Върнете се горе

Focus group discussions as a means to assess training needs and gather information for audience analysis

Брой 3

Donka Petrova

Resume: The current paper offers an overview of focus group discussions as a qualitative method to gather information about training needs and other audience characteristics (like attitudes, beliefs etc.). Key definitions and characteristics of focus groups are presented, as well as participant selection considerations. Specific attention is dedicated to virtual focus groups – not a new phenomenon, but one that is used more and more. Their advantages and disadvantages are analyzed. 

Key words: focus group discussions, training needs, audience analysis. 

Донка Петрова

Фокус групите като начин за оценка на обучителните потребности и събиране на информация за анализиране на аудитории 

Резюме: Настоящият доклад предлага обзор върху фокус групите като качествен метод за събиране на информация относно обучителни потребности и други характеристики на аудиториите (като нагласи, вярвания и др.). Представени са ключови дефиниции и характеристики на фокус групите, както и съображенията относно подбора на участници. Специфично внимание е отделено на виртуалните фокус групи – феномен, който не  е нов, но който се превръща във все по-често прилаган. Анализирани са техните предимства и недостатъци. 

Ключови думи: фокус групи, обучителни потребности, анализ на аудитория. 

For every trainer, public speaker, lecturer, or communicator in general it is of crucial importance to appear well-prepared in front of their audience – be it face-to-face or virtual. What to say, how to say it, what kind of information do they need, what kind of information they already know and don’t need, what would be most useful to them, how will it become understandable and interesting – there is a number of questions we face in our role as a communicator. That’s why initial preparation and getting to know the (potential) audience is so important – without it we cannot answer these questions. 

There are many ways to gather information about an audience. In this paper is presented one of them – the focus group discussion which has many advantages and is applicable in many settings – including online. The main emphasize is on how to use focus group discussion in order to assess training needs, but the same approach is suitable to assess the needs of other audiences as well, not just training participants, but also lecture or talk attendees, for example. Besides the context of training, any preparation to address an audience can benefit from a needs assessment – any lecturer, presenter, communicator in general can be better prepared and tailor their speech or presentation to the specific needs, expectations and level of knowledge of an audience.

What is needs assessment and why is it necessary? Typically, it is defined as a process, aimed to establish what gap exist between current level of expertise, knowledge, skills of a group and what is the desired level.  On this basis can be deduced how this gap can be filled. A well-planned training, lecture or presentation can minimize or even eliminate the gap entirely. 

What is a focus group discussion? 

Focus group discussions fall into the category of qualitative research methods in the social sciences. The discussion happens in a group format and is organized around a “focus on specific issues, with predetermined group of people, participating in an interactive discussion”[1], though in some cases the group may engage in more exploratory dialog. This method allows the gathering of a spectrum of views and positions in a relatively limited time. The group format stimulates the sharing of different points of view and a range of experiences. The role of the moderator is important, but the approach is non-directive, therefore his/her input is minimal. The main input is generated by the group. The discussion format also makes it possible to encourage the participants to elaborate on and expand their statements, as well as to debate different viewpoints. This method is especially useful to assess the value of a product or to collect information about individuals’ attitudes, opinions, beliefs, needs about a social (or training) topic. Group discussions can be more challenging to conduct than individual interviews “because group dynamics need to be managed (e.g., to ensure that all group members have a chance to speak) and because special equipment (e.g., multiple video cameras) is often used. Focus group interviews are best run by a trained facilitator; they often require a more formal setting (such as a boardroom) and may take more time to coordinate and run”[2].  

There are specific characteristics of focus groups that distinguish them from other qualitative methods. They can be summarized as follows (adapted from Monique Hennink, 2014[3]): 

  • They include a limited number of participants – typically between 5 and 8 are recommended. In some cases, the number may be slightly bigger, but in other – as in virtual focus groups, a smaller number is preferable. 
  • Participants should be carefully selected and have similar backgrounds or similar experiences with a topic (for example, similar working experience on the topic, similar life experiences). 
  • The discussion is focused (therefore, focus group) on a specific issue or a small number of related issues, so that there is enough time to discus each relevant aspect. 
  • The major goal is to gather different perspectives and points of views, not to reach some form of consensus on the issue. 
  • The discussion itself is of central importance for this method, as it allows the sharing of different viewpoints and the exchange of ideas (which includes even the possibilities of changing some viewpoints or reaching a new perspective within the discussion context by some participants).
  • The discussion should be led by a trained facilitator/moderator who is able to elicit a range of answers and viewpoints from participants and to be sensitive and attentive to the group dynamics. 
  • The questions are prepared and selected as to provoke discussion and sharing of different ideas/opinions/beliefs. 
  • The establishment of a supportive and non-threatening environments is of key importance for the flow of the discussion and the active participation of all members. 

The application of focus groups started in the 1920s of the 20th century and the method was further developed over the next decades – mostly as a tool for market research. The 1980s marked its establishment as an often-used method in the social sciences and afterwards – across many academic disciplines. One of the reasons for this newly achieved popularity of the method is that it allows to overcome some of the limitations of the traditional interview  – especially the artificial nature of interviews and the influence of the interviewer. The approach of the group moderator in focus groups is non-directive and the goal is to achieve more spontaneity and natural flow and exchange of opinions, ideas, etc. Initially the moderator asks the questions, but gradually, as the participants start answering and giving their input, this provokes new associations, memories, ideas within the group and they engage in a more exploratory exchange. The participants are more in control – they are mostly encouraged to discuss the topic among themselves, not with the moderator. Of course, the group format has its difficulties: for example, domineering members and silent members can both be challenges to the moderator, it requires skill and good preparation to guarantee relatively equal participation. Roles and status within the group may influence the way people participate and contribute – they will behave differently when their superiors are present, for example. It is therefore important to take into consideration social/professional roles and status hierarchies. The information collected may be hard to analyze – due to many different perspectives and large volume of data. Or within the discussion some issues may be addressed only superficially. Deeper understanding of the method and better preparation can help overcome these challenges.

Virtual focus groups – new challenges, new opportunities 

Nowadays internet-mediated communication plays a bigger and bigger part in our lives. Many activities are happening online, including training and lecturing and many planned as face-to-face activities cannot happen as such because of pandemic-related limitations. Virtual focus groups are not a new phenomenon, but they have not been common until recently. Now many questions arise with regard to how they can be carried out online – in terms of practical organization and of effectiveness. 

As was mentioned, virtual focus groups have existed for some time. There are in fact two types of such groups: 1) synchronous where the communication exchange is happening in real-time (via chat rooms or virtual meeting platforms) and is led by a moderator in a format similar to that of face-to-face focus groups and 2) asynchronous – the exchange is not happening in real time but is delayed in time and is typically conducted via message boards/bulletin boards or forums.  The format in this case is closer to an internet forum discussion – a specific question is posted by a moderator/organizer and the participants have a time frame in which to provide their answers and viewpoints. This format allows more time to reflect over and formulate a response and is useful if the goal is to reach more people who are dispersed in different locations, especially different time zones. Participants in asynchronous focus groups may remain anonymous if they desire – something which is not achievable in face-to-face or synchronous discussions. Another advantage of this format is that all of the communication is in written form and therefore easy to collect and store as a transcript and there is no risk of losing parts of the information. But a disadvantage is that it lacks the actual group dynamics and the benefits of intellectual stimulation created by real-time discussion. Also, the moderator does not have the opportunity to observe and analyze the group interactions and nonverbal reactions of the participants (though partial indications of it may be present through the use of emoticons and other symbols). 

Practical considerations and challenges 

Synchronous focus groups are the format that would be closer to face-to-face, traditional focus groups. Their organization in the virtual sphere sets up additional requirements: selection of a suitable hosting platform for carrying out and recording the focus group discussion; adjusting the questions and materials for an online setting; monitoring what unexpected challenges may arise and how the discussion of the topic is influenced by the online setting. The platform used is of key importance, it should allow for recording of the meeting; should be user-friendly, easy to use for the participants – for example, without the need to create specific accounts or download software; options like chat and screensharing, etc., are also important. Recording and making screenshots requires permission from the participants, so this can be achieved as well via the Internet – for example, via online consent forms. 

Advantages of virtual focus groups 

Virtual focus groups help overcome distance and other barriers that would otherwise not allow participation. This is important not only with regard to social distancing regulations, but also when the goal is to reach people who are far away or who have mobility limitations. The environment may feel safer for the participants, especially if they are at home or in familiar setting. They typically require less expenses to carry out and also, in some cases other regular online meetings can be transformed into a focus group discussion with the appropriate planning. According to Barbour[4] in virtual focus groups the tendency of some participants to dominate the discussion may be much less pronounced – dominance is communicated mostly through nonverbal cues[5]  and the more limited presence of such may effectively limit the domineering behavior as well.  Anonymity may also contribute to more participation by particular members who are typically more reserved or shy. In many cases though anonymity cannot be achieved. 

Some advantages are common between face-to-face and virtual focus groups. For example, social setting close to a natural environment – or, in the case of virtual groups, to typical online meetings makes the environment more comfortable and relaxing for the participants. A general advantage of focus groups is their flexibility – the method can be used for exploratory, explanatory, and evaluative research. It can be combined with other methods and with different interactive techniques and exercises can be used to stimulate the discussion (for example, icebreakers for the participants). 

Disadvantages

The participation in virtual focus groups requires a stable internet access and appropriate technical equipment – like microphone, camera. Also, another requirement is a certain level of technical skills. Even if the platform or software used are user-friendly, some people will have more difficulties when navigating the virtual space. Lack of skills (or perception of such) or lack of access to internet/equipment can be a serious hinderance to participation. Technical problems, if they arise unexpectedly, can put an end to the discussion as a whole or to the participation of certain individuals (connection issues, camera or microphone issues, etc.)[6]

 An important disadvantage of virtual focus groups is the lack of nonverbal communication – the moderator cannot observe different nonverbal cues or use such in order to stimulate the discussion and participation – or this can be done only partially. This may be compensated in different ways, like the use of emoticons, but only to an extent[7]. Since nonverbal communication is very important for the establishment of trust, rapport, for encouraging speaking and participation, all of these may be affected negatively in the virtual setting. It is not uncommon for online participants to be more reserved, less likely to talk, more concise in their statements because of the insufficient rapport and a feeling of distance, not only physical, but psychological as well. 

Standard turn taking in conversations is also more challenging to achieve online – many participants can type at the same time. It is often not possible to notice the typical subtle nonverbal markers for taking the floor, therefore two or more people may start talking simultaneously. Such challenges are not impossible to manage but require additional planning and attentiveness on part of the moderator. 

Ethical and confidentiality considerations can also be more challenging when conducting virtual focus groups[8]. For example, it is more difficult to guarantee the confidentiality of the discussion as participants can record it or make screenshots, or there may be other people present alongside the participants, who can see and hear what is happening. Prior consent forms and instructions are important in this regard, as well as a protocol for action on part of the moderator if participation rules are broken. 

Selection of participants for focus group discussions

There are many considerations what selection potential participants. One of the most important is their number: the group should not be too large as it would be difficult to have enough time and space for all opinions and it is harder for a moderator to navigate the dynamics. On the other hand, it should not be too small – it would not be possible to gather a variety of viewpoints from two or three people. For virtual focus groups the recommendation is to have less participants – 4 or 5[9]. The potential limitation of having fewer viewpoints can be (at least to an extent) partially compensated by the selection of participants who are well-prepared and possess expert knowledge or long-time experience on the topic. The optimal number would depend on the goal as well – if the goal is to assess training needs and to match training design or prepare a targeted lecture course or presentation, a larger number of people would be preferable, as it is important explore different needs and expectations. 

Group composition is key for the creation of supportive and secure space that would allow for sharing and reflection. Homogeneity and level of acquaintance contribute to the positive group dynamics – the more similar the participants are to each other, the easier it becomes to be open. For example, the similarity may be due to similar background, similar level of experience, shared specific experience, similar rank/positions, while differences in the levels of preparation/experience or differences in status may easily lead to some members dominating the discussions and others feeling they cannot contribute – or that they would be judged negatively if they do. (It is important to note that homogeneity of opinions is not what is sought after, but other similarities, that would make the establishing of trust and rapport easier). Therefore, heterogeneous groups are to be avoided. The same applies to groups, comprised of participants with opposing views (for example, pro and against capital punishment), as the situation would easily escalate into conflict and the purpose of the focus group discussion is not to reach consensus or organize public debates. Different subgroups of potential participants should be grouped into separate focus groups, thus allowing for the gathering of different perspectives, but without the risk of strained and negative group dynamic. 

Some specific strategies for participant selection include[10]

  • Approaching community gatekeepers: leaders in the communities (could be social leaders or opinion leaders), important figures, who have the trust of the target group and can have an influence on the flow of messages/information towards the group. They can be approached as potential participants or to recommend and engage other community members.
  • Formal services and programs: their employees can have elaborate observations on different groups of clients or on certain topics. They can also refer clients of other people they work with who may be interested in participating. 
  • Informal groups: target group member may participate in informal activities such as interest clubs, study or sport activities. Information and invitations for the focus group can be spread using such informal networks. 
  • Advertisements and incentives: mostly used to approach harder to reach groups. 

Structuring and guiding the discussion (based on Krueger and Casey, 2009)[11]: here we will present a short resume on the main parts and types of questions  in a focus group discussion and their functions.

  1. Introduction. It serves many functions: presenting the moderator, the goal of the meeting/discussion, what it is part of (project, research, etc.), information on how the participants were selected, explanation how the discussion will be conducted. Any ethical issues should also be discussed at this initial point. Also, the moderator typically asks the participants to introduce themselves and thanks them for their involvement.
  2. Opening question. This is typically a simple question, which can be answered by all. For example: “How long have you been working in this field?”. Its aim is not to provoke discussion, but to give everyone the chance to speak and thus set the tone of participation.
  3. Short introductory questions. A series of short questions that start to bring into focus the main topic but are easy to answer. Again, the goal here is to continue to build up trust and create rapport, not so much to gather information at this stage. Typically, 10 to 15 minutes can be dedicated to this part of the process. Example questions: “What are your work duties?”, “What do you spend most of your working hours on?”. Another approach here is to ask the participants to define what a key discussion concept means to them. For example, “What does an effective training mean to you? What makes it effective?”. The answers then can be used by the moderator to continue and deepen the discussion. 
  4. Transitions questions and statements. They mark moments of transition between topics, subtopics and parts of the discussion. For example, “I am glad I learned more about your professional experiences and duties. Now let’s talk about some of your needs and expectations in relation to …”. 
  5. Specific topic questions. These are the most important questions that will lead to the gathering of the needed information. They are usually introduced at about one third of the process, after the chance to establish rapport and build trust. Their format and number depend on the topic and the time, but should be mostly open questions, that can also stimulate a discussion and the sharing of different viewpoints. Yes/no questions as well as personal questions should be avoided, as they close the discussion and put pressure on the participants. Some examples: “What previous experience do you have on this specific topic?”,  “What previous trainings have you attended?”,  “What was useful about them?”, “What was not?”, “What can be helpful to you?”,  “Who can you turn for help to?”,  “What additional resources do you feel you need to address this topic?”, “What difficulties have you encountered before?”,  “What would help you overcome them in the future?”. General attitudes can be probed with suitable questions: “How common do you think the problem is?”, “What would you recommend to someone with this problem?”. Questions may be asked on general knowledge about the topic: forms, reasons, factors (to assess where are gaps), but they should not sound as if this is an examination. Similarly, questions about difficulties related to the topic are very important and informative, but should be formulated carefully, as participants may be unwilling to share their difficulties because of fear of being judged incompetent and unprepared.
  6. Closing questions. Questions that signal the end of the process. Often, they are aimed at clarifications and final thoughts. Some strategies that can be used are a ranking strategy (asking the participants which of the discussed points are the most important to them personally) or a summarizing strategy (the moderator summarizes key points and asks if he/she is missing something), or a “key message” strategy ( the participants are asked if they can convey a short message on the topic to an influential person, what it would be). Examples: “Is there something you would like to add?”, “Is there something important that we have not discussed?”, “From everything we have discussed today, what is the most important in your opinion?”. 

When not to use focus groups 

Focus groups are an effective and useful method in many cases, but naturally have their limitations. They are not suitable when the aim is to collect representative data – their scope is typically limited, the number of participants cannot reach the necessary levels of representativeness as with all qualitative methods. In such cases quantitative methods are the more appropriate approach.

Also, focus group discussion is not suitable when the goal is to gain insight into the deeper personal experiences of the participants, especially on sensitive and difficult topics. This does not mean that such topics cannot be in the focus, quite the contrary, many focus groups are conducted as a way to address and gather perspectives on topics such as violence, substance abuse, migration, suicide, mental illness, etc., but the approach to these topics should be broad (with questions like “What do know know/think about the issue X.”, “What can be done to address it”, etc.) and not with questions requiring the sharing of personal experience and touching on potential trauma. Participants should never feel pressured into sharing and revealing personal information. Within the group format, which is not a completely safe and confidential space, this is risky and unethical – and would not work on practical level in most cases, as the people would be hesitant to share. Of course, there may be participants who want to share their experience, but this should only happen by their personal choice. Even if some persons make this choice, the format of the focus group is not best suited to the collection of in-depth personal information or narratives (for example, the person’s story with the issue in focus, like migration or substance abuse). When the goal is to collect such narratives, other approaches such as in-depth interviewing and case studies are more suitable. It is risky, as Hennink writes, to think of the focus groups as a way to carry an interview with 6 or 8 persons at the same time, as the format and approach is different[12]


[1] Hennink, Monique. Focus Group Discussions. NY: Oxford University Press, 2014.

[2] Given, Lisa. Qualitative Research Methods. In: Saskind, N. (ed.). Encyclopedia of Educational Psychology, Vol. 1&2. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2008. 

[3] Hennink, Monique. Focus Group Discussions. NY: Oxford University Press, 2014. 

[4] Barbour, Rosaline. Doing Focus Groups. The SAGE Qualitative Research Kit. London: Sage Publications, 2007. 

[5] See Petrova, Donka. Nonverbal Expressions of Power and Dominance. In: Zinovieva, I., Karabeliova, S., Milanov, M. (eds.). Challenges and Perspectives in Contemporary Psychology. Sofia: St. Kliment Ohridski University Press, 2017, pp. 455-459. (in Bulgarian).

[6] See Daniels, Nicola, Gillen, Patricia, Casson, Karen, & Wilson, Iseult. STEER: Factors to Consider When Designing Online Focus Groups Using Audiovisual Technology in Health Research. In:  International Journal of Qualitative Methods18, [online]. Available from:  https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1609406919885786

[7] Morgan, David. Chapter 11. Online focus groups. In Basic and Advanced Focus Groups. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, 2018.

[8] Morgan, David. Chapter 11. Online focus groups. In Basic and Advanced Focus Groups. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, 2018.

[9] Tuttas, Carol. A. (2014). Lessons Learned Using Web Conference Technology for Online Focus Group Interviews: Qualitative Health Research. [online]. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25192765/

[10] Hennink, Monique. Focus Group Discussions. NY: Oxford University Press, 2014.

[11] Krueger, Richard, Casey, Mary Anne. Focus Groups: A practical guide for applied research. (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2009. 

[12] Hennink, Monique. Focus Group Discussions. NY: Oxford University Press, 2014.

Author avatar
adminiaGS
https://rhetoric-bg.com

Остави коментар

Вашият имейл адрес няма да бъде публикуван. Задължителните полета са отбелязани с *

Този сайт използва бисквитки за да функционира правилно