities to meet those client needs.

Here are some that are quick and easy and support the process of discussion:

1. Ask short questions to get long answers.

2. Occasionally stand and ask questions from a different place in the room to create a different atmosphere, and to infuse energy into the room.

3. Ask questions that access different models of listening on the part of respondents (those that process data visually, auditorily and kinesthetically).

4. Provide written instructions for worksheets or detailed activities.

5. When asking for lists (e.g., "What are the factors you consider when buying a car?") use the 10-finger "verbal countdown" method rather than charting on the easel.

6. Use sleeved items or other show-and-tell items to make the abstract real (e.g., "Here are some brands of dishwashers [show names]. Which one is the gold medal standard for the industry?" Each brand - GE, Whirlpool, Maytag, KitchenAid and Kenmore - is typed in 40-point type and inserted in a plastic sleeve.)

7. Use the easel to draw graphics to forward the conversation, to act as stimuli to get below top-of-mind responses. Some easy ones include drawing a stick figure and asking respondents to "Tell me about the heavy user of NutraSweet. What is that person like? A man or woman? Over or under 40? Works or stays at home? Has what kinds of shoes in their closets?" etc. Another one is to draw a circle with arrows leading to it with a key word or phrase in the middle like "old age" and ask questions like "What comes to mind when you think of this phrase?"

Asking questions that do not lead the witness

Moderators and interviewers are always pressed for time and an easy default is to drop into helping respondents by asking questions that lead them to the answer categories you're seeking. Avoid putting part of the answer you want in the question you ask. For example, DON'T ASK, "What are some reasons you grocery shop on your way home? Is it because it is convenient or time-saving?" Just ask, "When do you grocery shop and what are some reasons for that time frame?"

Some other classic questions that illustrate the concept of leading respondents:

A. You like sports utility vehicles, right?

Alternate: What do you like about SUV's and what don't you like?

B. Do you ever go to the grocery store in the middle of the night?

Alternate: What time of day is your usual time for shopping?

PROBE: What is the latest or earliest you have ever shopped?

C. It is quieter in grocery stores late at night, isn't it?

Alternate: How is late-night grocery shopping different from daytime grocery shopping?

Keep questions open and keep them "true questions," defined as questions to which the asker doesn't already have the answer!

Make the grade

It is fine to use a new technique or approach in QLMR as long as those techniques are not games to play on respondents to stroke the ego of a moderator or to impress a client. New techniques that meet the following criteria are probably good candidates to make the grade as a new tool in a moderator's toolbox:

1. The technique has a clear purpose and a defined outcome.

2. The task allows respondents to participate in a way that does not demean or belittle them or their experiences.

3. The task is conducted by a trained and experienced moderator who has practiced the technique, before using it in an actual group, and by a researcher who understands the principles on which the technique is built.

4. The technique moves understanding about consumer behavior to a new and deeper level.

Some of the newer techniques have been borrowed from other disciplines. In the hands of inexperienced researchers, who lack knowledge about the fundamental principles or paradigms on which the technique is built, these techniques can bomb. In the quest for "new, different, and better," qualitative researchers may erroneously place emphasis on the technique rather than the outcome produced.