Dr. Sarah Müller | s.mueller@ipi.de www.ipi.de Seite 21 | GOR12 | ipi Institute für Produkt-Markt-Forschung | www.ipi.de

1. Dr. Martin Zuber
Market research online community
(MROC) versus focus group

2. Agenda for GOR12 in Mannheim - 2012-03-07
1. Company Profile an Research Background
2. Research Questions and Study Design
3. Results
4. Summary and Recommendation for future research
Seite 2 | GOR12 | ipi Institute für Produkt-Markt-Forschung | www.ipi.de

3. 1. Company Profile and Research
Background

4. Many competences from one source
Full-Service Market Objective product
Research in testing including
Germany, Europe and product application in
beyond physical labs
Market
Research Product Lab
Foundation Foundation
1984 as MM-Research 2 competence centers 1971 as Institut für
Employees 2 perspectives Produktforschung und
16 Market researchers: Information
Psychologists, social, 1 aim
Employees
political and economical 18 Product researchers:
scientists Engineers, physicists,
We provide solid information sources for product household scientists
managers, developers,
marketing managers and consumer organizations
Seite 4 | GOR12 | ipi Institute für Produkt-Markt-Forschung | www.ipi.de

5. Branches of Business
Personal Care
Kitchen Technology Leisure/Outdoor
products
Consumer
Electronics
Domestic engineering
Children’s
products
Seite 5 | GOR12 | ipi Institute für Produkt-Markt-Forschung | www.ipi.de

6. Focus Group or MROC – qualitative research
Seite 6 | GOR12 | ipi Institute für Produkt-Markt-Forschung | www.ipi.de

7. 2. Research Questions and Study
Design

8. Research Questions
Which of the two methods is the most
effective, concerning two aspects:
1. The amount of information
…better stimulate the test persons to reveal as much
as possible information?
2. The collection of individual opinions
…better stimulate the test persons to reveal individual
opinions?
Seite 8 | GOR12 | ipi Institute für Produkt-Markt-Forschung | www.ipi.de

9. Literatur Review
1. Regarding the amount of information Lamnek (2005) found
out that online groups reveal more information because
differences between introverted and extroverted personalities
are leveled.
2. Erdogan (2001) suggests that individual opinions should
better provided in online groups as participants are not exposed
to any pressure of conformity. In focus groups people tend to
converge their opinions due to the pressure of conformity of the
attending group.
Seite 9 | GOR12 | ipi Institute für Produkt-Markt-Forschung | www.ipi.de

10. Study Design
• 4 closed MROC groups and 4 • The time for discussions in the
focus groups online groups was 2 weeks
• Every group consisted of six • Timeframes based on internal
participants and one moderator experience
• The focus groups discussions • Comparability not guaranteed
took 1 hour
Issue of discussions: The influence of the value “sustainability” on
the purchase intention of consumers
Every group discussion (online and offline) focused on a different
industry sector: clothing, cosmetics, food products and hardware
for personal hygiene
Seite 10 | Projektnummer X1234567 | Muster-Projektname | Kunde Mustermann ipi Institute für Produkt-Markt-Forschung | www.ipi.de

11. Online Focus Group or MROC?
Poynter (2010, 111): “When review online qualitative research many researchers
draw a major distinction between synchronous and asynchronous approaches.[…]
[…]
The first online qualitative technique that arrived on the scene was the introduction
of email groups, which was an asynchronous technique but only occasionally
used. The next was the development of a synchronous technique, the online focus
group. This was followed by the asynchronous bulletin board group, which in
many ways was the forerunner of the online research community (also known as
an MROC).”
Seite 11 | GOR12 | ipi Institute für Produkt-Markt-Forschung | www.ipi.de

12. 3. Results

13. Amount of Information - Analysis
MROC Focus group
Order_of_speeking
Seite 13 | GOR12 | ipi Institute für Produkt-Markt-Forschung | www.ipi.de

14. Amount of Information - Analysis
Means of the number of spoken or written
words per test person Mean for all
spoken words by
the test persons in
MROCs focus groups
the focus groups:
1087
593
782 806
717 738
667 Means for all
589 570 written words by
449 the test persons in
345 375
the online groups:
165 622
Lamnek
Most 1 Most 2 Most 3 Most 4 Most 5 Most 6
(2005)?
Seite 14 | GOR12 | ipi Institute für Produkt-Markt-Forschung | www.ipi.de

15. Amount of Information - Conclusion
The amount of information is slightly bigger in the online
groups, but in general is the outcome similar.
In the focus groups the In the online groups the
number of spoken words per written words per test person
test persons is quite equal. are very different.
 Influence of the  Lower influence of the
moderator, who balances moderator in an online
the discussion enviroment.
Seite 15 | GOR12 | ipi Institute für Produkt-Markt-Forschung | www.ipi.de

16. Individual Opinions - Analysis
Used method -> guided interviews -> consisted on the following four
parts:
1. Common buying behavior
2. The importance of sustainability regarding the buying behavior
3. The perceived effort of the manufacturers to incorporate
sustainability
4. The credibility of these activities
Analysis -> Evaluation of different attitudes and opinions -> to get
different pattern of behavior and thought
Second research question -> Comparison of the discoverd
diversity of pattern of behaviour and thoughts -> regarding online
or offline methods
Seite 16 | GOR12 | ipi Institute für Produkt-Markt-Forschung | www.ipi.de

17. Individual Opinions - Conclusion
• No big differences in the diversity of different pattern of behavior
and thought regarding the online or offline groups
• Mostly the same outcome regarding online and offline methods
Erdogan
(2001)?
 Reason:
The discussed topic is not delicate at all.
People do not need to converge their opinions to give
socially desirable answers.
Seite 17 | Projektnummer X1234567 | Muster-Projektname | Kunde Mustermann ipi Institute für Produkt-Markt-Forschung | www.ipi.de

18. 4. Summary and Recommendation
for future research

19. Summary - Results
No big differences between the two methods regarding the amount
of information and the evaluation of different opinions.
Disadvantages of MROC
• Online groups are more difficult
to balance by the moderator
• The general effort to moderate
- an online group is bigger than to
moderate a focus group
• The benefits of MROC did not
show to advantage in this
research project
Seite 19 | GOR12 | ipi Institute für Produkt-Markt-Forschung | www.ipi.de

20. Recommendation for future research
To benefit from MROC just work with this method on research
projects with the following characteristics:
• Research projects on delicate issues
• National or international projects
• Home Use Tests – Usage Diaries
• Explorative questions without guided
interviews
Seite 20 | GOR12 | ipi Institute für Produkt-Markt-Forschung | www.ipi.de

21. Thank you for your kind
attention!
ipi Institute für Tel. +49 711 931815-217 Project Manger
Produkt-Markt-Forschung Fax +49 711 931815-199 Dr. Martin Zuber | m.zuber@ipi.de
Neckarstraße 155
D-70190 Stuttgart
Germany