Recruitment of qualitative research participants for most fast moving consumer goods or other markets is a relatively straightforward matter. As part of the screening process a range of open and closed questions are asked, to determine a match with the profile the researcher needs to consult with to address the client's research objectives and answer their questions.
Apart from screening out due to using the wrong combination of brands or other behaviours that are not what is required, the risk to the applicant is minimised. A well-designed initial screener will ask the right questions quickly, and a few minutes of a potential participant's life is a reasonable exchange for the possibility of being invited to a well-paid focus group or depth interview on that subject subsequently.
Great care must be taken however, when the subject matter of the research is something awkward or sensitive. Just asking the screening questions, for which in many projects the majority will screen out and get nothing anyway, could become potentially detrimental to the respondents. Consider in the UK the old fashioned approach to focus group recruitment using face-to-face intercept methods - no problem to stop people in the street with your clipboard to ask them about their preferred brand of detergent, but how could you move the conversation on to determine whether they were or were not in the market for incontinence products, or a weight loss magazine?
Even in database driven recruitment where initial contact is made by email, very careful wording must be employed when inviting members to apply for projects that are highly sensitive. Very often of course the decision about whom to long-list and invite to apply is driven by simple demographic factors, proximity to the venue for one, but also other known factors such as age. "What on earth was it, about my profiling information, that made you think I might be interested in a project about (debt counselling / illegal downloading / erectile dysfunction)?!" is a not unreasonable response when a standard wording is engaged on an invitation however.
Far better to take great care when crafting an invite, explaining that the qualifying factors for the current project are highly sensitive and we really have no idea whom amongst our list may qualify as we don't hold this kind of information, but we really hope you won't mind taking a look in case you are a fit. Often it might be appropriate to reassure about the Market Research Society Code of Conduct in the UK (or other bodies in other markets) and how this protects their confidentiality and privacy within the research, and any other factors that might raise the comfort levels - such as the use of a female moderator so it's all ladies together, in a group about "women's problems".
The standard screening techniques of obscuring the 'right' answer amongst a range of dummy ones might also be inappropriate here. Respondents are not stupid, and if the one sensitive or awkward response is embedded in an anodyne list it will stick out like a sore thumb anyway, and very few people are likely to attempt to feign embarrassing diseases or circumstances in order to try to qualify for a focus group. Better in many cases to ask directly about the key criteria, then qualify on the screening interview with respectful and relevant probing, that will establish the qualification directly and appropriately.
Whilst for most research projects we would tend to avoid public social media postings that can be viewed by anyone in favour of individual invites to pre-screened people, there is definitely a valuable role here when it comes to sensitive topics. Bulletin boards or forums of communities of interest might be an appropriate place for a shout-out that people can choose to respond to or not, without feeling singled out. Providing an easy no-pressure response mechanism and clear call to action can help here.
The problem of screen-outs is also one that must be handled very delicately when the subject matter itself is delicate. You can tell people they are using the wrong mobile phone network to qualify for a research project - but you can't tell them they have the wrong kind of cancer. Again great sensitivity and an individual response is what is required.
When people essentially make themselves vulnerable in screening by revealing private and potentially embarrassing information, then they need extra reassurance about how that information will or will not be used in future... will be it held on a database, or can you tell them it will be deleted or disassociated with their profile? The MRS and every responsible code of conduct for our industry requires that respondents do not suffer any detriment due to their involvement in market research, and whilst we can never mitigate any disappointment at failing to be selected for a particular study, it is not reasonable that anyone is left wishing they hadn't applied in the first place.
No comments:
Post a Comment