Focus groups: Kill or cure?

This immediately begs the question of whether we are talking about focus groups per se or bad focus groups. However let’s accept the idea that in the most rational iteration of the focus group – with a logically constructed topic guide and a series of questions that ask people naively what they do, think and feel – we might be missing a trick. I am sure that there is plenty of this kind of superficial qual happening (and we can also debate why this might be, e.g. the trend for over-loading groups), but does this mean that we need to kill focus groups to cure qual?

The behaviourist attack on ‘traditional’ research is not a new one, but the idea that consumers – that is, people – are somehow incapable of any self knowledge and that the only way to usefully understand them is by observing their authentic behaviour seems to be both patronising and lacking credibility. Qual research has, over the years, employed an impressive arsenal of tools and techniques aimed at getting beneath or beyond the superficial response. They can’t all be wrong can they?

So if we are talking about poorly executed, over-rational, superficial, answer-accepting focus groups, then we agree wholeheartedly with Walker’s wish to kill this practice; but we don’t necessarily believe this means dispensing with the focus group completely. Indeed we do not agree that the focus group is dead; rather, to paraphrase Frank Zappa, “it just smells funny”.

With the right approach, the focus group can be transformed into an experiential event that engages all participants (consumers and clients) at a higher level than the often somewhat passive group discussion typically has. Adding in a bit of theatre is a great place to start. This is what we have been doing at Engage – “experientialising” our groups with a mix of gamification, stage management and more thoughtful use of venues.

A good example of this is a piece of work conducted for a TV channel. We positioned the project as a viewer event rather than a research project, and built the experience around what the TV company could offer – its studios, the cameras, the presenters etc. It was still essentially a focus group, but with a twist.

Alternative venues can also be used to add an edge of excitement and “specialness” to a project by allowing client teams to mingle with respondents without the barrier of the focus group mirror, or by using a mix of good old-fashioned moderated discussions with a range of co-creation tasks, as well as questioning techniques that draw from education theory and classroom practice to engage with different communication styles.

“Aha”, I hear you say, “that’s no longer a focus group, it’s a workshop”. And yes, while we might use workshop techniques and structure sessions by a series of tasks, rather than using the classic funnelled discussion guide, the core of the focus group approach remains intact. It’s still about getting a group of consumers together to discuss a range of issues, to respond to stimuli, to reflect on their motivations, to share their experiences and debate attitudes.

The fact that research needs have evolved does not mean that we should have a great big qual bonfire of the vanities. There’s life in the focus group yet.