Q. I learned about qualitative and quantitative research back in college, so I think I know what they are. But I’m never sure which one to use. Can you help?

A. A little post-college review may help:

Qualitative research is done to reveal feelings and emotions connected with certain stimuli (using a particular product or service, seeing a particular ad or concept, etc.). Focus Group Discussions of various types, One on One Interviews (in person and telephone), Situational Interviews and Ideation Sessions are the most-used qualitative techniques.

Quantitative research is done to reveal behavior and/or descriptive information. Its purpose is to get some type of count — for example, size of target audience, average age of customers, etc. Surveys by telephone, mail and on the Internet are the most used quantitative methods.

Something you probably did not learn in college — there are many hybrid research projects, combining elements of both qualitative and quantitative research. They are usually done to get both feelings/emotions and counts. Done carefully, they can work well in certain circumstances. Examples would include Advertising Copy Testing, having respondents complete written surveys before or during Focus Group Discussions or asking for in-depth, open-end reactions (why do you say that?) on a mostly quantitative study.

Do you have a comment or a research-related question? Forward it to me for future FAQs!

Q. There are different types of Focus Groups? Tell me more.

A. I divide Focus Group Discussions into two types, although there is often some crossover:

Traditional Focus Groups – These are the more straightforward, question-oriented groups. Usually there is a “warm-up,” then the concept, idea, situation or product is presented to the group for their reaction. A neutral moderator who probes for issues of interest and follows up on interesting or relevant comments made by the participants guides all of this. The key factors to successful traditional groups are:

• Clearly defined research issues
• Experienced moderator who understands the issues at hand/decisions to be made
• Diligent recruiting

Projective Focus Groups – Projective Groups bear a resemblance to traditional Focus Group Discussions in that they are informal, subtly structured conversations on a specific subject lead by a neutral moderator. They differ in the methods used to explore thoughts and feelings about the subject, and in the emotional depth that can be reached using these methods. Projective Groups rely more on indirect questioning and strongly emphasize the interpretation of group input.

Some of the techniques that may be used in Projective Focus Groups include:

• Collage-building
• Brand personification
• Guided Journey
• Pictorial symbols

Projective Focus Groups are used extensively in exploring brand image and development of creative concepts for products/services and advertising. A few of the questions addressed in Projective Focus Groups have included:

• Is this the right name for the product?
• What feelings are evoked by our brand? By the competitor?
• What mood should our advertising and collateral material invoke?

Do you have a comment or research-related question? Send it to me for future FAQs!

Q. When do you use One-on-One Interviews instead of Focus Group Discussions?

A. One-on-One Interviews (often called “IDIs” or Individual Depth Interviews) can be more effective than Focus Groups in several situations:

• When you don’t want one or two group members to bias others — This is the reason IDIs are often used in advertising testing. In the “real world” people usually react to advertising individually, not in groups.
• When the subject is intimate — I have used IDIs to explore ideas about and emotional issues related to such subjects as cosmetic surgery and feminine hygiene products.
• When the subject is controversial or extremely provocative — When the subject is political, sexual or both, IDIs are the answer.
• When it would be difficult or impossible to gather together a qualified group of respondents — Sometimes clients, particularly in business-to business applications, would love the give-and-take of Focus Group Discussions with their customers. But the people who would be qualified for such a group are scattered all over the country. In this situation, the interviewer goes to them one-on- one. These can sometimes be done by telephone.

There are a few cautionary notes in doing IDIs. These will be outlined in the next FAQ (#4).

Do you have a comment or research-related question? Send it to me for future FAQs!

Q. You said there are some times NOT to do Focus Groups or Individual Depth Interviews (IDI’s). Can you tell me more?

A. The majority of calls I get from prospective clients start out with “Let’s do some groups.” At least one-third of them wind up doing a different type of research after we spend some time talking about what they need to find out.

Why are Focus Groups and IDI’s so popular? They are a very visible, hands-on technique. Clients can be right there, see their customers and hear them react in person, tweak the questions (or the new product, ad, etc. being tested) between groups. For most marketers, this is much more exciting than reading a research printout.

But although Focus Groups and IDI’s can provide high-quality input for many marketing applications and decisions, there are situations in which they are not the “right thing” to do.

The most important is when numbers are needed. Focus Groups and IDI’s don’t provide any projectable numbers. So, if there are questions of demographics (what is the average age/income/education level/etc. of our customers?) or segment behavior (how many of our customers use liquid hand soap?), a different type of research needs to be explored.

Do you have a comment or research-related question? Send it to me for future FAQs!

Q. How do you test ad concepts in Focus Groups?

A.There are several ways to do this, depending mostly on how finished your ad concepts are.

I recently used Focus Group Discussions to test three possible campaigns for an existing product. Each of the campaigns had two executions, all fairly finished marker drawings. The purpose of the research was not to pick one of the three, but to generate as much learning as possible about what the three campaigns were communicating to the target audience — and how the target audience felt about what each of the ads said to them.

The six executions were shown to them one at a time, with respondents receiving a color copy of each one. Before saying anything aloud, they were asked to mark those elements that they liked and disliked on the ad itself (their own copy of it) and to answer a few written questions about the execution. After they had done this, the executions were discussed by the group.

The written exercise was included in order to allow each respondent to experience the ads on his/her own before there was “crowd comment” about them. If this isn’t done, those people who particularly like or dislike an execution can strongly affect the others whose opinions aren’t as quickly formed or strongly held. When each has committed their own thoughts and opinions to writing individually, the respondents are more likely to make their own individual opinions heard.

Do you have a comment or research-related question? Send it to me for future FAQs!

Q. Why can’t we just do this Focus Group in our conference room??

A. I have conducted groups all over — including at a kitchen table in a farmhouse outside of Chattanooga, school libraries in several Minnesota towns, a hospital doctors’ lounge and a barbecue restaurant in North Carolina.

But all of these were necessities. Given the opportunity to use a professional facility, I will go with it every time. Some of the reasons:

• Keeps the client confidential and respondents less biased — You can’t do this if it is in your conference room. And even if we were going to tell them in the group who the client is, the fact that they are actually on client premises may affect response.
• Provides less intrusive viewing opportunity — Unless your conference room has a two-way mirrored wall, it is hard to match this.
• Is less distracting to respondents — Focus Group facilities are designed to be neutral (wall colors, furniture, lighting, etc.). Your office probably is not.
• They do this every day — Professional Focus Group facilities are prepared for groups. They know how to greet them, keep them separate from clients and others, discreetly dismiss unqualified (”my wife couldn’t come so I came for her”) and non-sober (it happens more than you would think) respondents. They have audio and video equipment already set up and tested. They have those great mirrored walls…

Focus Groups done correctly look easy. Not until you decide to set them up on your own do you learn to appreciate what really goes into them at all levels.

Do you have a comment or research-related question? Send it to me for future FAQs!

Q. If you were research director in a company and had a limited budget, what kind of research would you do?

A. Since I have been writing mostly about Focus Group Discussions and qualitative research, my answer may surprise you. But in this situation, the first thing I would do is set up some type of quantitative Tracking Research.

I define Tracking Research as research that is conducted in a regular pattern (interviews every day, week, month or even several times a year at pre-planned times) with most of the questions remaining consistent and space reserved for a few “changing” questions.

The possible methodologies for Tracking Research are endless (you can do it by telephone, on the Internet, by mail, at random, with customers only, with customers and prospects, etc.) and depend on your information needs and just how limited your budget is.

Advantages of Tracking Research are clear:

• You can spot changes or trends early on because you are always monitoring your marketplace.
• You always have research in the field, so you will have information quickly about changes in the marketplace (if two competitors announce a merger, you are likely to have market reaction to it before they do).
• You are already in the field, so to add a few questions checking out a new product or strategy (your own or competitors’) is simple.
• You can budget for the whole year in advance and usually spread out payments throughout your budget year.

Do you have a comment or research-related question? Send it to me for future FAQs!

Q. What are the benefits of doing on-line testing and surveys?

A. On-line is a great methodology for some types of research, but to conduct a successful project, you need to pay special attention to certain aspects of the project:

Benefits

Immediacy of Response — It is usually possible to do the “field” part of an on-line study more quickly than a study of similar size done by telephone or mail.

Product Demonstration — You can “show” respondents a new product, concept, etc. in order to get their reactions. This can be a big advantage, impossible in telephone interviewing.

Price — Using e-mail to reach respondents may be less expensive than telephone or mail surveys.

Keys to Success

Sample — You must know respondent e-mail addresses and it is very important that all members of the respondent group have “opted in” to receive surveys via e-mail. I frequently use the pre-recruited e-mail panels put together by large field operations like Harris On-Line and NPD. These consist of groups of people who have been screened for demographics and behaviors and who have agreed to receive and respond to e-mailed surveys.

Simple — In e-mail studies more than any other, it is imperative that the questions be logical and easy to answer (correct choices, blanks, etc.). Design of the survey, including getting and keeping the attention of the respondent, is very important. That “delete” key is very handy for a frustrated survey-taker. They can easily just make the whole thing go away!

Do you have a comment or research-related question? Send it to me for future FAQs!

Q. Why does marketing research cost what it does

A. The highest cost in any research is data-gathering — which is as it should be. The old phrase “garbage in, garbage out” is never more true than in marketing research. You must ask the right people the right questions or the answers are useless, no matter how you analyze them!

The data-gathering cost is based on the difficulty of reaching the right respondents. Researchers usually want to know the “incidence” when developing costs. Incidence is the percentage of people in the population who fit your respondent specifications.

For example, if you want to conduct a study with respondents who have checking accounts at banks (80% incidence or higher in all U.S. markets), it will be much cheaper than one in which the respondents do their banking via the Internet (about 12-15% incidence, depending on the market).

In addition to the incidence figure, ease of access is key. Some groups are particularly difficult to reach. Among these are physicians and high level executives (their calls, mail, faxes, etc. are well-screened) as well as farmers and building contractors (they are out and away from their phones, mail, faxes, etc. most of the day). Easier access equals lower research costs.

Do you have a comment or research-related question? Send it to me for future FAQs!

Q. How do you decide what kind of people you want in a Focus Group?

A. There is only a very short window of time for Focus Group participants to become comfortable enough with one another to talk together easily. So, Focus Groups work best if the participants begin with something in common, almost always something related to the subject of the session.

The “common ground” chosen depends on the type of product/service being tested and the target audience. Respondents may be customers, former customers, users of a competitive product, potential purchasers, etc. They may all be from a specific demographic group (for example, all mothers of toddlers with $50,000 plus household income for Focus Groups on a relatively expensive childcare product) or even all from a specific part of town, if location is an issue.

Sometimes I’m asked to do a single group with, for example, “2 heavy users, 2 light users, 2 former users and 2 non-users.” This approach may sound efficient on paper, but what will we find out? What will be the common ground for the respondents? Will they be able to discuss the product/service completely and comfortably coming from all these different levels of experience?

You could liken it to getting 2 fans each of basketball, baseball, golf and hockey in a room and asking them to discuss sports. Everyone is coming from a different direction and they have little common ground. It is usually better to keep each group homogenous to some degree or you can wind up with an inexplicable jumble of ideas and opinions.

Next time — Now that you know who you want, how do you get those people to come to the group?

Do you have a comment or research-related question? Send it to me for future FAQs!