The Pros
Involver has tried to combine the pros of the traditional focus group with on-line qualitative research. With this, the disadvantages of both methods have been eliminated as much as possible to create a new and successful research method. Below is a more extensive explanation concerning Focus Groups vs. Involver.
Focus Group vs. Involver
The success of a traditional focus group relies on the qualities of a panel chairman. Still, no matter how competent the panel chairman is, he or she will always influence the conversation, and in that the research data that is gathered. For example, the panel chairman has to initiate the conversation while avoiding steering it into a specific direction. A topic list is therefore a necessary evil. Without any direction, not all possible scopes will be considered and the wishes of the client might not be met. In Involver, this element of direction is taken out. The reasoning in this is that in a large-scale sample, all relevant angles will surface on the basis of the principles of diversity, independence, and decentralisation.
Involver tries to combine a quantitative sample with a qualitative way of gathering data. A focus group consists of a small number of people and is therefore by definition not a reliable sample. Because of the large-scale acquisition of data, Involver can be considered a more representative sample. In Involver a large group of people assesses the ideas which are brought up, and this allows for more well-grounded statements about the support of the idea within the entire target group.
ISIZ has conducted a field test on the possibilities of online brainstorming compared to traditional focus group research. You can request the white-paper that has been published on this subject by contacting ISIZ.
Pros and cons
Below you can find a chart with a short overview of the pros and cons of Involver, the traditional focus group, and the traditional web survey.
Involver has tried to combine the advantages of the traditional
focus group with on-line qualitative research. In doing this, the
disadvantages of both methods have been reduced to a minimum in
order to create a new and succesful research method. Below is a
more extensive explanation concerning Focus Group vs.
Involver.
Focus Group vs. Involver
The success of a traditional focus group relies on the qualities of a panel chairman. Still, no matter how competent the panel chairman is, he or she will always influence the conversation, and in that the research data that is gathered. For example, the panel chairman has to initiate the conversation while avoiding steering it into a specific direction. A topic list is therefore a necessary evil. Without any direction, not all possible scopes will be considered and the wishes of the client might not be met. In Involver, this element of direction is taken out. The reasoning in this is that in a large-scale sample, all relevant angles will surface on the basis of the principles of diversity, independence, and decentralisation.
Involver tries to combine a quantitative sample with a qualitative way of gathering data. A focus group consists of a small number of people and is therefore by definition not a reliable sample. Because of the large-scale acquisition of data, Involver can be considered a more representative sample. In Involver a large group of people assesses the ideas which are brought up, and this allows for more well-grounded statements about the support of the idea within the entire target group.
ISIZ has conducted a field test on the possibilities of online brainstorming compared to traditional focus group research. You can request the white-paper that has been published on this subject by contacting ISIZ.
Pros and cons
Below you can find a chart with a short overview of the pros and cons of Involver, the traditional focus group, and the traditional web survey.
|
|
Involver |
Traditional Focus Group |
Traditional Web Survey |
|
Large group of respondents, representativeness |
|
|
|
|
No interference of panel chairman |
|
|
|
|
Moderation of ideas by respondents |
|
|
|
|
Fill out survey at own pace/place |
|
|
|
|
Short rotation time |
|
|
|
|
Exclusion of interpersonal group processes |
|
|
|
|
Non-verbal communication is considered in results |
|
|
|
Involver has tried to combine the advantages of the traditional
focus group with on-line qualitative research. In doing this, the
disadvantages of both methods have been reduced to a minimum in
order to create a new and succesful research method. Below is a
more extensive explanation concerning Focus Group vs.
Involver.
Focus Group vs. Involver
The success of a traditional focus group relies on the qualities of a panel chairman. Still, no matter how competent the panel chairman is, he or she will always influence the conversation, and in that the research data that is gathered. For example, the panel chairman has to initiate the conversation while avoiding steering it into a specific direction. A topic list is therefore a necessary evil. Without any direction, not all possible scopes will be considered and the wishes of the client might not be met. In Involver, this element of direction is taken out. The reasoning in this is that in a large-scale sample, all relevant angles will surface on the basis of the principles of diversity, independence, and decentralisation.
Involver tries to combine a quantitative sample with a qualitative way of gathering data. A focus group consists of a small number of people and is therefore by definition not a reliable sample. Because of the large-scale acquisition of data, Involver can be considered a more representative sample. In Involver a large group of people assesses the ideas which are brought up, and this allows for more well-grounded statements about the support of the idea within the entire target group.
ISIZ has conducted a field test on the possibilities of online brainstorming compared to traditional focus group research. You can request the white-paper that has been published on this subject by contacting ISIZ.
Pros and cons
Below you can find a chart with a short overview of the pros and cons of Involver, the traditional focus group, and the traditional web survey.
|
|
Involver |
Traditional Focus Group |
Traditional Web Survey |
|
Large group of respondents, representativeness |
|
|
|
|
No interference of panel chairman |
|
|
|
|
Moderation of ideas by respondents |
|
|
|
|
Fill out survey at own pace/place |
|
|
|
|
Short rotation time |
|
|
|
|
Exclusion of interpersonal group processes |
|
|
|
|
Non-verbal communication is considered in results |
|
|
|
