Q. I’ve seen Focus Groups where one respondent pontificates, is disruptive or just butts in and keeps talking through the whole session. What do you do when you get someone like this in a Focus Group?

A. First, I try not to get anyone like that in a Focus Group! I work with recruiters to screen out people who seem particularly difficult and bothersome. I also watch and listen to the respondents in the waiting area before the Focus Group begins to see if anyone shows disruptive signs there. If they do, I don’t use them in the group.

A few people do slip by all that screening and make it into a Focus Group. They talk too much, act aggressively and/or interrupt others. There are, however, a few techniques that can help mitigate their effect:

• The moderator can directly address the problem — “Thank you for your input, Joe. Now let’s hear from some of the others in the group. Vicki, what do you think?”

• Having already heard from Joe, the moderator can refuse to recognize him (ignore that hand waving in the air). She can refuse to look directly at him and, if things don’t improve, can hold her hand up in the classic “halt” sign while continuing to carry on a conversation with others in the group. Since this doesn’t happen until “Joe” has clearly become a problem, the other members of the group are often glad to see the moderator taking corrective action and are helpful in the process (they ignore him, too).

• As a last resort, the moderator can stand behind Joe. Most people will not talk to someone standing directly behind them. The other members of the group will look at the moderator over Joe’s head. They aren’t “available” to him either.

• Finally, if Joe is one of those people (and there aren’t many) who keeps on talking in this situation, the moderator can put her hands on his shoulders. That will usually stop anyone.

(Hint — these techniques can work in your own business meetings, too!)

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

Q. What is the most difficult situation you have ever had in a group? What did you do?

A. The last time I sent a mailer I commented on dealing with difficult respondents – people who talk too much or try to “hijack” the group. Several of you followed up asking what other unexpected situations can occur in Focus Groups – and how they might be handled. Here are a few that stand out over the last 20 years or so:

• A respondent announced in the introductions that he knew a lot about our topic of discussion since his wife was the business manager of a specialty medical practice (the client’s main competitor). He had lied to our recruiters (twice), telling them he had no family or friends in the field. I got up, talking and smiling the whole time, pulled back his chair, took his arm and walked him out the door, cheerily explaining that he was “too much of an expert” to participate in this group. Because it was early in the session and done quickly and in a pleasant way, the group wasn’t adversely affected.

• The Focus Group was made up of pre-teens. One of the young men was the “class clown,” trying to attract attention. I used all of the usual (adult) techniques to shut him down – but they didn’t work with Andy! He wanted to impress those girls, who were ignoring him more than I was. Finally, he took several coffee creamers in little cups from the refreshment table – and opened and drank them, one after the other. This got the attention of the girls, who were pointing and shrieking. I called an intermission. During intermission, Andy was dismissed and sent home. When we reconvened, I was afraid the other kids wouldn’t talk since I was “mean” to Andy. It turned out they were relieved to see him go, too!

• One of the respondents was apparently coming down from drugs. He paced, sat on the back of his chair, put ice on his head and rubbed it around and scratched his skin constantly. Though this was really distracting, it didn’t start until 20 minutes or so into the group and I didn’t think I could get him out of there quickly or easily without sacrificing the rest of the session. So after I was sure he wasn’t ill, I basically ignored him – and after a few minutes, so did the rest of the respondents.

Do you have a comment or question – or a Focus Group Story to share? Send it to me for future FAQs!

Q. What kinds of things can we find out in Focus Group Discussions that we might not find out in other ways?

A. The first thing that comes to my mind is that you can use Focus Groups for a very basic check — to determine whether the overall concept of the product or service is appealing to consumers.

Wine Example* – An international company was purchasing wine from various small winemakers in another country (not well-known for its wines) for sale in the United States. The company hired US wine specialists to work with the foreign winemakers to explain US tastes and wine-purchasing behavior to them. The winemakers then used this information to tailor their wines to the American market – though the wines were still made from the same grapes in the same wineries using the same handmade processes.

The international company had decided to market the wines as being “developed by US wine specialists and made by traditional methods in (other country).”

When some of the wines were tested in Focus Groups in the United States the respondents found them interesting and were anxious to purchase them. HOWEVER, when they heard the positioning statement they reacted very negatively.

A large part of their interest in these wines was because they were from small winemakers in a “developing” wine area. They saw themselves as leaders and innovators among their friends if they purchased these wines. The last thing they wanted to hear was that they had been “developed by US wine specialists.” The story of the small winemakers and the new winemaking region were the basis of the appeal of the wine for them.

With this knowledge the import company was able to develop packaging and marketing materials that emphasized the country and the small winemakers. They continued to use the wine specialists (the taste of the wine was still important), but did not mention this aspect in the marketing.

*This example has been altered to disguise the actual client and product class.

Do you have a comment or question – or a Focus Group Story to share? Send it for future FAQs!

Q. Can we do Focus Groups with our employees? How can we get them to tell us what we need to know?

A. This is one of those “Yes and No” answers. Yes, Employee Focus Groups can be very useful in a number of situations. But no, they won’t take the place of consumer Focus Groups. And they can’t be done in the same way.

My clients have had success with Employee Focus Groups that were:

• About strictly employee issues. I have conducted employee Focus Groups on subjects which included benefits, internal communications, new plans, goals and initiatives. Significant information has been explored in these sessions that did not come up at the companies (or that did not come up where management could hear it).
• Product screenings. Discussions of employee concerns about delivering existing and new products/services. And discussions of employee ideas related to/inspired by these concerns.
• Consumer communications reviews. The employees know what they can and can’t do and many interact with consumers every day. Hearing from them can help control company over- (or, interestingly, under-) promising in advertising and marketing. Employee input is also often sought in developing communication campaigns.

Employee Focus Groups are a whole different animal from consumer and business-to- business groups – the same rules just don’t apply. And there are some new ones you need to know. Let me know if you want me to send:

• Employee Focus Group How To’s — and How Not To’s
• Empowered and Secure: Employee Focus Group Case Histories

Just call or e-mail me at the address/phone below and tell me which one/s you want!

Q. How can we use research to help us develop our advertising?

A. Qualitative research has traditionally been used either to surface ideas for advertising or to check for “red flags” in finished/nearly finished work. But recently I worked with some clients who had (from research) come up with three rough concepts for possible development. They wanted to know which of the three was best – and why!

Restaurant Case Study* — The restaurant group and their advertising agency had used the results from their strong research program (regular customer satisfaction surveys and focus groups on specific areas of concern) to come up with three possible campaigns:

• The restaurant group liked one (a “warm and fuzzy” branding campaign)
• The agency liked a different one (more hi-tech with the latest graphics and effects)
• There was a third one that both thought was pretty good – but it didn’t have a real champion.

Because there were elements that had to be seen, and because the concepts were in rough form that required some explanation, Focus Groups were used to test the campaigns.

Groups were held with recent customers and potential customers. To everyone’s surprise (mine, too, this doesn’t happen very often in ad testing) all of the group participants strongly preferred one campaign over the other two.

Have you guessed? It was the third campaign. Respondents liked it because they believed it showed what a restaurant really DOES for you, and showed it in an interesting light. They thought the warm and fuzzy campaign was “pretty” but not really about a restaurant at all. They thought the graphics and effects of the second campaign were great, but they didn’t “get” why a restaurant would want to use them when they detracted from the message.

The restaurant group and agency listened to their customers and developed the third campaign. Not only has it been very successful for them in terms of sales but their employees liked it as much as their customers did! (And as a bonus, the campaign has won a number of marketing awards).

*This example has been altered to disguise the actual client and product class.

Q. What’s New in Research?

A. More than you might think! And most of it relates to technology.

In qualitative research, we can now do group discussions on-line. The on-line sessions can be in the form of:

• a “chat” with the facilitator posting questions and each respondent answering them as his or her time allows (usually over a pre-specified period). In this format all of the respondents can see what the facilitator has to say – but whether they see what all the other respondents say is up to the client and the facilitator.

• a more “classic” group plan with everyone reading the questions and responding in the same 1.5 to 2 hour time frame. In this format, all of the respondents usually can see what the others are responding in addition to what the facilitator asks.

The latest in on-line research discussions is web camera discussions. For these, the respondents must either have a web cam or be sent one to use for the discussion. They can see the facilitator and the facilitator can see them as the discussion goes forward.

Q. Last time you talked about what’s new in Qualitative Research. Is there anything new in Quantitative?

A. Nothing completely new, but on-line surveys continue to become more sophisticated and easier to conduct for the user while also becoming less difficult to participate in for respondents.

The two types of on-line surveys I have done include:

• Known Respondent Surveys. If you have a list of known (and opted-in) e-mail addresses from customers, subscribers or employees, for example, you can survey them electronically. They are usually sent an e-mail from your company that contains a link to your survey. Drawback – Anonymity of the survey sponsor isn’t possible.
• Panel surveys. Many companies have panels of qualified respondents who will participate in surveys. These are people who have agreed to answer most surveys that are sent to them and who have provided a great deal of information about themselves, their buying habits, etc. to the company. Many very specific panels are available, as are “general population” panels. You can choose, for example, to only send your survey to people who have bought similar products, live in certain parts of the country, have a certain number or age of children, etc. There are also many professional panels (doctors, dentist, architects, engineers, etc.). Sponsor anonymity is possible in this type of study. Drawback – Using some of these panels can be pretty expensive.