This being our annual qualitative research issue, I thought it apropos to write about a consulting firm that's putting a different spin on the classic focus group. Boston-based Creative Realities is stretching the boundaries of focus group procedures - some might even say it's committing research heresy.

Creative Realities is a consulting firm that specializes in helping firms with process management, innovation and brainstorming. As part of that work the firm does a kind of qualitative research it calls "customer co-labs." Customer co-labs are similar to focus groups except they're longer and - here's the heretical part - the clients sit in the room with the respondents and moderator.

Now it's not unheard of for clients to sit in on focus groups, either as passive observers or active questioners. When researching hi-tech products, for example, sometimes a company engineer or product rep has to sit in to help the moderator handle extremely technical questions.

But in most cases, having clients in the room is considered a no-no, mainly because their presence might influence respondent answers or otherwise taint the process.
 
Jim Terwilliger, senior consultant with Creative Realities, insists these fears have proven groundless. If - for any reason - the Creative Realities staff detects that respondents are being too generous in their answers or are bothered by the company in some way, they will probe further - "We will deal with it," Terwilliger asserts. They also try to simply eliminate the problem before it starts. When they introduce the clients and respondents, they tell the respondents to pretend they are part of a consulting team. "We tell them that some of the best learning comes from negatives, so don't be afraid to give us the negatives. We need that," says Terwilliger.

Respondents are recruited just as they would be for a focus group. Meetings are held in hotel suites or meeting rooms and occasionally focus group rooms. Terwilliger says the company tries to assemble client group members into an interdisciplinary team, which includes brand managers, research, marketing and sales people, or R&D folks.

"They each may have a different need in terms of clarification for action," Terwilliger says. "Being in the common within a given population. Ultimately, the decision to use group or individual interviews rests on a combination of practical and theoretical considerations. Issues like the sensitivity of the topic or proprietary information, type of respondents, geographic dispersion of respondents, sample size, timing and cost all have an impact. This data suggests that when the research objectives are to examine what "most consumers" think, and when peer influence is an issue, focus groups are the best means to observe and understand responses.


References

Goldman, A.E., and McDonald, S.S. (1987). The Group Depth Interview. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall.

Greenbaum, T. (1988). The Practical Handbook and Guide to Focus Group Research. Boston: DC Heath.

McQuarrie,  E.F., and Mclntyre, S.H (1988). "Conceptual underpinnings for the use of group interviews in consumer research." Advances in Consumer Research, 15,580-586.

McQuarrie,  E.F., and Mclntyre, S.H. (1990). "What the group interview can contribute to research on consumer phenomenology." In E.G. Hirshman (Ed.), Research in consumer behavior. Vol. 4, 165-194. Greenwich, Conn.: JAI Press.