facilitating focus groups ebook - babelfishgroup.com focus groups ebook.pdfappearing in stephen...

http://www.babelfishgroup.com

Facilitating

Focus Groups

Facilitated and written by: Andrew Rixon PhD

Illustrations by Simon Kneebone


Contents

Our philosophy on learning facilitation ................................................................................................... 3

History of Focus Groups .......................................................................................................................... 4

Styles of Focus Groups ............................................................................................................................ 5

What are the key elements of a focus group? ........................................................................................ 7

Common uses for Focus Groups ............................................................................................................. 8

Common Design steps for Focus Groups ................................................................................................ 9

Uncommon Design steps for Focus Groups .......................................................................................... 10

On Questions ......................................................................................................................................... 13

Types of Questions ............................................................................................................................ 13

Strategies for Questioning................................................................................................................. 14

Making sense of the Data ...................................................................................................................... 15

On Validity and Rigour ........................................................................................................................... 16

Convergent Interviewing and the Dialectic Data Engine....................................................................... 17

Focussed Conversations through ORID ................................................................................................. 18

Facilitator Hot Spots and Tricky Bits ...................................................................................................... 19

General Notes........................................................................................................................................ 21

About the Author .................................................................................................................................. 23


Our philosophy on learning facilitation

Appearing in Stephen Hawking's 1988 book “A Brief History of Time” there is the story of:

“A well-known scientist (some say it was Bertrand Russell) once gave a public lecture on

astronomy. He described how the earth orbits around the sun and how the sun, in turn,

orbits around the center of a vast collection of stars called our galaxy. At the end of the

lecture, a little old lady at the back of the room got up and said: "What you have told us is

rubbish. The world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant tortoise." The

scientist gave a superior smile before replying, "What is the tortoise standing on?" "You're

very clever, young man, very clever," said the old lady. "But it's turtles all the way down!"

Similarly, the common solar system model for learning the skills of facilitation is that there are skills,

which are informed by theories which are impacted in-the-moment by the values that you as a

facilitator have. In a somewhat counter view we believe that there are skills and models which

inform the learning, doing and being of facilitation and that these skills and models go all the way

down….


History of Focus Groups

There have been three main areas of historical contribution to how Focus Groups are conducted.

1. Sociology and Social Psychology

Here the focus is on the individual rather than the group as a unit of analysis.

The sociological and social psychology perspectives have seen focus groups used to explore group

behaviour topics such as decision making, leadership, social power and productivity. An uptake of

focus group research was seen around exploring the effectiveness and persuasiveness of a particular

communication, and in particular this saw a branch of work emerging within the radio research and

broadcasting industry.

2. Clinical Psychology

Here the emphasis is on interactive group discussions and activities.

Saw examples as early as Jacob Moreno in the 1930’s, with his psychodrama and play therapy.

Generally uses more indirect ways of asking questions. The interactions among participants in

clinicial group therapy facilitates individuals’ treatment processes

3. Marketing Research

The successful use of focus groups in evaluating the WWII morale and training films chartered by

Robert Merton were widely picked up by industry. Examples saw the use of focus groups to explore

the design of products and services as well as obtaining consumers’ perceptions of prices, brands

etc.

The application of focus groups to marketing research appears widely and well known.

For further reading see:

Stewart, D., Shamdasani, P., and Rook, D. (2007). Focus Groups- Theory and Practice 2nd

Edition.

Sage Publications.


Styles of Focus Groups

Based on the history of focus groups, a tension can be identified as to the different styles of

conducting focus groups.

What style do you naturally gravitate towards? What style would be a stretch for you?


What would be the advantages and disadvantages with the:

A. Sociological/Social Psychological style?

B. Clinical Psychology/Psychotherapeutic style?


What are the key elements of a focus group?

1. Focus groups have a focus

2. Group Interactions: Use of group rather than individuals to allow observations of how and

why individuals accept or reject other’s ideas etc.

3. In-Depth Data

Incremental answers that go beyond the level of surface explanation. There has been a

suggestion of decline in ‘in-depth data’ from focus groups probably because:

a. A tendency to include too many questions

b. A tendency to use exclusively direct questions and verbal responses to them. In

contradiction to the findings of recent neuroscientific research that concludes the vast

majority of human thought is visual, metaphorical and emotional, and resides deeply in

neurological substrata. Access to these mental zones typically requires more subtle,

indirect approaches to asking questions, and it suggests and validates the value of using

non-verbal techniques that involve visualisations or role-playing (see Zaltman 2003).

4. Humanistic Interview: Emphasis on meaning as opposed to measurement

For futher reading see:

Zaltman, G. (2003). How customers think. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Krueger, R. (1998). Moderating Focus Groups-Focus Group Kit 4. Sage Publications.


Common uses for Focus Groups

Some of the common uses for focus groups include but are not limited to:

1. Obtaining general information about a topic of interest

2. Stimulating new ideas and creative concepts

3. Diagnosing the potential for problems with a new program, service or product

4. Interpreting previously obtained quantitative/qualitative results

5. Learning how respondents talk about a topic of interest

6. Generating impressions of products, programs, services, institutions or other objects of

interest

What are some specific application areas you’re looking to apply Focus Groups too?


Common Design steps for Focus Groups

The most commonly known steps in the design of focus groups are:

1. Problem definition / Formulation of the research question

2. Identification of sampling frame – Preparation of the invitation

3. Designing the interview guide

4. Conducting the focus group

5. Next steps including analysis, interpretation, report writing, decision making and action


Uncommon Design steps for Focus Groups

Based on our experience, here are three areas of tension that can impact the design and facilitation

of focus groups.

Based on your current experience and facilitation style, what choices in design (and action) do you

tend to make? How would you decide on adaptation based on the group, project and client?


What relationships are there between the three ‘slider-bars’ of “facilitating the group dynamic”,

“content and focus” and “questioning” ?


Chris Argyris has discussed the notion of Espoused theory versus Theory in action. That is, the

difference between what people say they do and what they actually do. How can we be mindful of

this gap in the design of focus groups?


On Questions

Types of Questions

There are many different types of questions:

1. Leading Questions: Moving toward deeper meaning and discussion

2. Testing Questions: Testing the limits of a concept or statement

3. Steering Questions: Moving the direction of a discussion

4. Obtuse Questions: Allowing a slight change in direction by backing the discussion off by 1

level of abstraction

5. “Feel” Questions: Touching on how people feel and their emotional responses and

interpretations

6. Anonymous Questions: Getting a group talking. About anything. (Eg. Picking a card and then

inviting participants to talk about it)

7. Silence: Often it is simple silence which is most revealing

What other types of questions can you think of?


Strategies for Questioning

Here are three strategies for Questioning.

A. The Funnel Approach – Begin broad and become narrow : Strength- Gives time to warm

participants up for the specifics

B. The Inverted Funnel Approach – Begin narrow and become broad: Strength- Motivates

participants to talk more freely

C. The Quintamensional Design Approach (Gallup 1947). This is a 5 step approach with

questions designed to elicit:

1. The degree of awareness

2. Uninfluenced attitudes

3. Specific attitudes

4. Reasons for these attitudes

5. Intensity of these attitudes

What other strategies can you think of?

For further reading see:

Strachan, D. (2007). Making Questions Work- A Guide to How and What to Ask for Facilitators,

Consultants, Managers, Coaches, and Educators. Jossey-Bass.


Making sense of the Data

After having worked through all the elements of designing the focus group, and then running the

focus group, there is the final element of ‘making sense of the data’. This could see the focus group

outcomes being written up in a report, or further analysis to get to decision making and actioning.

Here are some common approaches to making sense of the data:

1. Issue Order – Looking at the occurrence of issues elicited within the focus group

2. Issue Absence – What issues weren’t brought up? Why?

3. Time spent on an issue

4. Intensity of expression

5. Participatory Analysis – Running another focus group with the purpose being to ‘analyse’

and ‘make sense of the data’


On Validity and Rigour

Drawn from Bob Dick’s exploration of validity:

http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/arp/sofsys2.html

Most conventional research methods gain their rigour by control, standardisation, objectivity, and

the use of numerical and statistical procedures. This sacrifices flexibility during a given experiment --

if you change the procedure in mid-stream you don't know what you are doing to the odds that your

results occurred by chance.

In action research, standardisation defeats the purpose. The virtue of action research is its

responsiveness. It is what allows you to turn unpromising beginnings into effective endings. It is

what allows you to improve both action and research outcomes through a process of iteration. As in

many numerical procedures, repeated cycles allow you to converge on an appropriate conclusion.

The validity of any assertions that experimental science makes depends on evidence and arguments

that support the universality of its results. This is usually done by reducing the variables which they

study to those that they can manipulate or measure, preferably under controlled conditions, to

establish evidence of strong causal links. The variables that they can treat this way may or may not

be the important ones in a specific situation. It is left to those applying the knowledge to adjust it to

local circumstances. Experimental science chooses to mount arguments about universal principles

at the expense, if necessary, of arguments for specific usefulness.

The validity of any assertions that ethnography makes depends on evidence and arguments that

support the accuracy of the explanation of a complex social situation. This is usually done by

interviewing a wide range of people in that situation and attempting not to interpret the data but to

allow patterns of behaviour to emerge from the interview data. The trade off can be at the expense

of comparing between groups or comparing the data with some existing theory to add to the body

of knowledge about human behaviour in general. Action research aims primarily to achieve action

and understanding in one complex social situation at the same time -- action to inform the

understanding which informs the action. There is a secondary interest in gaining knowledge about

human nature in general and methods for exploring it.


Convergent Interviewing and the Dialectic Data Engine

Drawn from Bob Dick’s writing on convergent interviewing and his paper “What can action

researchers learn from Grounded Theorists”. For more see

http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/arp/iview.html

http://uqconnect.net/~zzbdick/dlitt/DLitt_P60andgt.pdf

The essence of the process that sits within Bob Dick’s approach of convergent interviewing and using

the Dialectic Data engine is to:

Observe “emerging” data…

Is there Agreement?

Probe for exceptions…

Is there Disagreement?

Prove for explanations…

Observe “emerging” data…

In grounded theory the theory emerges from the process of constant comparison. The ‘engine’

which drives the process can be viewed as a set of decision rules:

Compare a data set (for instance a set of interview notes) to another dataset, or (after early

interviews) to the emergent theory.

Note the overlaps between interviews (or between interview and emergent theory). These overlaps

will consist of agreements and disagreements. An agreement is where both sets mention a topic

and do so compatibly, for example ‘teamwork needs improvement’.

A disagreement occurs when both mention the same topic but in ways which are not compatible.

Both may mention teamwork, for example; one may identify it as needing improvement, and the

other as a strength of the team.

Where there is agreement probe for exceptions. This may occur in the same interview, or in the next

interview. Note that the exceptions, when provided, then constitute a disagreement.

Where there is disagreement probe for explanations. ‘Some say teamwork is good. Others say it

requires attention. Help me to understand how this difference arises.’

The process can be viewed as a dialectic which uses the apparent disagreement to generate

agreement at a deeper level.

Focussed Conversations th

ORID is a powerful model for holding a focussed conversation and also structuring experiential

debriefs.

The Objective step draws out the facts about the experience or event. The group recalls information

and details that re-create the event

Eg. “What did we just do in this activity? What did you notice?”

The Reflective step allows the group to acknowledge feelings and emotions around the event or

experience.

Eg. “How did it make you feel?”

The Interpretive step invites participants to consider the meaning and value of the event or

experience with regards to the significance for the group, allowing members to put the event into

perspective and determine it’s impact.

Eg. “How is this important for

group?”

The Decisional step invites the group to decide what decisions are necessary or what actions are

required.

Eg. “What might you do differently already as a result?”

For further reading see: “Winning through participation: Meeting the challenge of corporate change

with the Technology of Participation, The Group Facilitation Methods of the Institute of Cultural

Affairs, Laura J. Spencer”


Focussed Conversations through ORID

holding a focussed conversation and also structuring experiential

bjective step draws out the facts about the experience or event. The group recalls information

create the event so that it’s clear in everyone’s memory.

Eg. “What did we just do in this activity? What did you notice?”

eflective step allows the group to acknowledge feelings and emotions around the event or

Eg. “How did it make you feel?”

nterpretive step invites participants to consider the meaning and value of the event or


perspective and determine it’s impact.

Eg. “How is this important for you as a group? What are some things we have learnt as a

ecisional step invites the group to decide what decisions are necessary or what actions are

Eg. “What might you do differently already as a result?”

Winning through participation: Meeting the challenge of corporate change


holding a focussed conversation and also structuring experiential

bjective step draws out the facts about the experience or event. The group recalls information

eflective step allows the group to acknowledge feelings and emotions around the event or

nterpretive step invites participants to consider the meaning and value of the event or


you as a group? What are some things we have learnt as a

ecisional step invites the group to decide what decisions are necessary or what actions are

Winning through participation: Meeting the challenge of corporate change



Facilitator Hot Spots and Tricky Bits

What are some hot spots and tricky bits that you would like to explore in your work and interactions

with groups?


Gems, nuggets and learnings?


General Notes


About the Author

With one of the first PhDs in Complex Systems and Complexity Science

from the University of Queensland completed in June 1999, Andrew had the

opportunity to move to Boston and work for a management think tank

applying complexity insights to the world of organisations.

The founder and director of the boutique management consulting company

Babel Fish Group, Andrew works as a professional facilitator and change

consultant and has experience in working with organisations both within

Australia and internationally, in the USA, the Netherlands and the UK.

Andrew brings a spirited dynamic presence as a professional speaker, change consultant and

workshop leader. Principled, innovative and resourceful, Andrew enjoys living in Melbourne

with his wife Sascha and dog George. Andrew can be contacted by email at

[email protected].

facilitating focus groups ebook - babelfishgroup.com focus groups ebook.pdfappearing in stephen...

Documents