Editor's Note: Rusty Clowes and Diane Guise are principals of The Clowes Partnership, a Richfield, Conn., qualitative research firm.

Fact or fiction: every focus group has at least one bully, a respondent whose sole objective is to dominate the group and to browbeat fellow respondents into submitting to his or her point of view. It's a fact. At least, many marketers believe it is. They firmly believe that focus group bullies are commonplace and that they influence group findings.

While we don't deny they exist, the bully's presence is not a normal, every-group event, nor are group findings typically skewed by them. This myth of regular bully attendance in focus groups has been perpetuated for a variety of reasons and from a variety of perspectives. It's important to understand the reasons for the myth and the differing perspectives.

A bully or not

First, let's define a bully. A focus group bully is an individual who tries to monopolize the group and force his opinions on the group as the only correct or acceptable ones. The bully will use almost any means to achieve dominance, even intimidation and ridicule. Left unchecked, this behavior is disruptive and destructive to the group.

Care must be taken, though, because the person you think is a bully may not be. The articulate respondent who garners group attention (and sometimes consensus) through persuasive reasoning and insight is not a bully. While at times overly enthusiastic, the articulate respondent is a positive influence upon the group. In fact, most screeners include open-ended and multiple choice questions designed to find these articulate respondents. After all, it is through the open interchange of thoughts and the resulting cross fertilization of ideas (in part generated by these articulate respondents) that we glean some of the most valuable group findings.

A bully excuse

For observers behind the mirror, focus groups can be a terribly unsettling experience. It's not enjoyable to watch and listen as respondents berate your product, concept, advertising or company. Often, observers react to this by responding to a specific group based on the input of one or two respondents rather than the input of the entire group.

If the input from an articulate respondent is negative, the charge of a "bully at work" can provide an excuse for dismissing group findings. In this scenario, the supposed bully is accused of monopolizing the group and directing its output.

In addition, changes of opinion that occur during the group are often cited as evidence of a bully at work, a reason to be suspicious of the group as a whole. However, these changes should be regarded as a learning opportunity. What triggered the change in feelings? Has a product or concept weakness been uncovered?

Of course, when the input is positive, the would-be bully is transformed into an eloquent respondent who captures and reflects the thoughts of the entire group. Naturally, in a perfect world observers would maintain an open ear and listen equally to all respondents. But this isn't a perfect world; selective listening does occur. Furthermore, selective listening skews group findings and can truly obscure real issues.

The bully fighter

Experienced moderators all have reliable techniques to help bring the potential bully in line as a productive - and sometimes even articulate - respondent. It is always tempting to dismiss an apparent bully (figuratively and literally) early in the group. However, such an early public dismissal can have a chilling effect on the participation of other group members. A little patience (and faith in your moderator) can often turn this seemingly unmanageable respondent into a useful group member.

The bully issue usually can be avoided by establishing group ground rules early on:

  • There are no right or wrong answers.
  • We expect to hear from all respondents.
  • We want all to feel free to agree or disagree.
  • We are not looking for a consensus.

And yes, as a last resort, the real bully who blatantly and consistently ignores these ground rules can be summoned out of the room for a "phone call" and simply not return.

The next time you're behind the one-way mirror and think you spot a bully in your group, ask yourself:

  •  Is this a real bully or the articulate respondent we have screened for?
  • Have negative responses and/or changes in opinion uncovered a weakness in the product or concept?
  • Is there really a bully in my group is it my bully excuse?