Southwest Educational Development Laboratory
Volume 5, Number 2, 2000
Smarter Dissemination: A Word from the Director
Using Market Research for the Dissemination and Utilization of Disability Research
Using Market Research for the Dissemination and Utilization
of Disability Research
Following is a discussion of selected market research techniques, accompanied in some cases by examples from NIDRR-funded research activities. The intent of this discussion is to show how these tools can be used to gather market research data.
In addition to formal techniques, there are many informal techniques for gathering information about consumers to supplement formal techniques. These include, but are not limited to, customer service/complaint calls records, advisory board discussions, informal consumer conversations, anecdotal evidence, and employee observations.
In business, customer visits are valuable for gathering market research information. Decision-makers who do not regularly interact with customers have a different perspective from sales and customer service personnel. In the same way, new information may be gathered from consumers, or potential information users to help the researcher identify options in the development of research projects and dissemination activities.
Visits may be outbound, where the researcher visits the consumer, or inbound, with the visit to the researcher. Outbound visits allow the researcher to view the environment and frame the discussion in the context of that setting, with a potential for a more direct relationship to the consumer's needs. Inbound visits provide a view of the researcher's environment and may add credibility to the source of the research. Also, standardization can be implemented more easily onsite.
The visits include directed interviews or conversations with expert informants--the consumers. Interviewers need a standardized list of questions to guide the interviews and a standardized method for recording the responses in order to capture the data. Probing is a key skill in this process. Probing serves to extend and clarify the respondent's initial answers, and provides opportunities to elicit ideas about possible options to explore in research development and dissemination.
Benefits of Customer Visits in Market Research. In general, fewer additional resources are needed, and researchers can count on a high completion rate with timely feedback. Structured interviews with users may add to market research data through eliciting responses to specific questions about what users want and need. Informal visits may also occur when market research is not the primary reason for the visit. Such visits (perhaps during consultation or technical assistance) may be valuable opportunities for data gathering that will help inform decisions about dissemination and utilization planning (McQuarrie, 1996).
The traditional focus group format involves 8-12 individuals with a moderator who leads the group through a loosely-structured, free flowing dialogue around a particular topic. The moderator is trained in the process and a discussion outline is prepared to guide the focus group. Participants are screened to meet desired criteria and are sometimes provided with a financial incentive for participating.
Typically, several focus groups are conducted to gain greater insight. Using a facility especially designed for focus groups will allow for watching via a one-way mirror, the opportunity to send notes to the moderator to adjust the questioning, and the ability to videotape for later viewing. Trained outside moderators can also make for more objective results. New Directions Consulting publishes the National Directory of Focus Group Discussion Facilities annually (Blankenship, Breen,& Dutka, 1998).
The dynamic of the group process allows the "creative juices" to begin flowing between group members during each session. The resulting data are richer than aggregating data from individual user visits.
There are a number of advantages to using focus groups:
Disadvantages include: difficulty in covering more than one topic; limits of geography and logistics of gathering participants; more expensive than some methods, when done properly; may yield biased results if done in-house.
New technologies offer other options for conducting focus groups, for example, using the World Wide Web to convene participants in front of computer screens in varied locations.
Focus Groups in Market Research. In commercial marketing, focus groups are often used for formative research on needs, wants and perceptions; development of questionnaires; pretesting of product or service concepts, communications themes, and execution of messages; and assessment of customer satisfaction and dissatisfaction (Andreasen, 1995, p. 115).
It is also the research method most used in social marketing (Weinreich, 1999a). Focus groups are particularly useful in pre-testing. They may be used as a strategy to gain the insights and involvement of users as research activities are developed, and may help expand both the user audience and the scope of the research.
Caution must be used, however, as focus groups do depend on a small sample of participants that may not ultimately represent the larger body. The focus group must be well-planned and carried out in an organized manner with appropriate data collection. Even if well-planned, a quantitative method may be needed to verify results for the target population.
Focus groups have long been a staple of marketers and business planners -- now they are moving online as companies test new product names and the effectiveness of Web sites. The main advantage is speed; the main drawback is the absence of personal interaction when people communicate online. There is a subtle difference in how the questions are asked and answered in person and online, said David Bradford, a vice president and director of The Virtual Research Room, a marketing research firm, also known as Vrroom, that is based in New York. "There's a different interface," Mr. Bradford said. "In a traditional focus group, one person speaks at a time, and sometimes one person tends to dominate. Online, because everyone is composing his answer to the moderator's questions simultaneously, everyone has a chance to speak equally, and they are influenced less by those around them."
Can Web focus groups provide answers that are applicable to more general audiences? Can the people who use the Internet, which not long ago was a place largely for young white men who were educated and technologically adept, men, speak for everyone? "A few years ago, there was more bias in a group of Internet respondents," said Susan Roth, the director of qualitative research at Greenfield Online, a marketing research company, "but that's changing. As more and more people use the Internet, that group is getting closer and closer to the demographics of the general population."
© Benton Foundation 2000 (www.benton.org). Reprinted with permission.
From Communications Related Headlines for http://www.benton.org/News/ July 06, 2000
[SOURCE: New York Times (D8) AUTHOR: Catherine Collins]
http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/00/07/circuits/articles/06focu.html
NOTE: Free registration is required to access New York Times articles.
This example of the use of focus groups is from NIDRR-funded research. Focus groups were used to gain the perspectives of State Vocational Rehabilitation professionals about the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992. Although it was not conducted as market research, it does provide insights into the ways in which information from focus groups may be summarized and used as a basis for application and utilization of research outcomes.
Clearly, social marketing information-gathering can assist in promoting change and identifying current and potential "barriers" to the change process. This example demonstrates that attitudinal and knowledge differences can be made evident by using focus group techniques with relevant target audiences.
The example below can be found at http://www.communityinclusion.org/publications/text/rp7-96.html. It has been edited for use in this issue of The Research Exchange.
Jean Whitney-Thomas and Dawna M. Thomas
The Center on Promoting Employment (RRTC)
Children's Hospital & the University of Massachusetts at Boston
July, 1996
The first years of this decade saw a surge in the rethinking and redrafting of policy related to disability in this country. The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act in 1991, and the 1992 Rehabilitation Act Amendments comprise a body of clearly articulated anti- discrimination legislation and service priorities. These laws emphasize greater access to services and full involvement of individuals with disabilities in community life and service delivery (Goodall, Lawyer, & Wehman, 1994; Weber, 1994). In the Fall of 1994, the Institute for Community Inclusion convened a series of focus groups of vocational rehabilitation administrators and counselors in order to better understand how the Rehabilitation Act Amendments have been implemented in one state's system. The findings reported briefly here describe what these individuals perceive as the most important elements of the Amendments and how they feel service delivery has changed as a result.
A total of 11 state and local office administrators and counselors participated in three focus groups. The groups were organized so that members with similar positions and experiences within the VR system participated in the same discussion. Among the participants were three women and eight men; a number of whom had challenges including physical, medical, mild cognitive and visual impairments. These rehabilitation professionals have an average of 15 (ranging from 4.5-22) years of service in the state VR system. Three of the participants reported having Certified Rehabilitation Counselor (CRC) licensure.
State level administrators provided the most global perspective on the law's intentions and its desired impact. They used the term "paradigm shift" to indicate the Amendments' proposal for broad-based change in disability policies and practices. They saw the Amendments as a clear mandate to refocus the VR process from "employability" to "employment." As one state administrator said,
"The purpose of the program is to put people to work. Not get ready to work; not talk about work, going to work, or think about work; not services, but work."
Finally, this group described the Amendments to the law as emphasizing consumer empowerment, active involvement in the vocational rehabilitation process, and as a mechanism to implement the Americans with Disabilities Act. In contrast to the state level administrators, local office administrators and supervisors provided insight on the law's impact on daily procedures, counselor decision making process, and professional development. Their discussion focused much more on the day-to-day management of the VR system given the new law. In their eyes, the Amendments gave greater autonomy to the counselors by allowing them to make eligibility decisions on an abbreviated timetable. When asked about consumer empowerment issues, these administrators did not feel that this was a new issue or as one person said, "a revelation."
All three groups talked about the new 60 day eligibility decision-making process and agreed that this change had the greatest impact on the VR system's delivery of services. Administrators saw the 60 day limit as a streamlining mechanism to break through the system's barriers and bureaucracy. Counselors disagreed, however, and felt that the 60 day eligibility process prevents them from providing the same level of individualized service and counseling as they did prior to the Amendments. As one counselor said, "It seems like I'm doing an awful lot more work now than I did before the law. Different kind of work, I should say... more paper work... there are also more hoops to jump through: I also find that I'm pushing clients away more, where I may spend a lot of counseling time with clients to get them to where they want to go before the Act." The counselors suggested that the new eligibility timeline may actually hinder elements of the amendments that are less easily defined such as consumer empowerment and improved services.
These discussion groups give insight into the meaning of the amended rehabilitation law but falls short of answering the question as to whether the amendments have been successfully implemented. Below is a list of recommendations for future attempts to understand change in the state Vocational Rehabilitation agencies:
Compare impressions of change across levels of the agency. Since there is evidence of different interpretations of the law, future investigations of change should take into consideration this potential diversity. Larger samples of counselors and administrators may have different opinions when asked whether or not day-to-day practice has changed. The perspectives of VR personnel should be compared and the samples should include voices from multiple levels in the agency.
The voice of the consumer should be heard. As part of the study from which these findings come, a focus group of consumers were asked for their impressions of the changes in the law. These individuals were not aware of the law itself, although each person had a great deal to say about their experiences within the state's VR system. This small set of consumers who were not aware of the Amendments, may or may not be representative of national or even statewide trends. A larger sample of VR consumers should be surveyed as to their knowledge of the Amendments and their impression of change in the delivery of VR services.
Mechanisms to measure and enhance consumer involvement need to be developed. The Amendments were crafted around the principles of consumer empowerment and involvement in the rehabilitation process. There is a need to document consumer involvement where it occurs, identify areas where it is lacking, and develop strategies to enhance involvement generally. Future research should explore the knowledge, role, and influence that consumers have of policy and on service delivery.
Goodall, P., Lawyer, H., & Wehman, P. (1994). Vocational rehabilitation and traumatic brain injury: A legislative and public policy perspective. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation,
9, 61-81.
Weber, M. C. (1994). Towards access, accountability, procedural regularity and participation: The Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992 and 1993. Journal of Rehabilitation, 60(2), 21-25.
Copyright ©2004 Southwest Educational Development Laboratory
