1. A Client’s Guide: Optimizing Focus
Group Productivity
H. William Moore and Company
2. Introduction
I have observed over two thousand focus group sessions,
either in front of the mirror as a moderator or behind the
mirror as a client. I have witnessed group sessions that
resulted in creative epiphanies. I have also been present at
group sessions that turned out to be unmitigated disasters.
Drawing on this experience, the following presentation
outlines client-directed suggestions for optimizing focus
group productivity.
Bill Moore
H. William Moore and Company
3. How Focus Groups Can Go Wrong!
• Flawed research objectives
• Deficient moderator/project fit
• Inadequate moderator briefing
• Substandard respondent recruitment quality
• Inflexible discussion guide administration
• Subjective listening behavior
• Reluctance to occasionally break the rules
4. Write Clear Concise Research Objectives
• Carefully examine your written statement of research objectives
• Do your objectives include words like “measure” or “project”? If so,
you should be considering a quantitative research methodology.
• If you used words like “explore”, “investigate” or “identify” you are
on-track for focus group or other qualitative methodologies.
• Ask yourself how the research findings will be used. Try this
exercise: If I knew _____, I could _______.
• The more closely you can define the outcome you want, the more
likely your research supplier will be able to deliver it.
• If you can’t limit yourself to a single objective, priorize your
information needs into primary and secondary objectives.
• Circulate your research objectives to the key stakeholders in your
organization. Is everyone on the same page?
5. Moderator Selection Criteria
• Experience: How many focus groups has the moderator
conducted? In what client industries?
• Marketing Acumen: Does the moderator have a thorough
understanding of the practical aspects of marketing?
• Communication Skills: Ask for a face-to-face meeting with a new
moderator. Is the moderator a good listener?
• Problem Solving Capability: Does the moderator understand your
marketing situation and research objectives? Is the moderator’s
research proposal unique to your situation or is it boilerplate? Does
the moderator offer creative solutions for your information needs?
6. Moderator Selection Criteria continued
• Dedication/Involvement: Will the moderator remain personally
involved in all aspects of your project? Who else will be involved?
Who will perform the post session analysis and/or prepare the final
report?
• Multi-Tasking: An effective moderator will be fast on his/her feet.
Group moderation requires simultaneous activity on multiple levels
such as: following the discussion guide, listening to the responses,
probing for additional information, conjuring new opportunistic lines
of follow-up, keeping all respondents involved, dealing with difficult
panelists and managing stimuli like concept boards, etc.
7. Briefing Sessions
• Don’t wait to the last minute to brief your moderator. In fact, the
ideal time for briefing research suppliers would be at the proposal
request phase.
• I don’t believe you can over-brief a moderator, unless you wait until
the last moment.
• There will be a significant return on your time investment for in-
depth briefings. Detailed pre-session briefings should minimize the
need for the disruptive passing of notes to the moderator while a
session is in progress.
• Be willing to share prior research, marketing plans or any other
relevant information. If this background information is sensitive, get
your moderator to sign a non-disclosure agreement.
8. Respondent Recruitment
• Explicit respondent recruitment objectives should be incorporated
into the overall study objectives.
• Don’t skimp on respondent coop payments. Rely on local facility
recommendations.
• Limit the screening interview to ten minutes. Keep the questions
simple with simple response scales. Ask questions that minimize
respondent “guessing” their behavior patterns. Avoid screening
criteria that relies on the screener’s subjective judgment, with the
exception of “articulation” questions.
• Allow two weeks for an effective respondent recruitment period;
longer for low incidence or complex screening.
• Consider using reputable national interviewing service firms
specializing in focus group recruitment.
• Always rescreen respondents
9. Discussion Guides
• The operative word in the term Discussion Guide is guide!
• A thoroughly briefed moderator should be given the freedom and
flexibility to opportunistically switch the sequence of questioning
and also ask new, unanticipated, extemporaneous questions.
• Rather than waiting until the final moments of the group sessions,
schedule a mid-session mini-briefing with the moderator to discuss
interview adjustments.
• Don’t data dump the discussion guide with items unrelated to your
primary research objectives. Each group session panelists’ fair
share of “air times” is about 10 minutes. Do you want superficial
insight on multiple issues or in-depth feedback on your primary
objective?
10. Objective Listening
• In a typical round of focus groups you are going to find “naysayers”
and “yea-sayer's”.
• The naysayers are the people who take extra pains to see the
negative side of everything. They are masters at pointing out flaws.
• The yea-sayer's are motivated to please the moderator, attempting
to respond with the “right” or expected answer.
• Both respondent types are to be valued. Don’t ignore the naysayer,
they can provide the insight to improve or refine ideas and
concepts.
• It may be helpful to identify the naysayer and yea-sayer “outliers”
and focus separately on the panelists who fall in between.
11. Breaking The Rules
• Rule #1: Focus groups are best conducted at dedicated research
facilities.
– Not necessarily. Non-traditional focus group settings can
inspire creativity and trigger reality based responses.
– We have successfully conducted group interviews in retail
stores, at trade shows, at jobsites, on cruise ships and in
respondents’ homes, i.e., “social network parties”.
• Rule #2: Keep clients behind the mirror.
– In some instances, particularly dealing with technical
subjects, panelists get annoyed when moderators repeatedly
answer questions with: What do you think the answer is? The
presence of a technical professional can enhance the outcome
of these sessions. However, the moderator has to stay in
control, i.e., Lets ask the expert for that information.
12. Breaking The Rules continued
• Rule #3: Never describe the nature of the research to panelists in
advance of the group sessions.
– In most cases it is desirable to minimize the risk of recently
recruited respondents doing “homework” on a suggested or
inferred research topic prior to the group discussion.
– In some instances, pre-session homework assignments can
enhance the quality of group session discussions. Examples:
• In-home use with new product prototypes
• Scavenger hunts to purchase merchandise from competing retailers
• Professional tradesmen bringing specified tools to the sessions
• Mini photo albums of home decoration projects
13. Breaking The Rules continued
• Rule #4: Never collect quantitative data in focus group sessions.
– Asking respondents to use pencil and pads to record initial
reactions is a common focus group practice. Why not extend
this approach to self administered questions with response
scales?
– A conflict between the scalar “data” and the follow-up
discussion points should serve as an analytic red-flag
warranting even greater in-depth review of the results.
– Consider replacing paper questionnaires with iPad or iPod
Touch devices. Moderators and client observers could see
scalar responses in real time, and tailor more effective follow-
up.
– Use extreme caution in disseminating same base sized
quantitative data collected in focus groups
