Editor’s note: John J. Houlahan is founder and chairman of FocusVision Worldwide, Inc., Stamford, Conn.

Focus group research is the most widely used methodology in marketing research and increasing in usage every year. Yet in spite of demonstrated acceptance, focus groups in all their formats have lately become the most criticized and vilified form of research.

Trade reporters like to expose what “really goes on” in focus groups they have participated in or observed from behind a one-way mirror, believing they have uncovered a “big scoop” on the shabby, almost fraudulent practice of focus research. You hear speeches with titles such as “The Death of The Focus Group” from marketing consultants who find that focus groups impinge on their roles as unquestioned consumer gurus. Innovators of new services that might benefit from replacing traditional focus groups invariably start off by trash-talking about current practices.

Even those within the industry have their cautions. Well-meaning researchers acknowledge the potential benefits of focus groups but are quick to mention the “dangers.” Their warnings include concerns that naïve clients may jump to conclusions, see only what agrees with their preconceived notions, and be misled or mislead others. They remind us that qualitative research is not projectable and should never be tabulated. They note that respondents can lie intentionally or unintentionally, submit to peer pressure, or be dominated by an overbearing participant in the discussion.

Sometimes qualitative research is denigrated as “quick and dirty,” done only as a poor substitute for the rigor of a well-defined and well-executed quantitative project.

Despite all this, almost every marketing research budget includes qualitative research, including such industries as consumer packaged goods, pharmaceutical, financial, high-tech, entertainment, automotive and more. U.S. companies devote approximately 18 percent of their research budget to qualitative research.

The majority of focus research projects in the U.S. take place in over 750 focus facilities and are directed by over 1,000 moderators. The most common formats of qualitative research are focus groups and IDIs (individual depth interviews). Acceptance and usage has increased consistently from 110,000 focus groups and equivalent value IDI sessions in 1990 to almost double the number in 2002 of 218,000 sessions. That is a spending level of approximately $7 billion.

And focus research is a globally accepted form of marketing research. In 2002 there were an estimated 245,000 focus groups and equivalent IDI sessions conducted outside the U.S. throughout Europe, Latin America and Asia-Pacific. This makes a worldwide total of 463,000 sessions.

Usage has thrived during good economic times, but has also endured through advertising and marketing recessions, general economic malaise and threat of war.

Enduring popularity

With all the criticism, what accounts for the enduring popularity, acceptance and growth of qualitative research? Following are some reasons.

Focus research is the only formal research methodology that allows clients to experience the real, live customer and prospect. In the end, purchasing decisions are the result of complex psychological workings which can only be explored through open discussion with the consumer. Every other research methodology provides only a numerical representation of such actions.

But that may be part of the problem. Qualitative research exists in the realm of psychology and requires the researcher to draw conclusions based on subjective information, while the decisions to be made from quantitative results tend to be more self-evident.

Qualitative research can provide intimate understanding and valuable insight about the customer not attainable through other research methods. It is uniquely appropriate to determine how products and services fit into the living pattern, mindset, vocabulary and emotional needs of the customer.

Qualitative research is singularly qualified to fuel and feed the intuition and beliefs of management about the consumer. It allows management to make intuitive leaps to better ways of satisfying and communicating with consumers. Managers can more confidently chart a course where no statistical roadmap is available. There is recognition that valuable insights are just as valid and important as accurate statistics.

Some of the “dangers” of focus research are addressed and neutralized through responsible management and execution of research projects. Experience indicates that most clients are sophisticated in their use of qualitative research. Just as they are obligated to learn to use other tools in marketing and marketing research, part of their job is to take advantage of this important methodology and apply it effectively and responsibly. Blue-chip marketers simply do not tolerate incorrect use or abuse of focus research.

The moderator plays a key role in ensuring that the research is applied and used appropriately. He or she has stewardship of the project, not just in running the groups, but also in project planning, crystallizing objectives, counseling throughout to sharpen the process, reviewing and synthesizing results, and providing an objective interpretive report.

The moderator devotes intense undivided attention to a project from beginning to end in a concentrated time period. Her skills, training and experience are applied throughout to optimize results for the clients and avoid abuse or misuse.

Maximum benefit

Attendance at, and observation of, qualitative research is considered a must by most practitioners to get the maximum benefit from the focus research experience. This goes beyond just listening to content and observing body language. Group dynamics and respondents’ individual expressions communicate a great deal to moderator and clients.

There have been efforts - lately applying Internet technology - to speed up the process of or cut costs for qualitative research. These include chat sessions, bulletin boards, qualitative/quantitative combinations and others. Each may find a useful market position with advantages of its own, but so far, none has caught on as a replacement for the traditional focus group or IDI. One reason for the resistance is that each of these methodologies, in their attempts to gain easier access to respondents, results in a reducing or stamping out of the visual and verbal interactive elements that are the strength of focus research. That is, the opportunity to experience the consumer in the flesh in a way that will expose the psychology of their decision-making.

Some new technologies have been accepted. But they are those that aim to preserve the integrity and unique characteristics of the focus research environment, and then make the intact experience more accessible to client users. These include the videotransmission technologies of videoconferencing and videostreaming, which keep the moderator, participants and focus facility components in place while providing a technological overlay to permit clients to see, hear and interact without leaving office or home. The growing use of these technologies demonstrate that clients remain highly interested in hearing what the consumer has to say, even though they are less able or willing to travel to attend in person.

Know the customer

Today’s corporate culture demands that marketing and advertising personnel know the customer, not as a numerical average, but in all their subtleties, aspirations and motivations. In his keynote address to the Advertising Research Foundation Conference in 1998, Robert L. Wehling, senior vice president of global marketing and consumer knowledge at The Procter & Gamble Company, issued the following corporate mandate to researchers: “Know the individual consumer’s heart and you will own the future! Get to know this changing consumer personally. Not as an average but as a person.”

What’s the best way to accomplish those goals? By using focus research, the methodology that lets you get up close and personal.