Qual Street

Dedication to the answer

Menu

Groups - what are they good for?

Groups - what are they good for?

Articles

I agree with so many of the criticisms levelled at group discussions, I’ve started to wonder should I ditch groups altogether?

So here’s some thinking on what’s wrong but then again what’s right with groups…

1. Seems Wrong…Exploring Behaviour

For example, asking people about what’s changed in their daily routines recently…

Wrong because:

  • You get unreliable answers – Behavioural Economists and Social Psychologists have really effectively demonstrated how little we know ourselves, how forgetful we are, how subtle our behaviours are too…
  • It’s unrepresentative – pick another six people on another day and you might get a totally different set of answers
  • Answers are likely to be shallow, because people aren’t always in tune with the fine details of their everyday lives (we don’t really monitor when we adopt new a recipe as part of our repertoire, for example)
  • Conclusion – there’s not much value in exploring behaviour in groups, unless it’s part of a warm-up

But… what about exploring experience – behaviour’s close cousin…?

I can really see the merits here. For me, qualitative research is about insight – and being able to get clients a close understanding of, and empathy for, their customer is what insight is about. So I think I’m comfortable exploring people’s experiences – how they feel about what they do, and what it’s like to be them. Obviously ethnography and depth interviews can deliver this really well (if not better than groups), but the benefits of the group dynamic, the spark that passes between one mind and another, can also deliver and reveal strong insight too.

2. Seems wrong…exploring social and political opinions

Wrong because:

  • Some people will withhold what they think: we have a particularly clear separation of public and private ‘faces’ when it comes to talking about how society runs/ should run (I think because we are being asked about our opinions on ‘group’ behaviour rather than individual or personal actions)
  • These kinds of discussions are also really likely to be influenced by ‘social proof’… (this is the concept that people who are uncertain what they think about something tend to (unconsciously) adopt the opinions of other people like them)
  • Conclusion – these kinds of groups would need to be handled with extreme care. Of course if we want to see social proof in action, to see how ‘influencers’ can spread ideas and opinions, then groups might be worthwhile

3. Is exploring reactions to… NPD/ brand propositions/ advertising ideas wrong?

This is the heartland of the focus group, but even here it does seem like there are some really clear challenges that need addressing:

  • Again, there’s the danger that people who don’t hold strong opinions will be affected by social proof – not knowing what they think until others with a stronger voice have an opinion
  • Poor comprehension, or lack of vision about an idea, can get in the way of reactions to the idea itself
  • Respondents can apply what I call ‘negative filters’ reacting against the language, visuals or descriptors of an idea, rather than the idea itself
  • Because we’re all ‘unreliable witnesses’ respondents are unlikely to know how they will react to something new or different in the ‘real world’ and therefore respondents can often unwittingly ‘rationalise’ reactions to an idea

It’s these challenges that do call into question the value of groups at all!

However, maybe through the muddle of the group discussion, we get to see via ‘social proof’, ‘miscomprehension’ ‘negative filters’ how an idea needs to be developed to be well expressed, motivating and compelling for consumers. Good qualitative research is all about knowing that these behaviours are going on, and interpreting what these kinds of responses mean.

Further, good moderating skills can side-step rationalised responses, and in analysis a good researcher will pay more attention to spontaneous, emotional, instinctive reactions to ideas too.

Lastly I am loathe to give up what groups offer that you don’t get from any other methodology, shared and social thinking, the sparking and clashing of ideas that can, on a good day, reveal so much.

Ultimately, groups give us the chance to see how others see ideas, how they feel about them and how share their thoughts about these ideas with one another.

Big Conclusion – Qualitative research isn’t perfect, or scientific, or a sure thing. It is just one way of delivering strategic thinking.

And so what are groups good for? They are one way we can access the ‘material’ from which this strategic thinking is created.

kath-handonheart

Kath Rhodes, Qual Street Owner

I love love learning and so I invest time and resources with Ambreen and Claire into exploring social psychology, neuro science, creativity and new techniques in research. Read all about it and help yourself to the ideas that will deliver your business the insight it needs

Latest tweet from the street

RT @KilbanePete : With the local elections sandwiched between two bank holidays and a coronation, many will be away on May 4th voting day. T…

@Qualstreet on 17 March 2023