Page 216 -

204 CHAPTER 8 Interviews and focus groups

functional, these interviews might even ask users to complete sample tasks. Although
this feedback can be very useful—particularly early in the design process—such
interviews must be conducted carefully. If participants are aware that they are evalu-
ating a tool that you have designed, they may be overly favorable in their responses.
When conducting an interview like this, you might want to discount favorable re-
sponses and give more credence to critical remarks.

8.6 INTERVIEWS VS FOCUS GROUPS
Interviewing is a powerful, but labor-intensive, data collection technique. To gather
input from 20 individuals, an interviewer must meet with each person individually,
perhaps for an hour or more. An attractive alternative might be to meet with several
participants in focus groups. These group discussions provide a reasonably effec-
tive and inexpensive tool for easily gathering a broad range of opinions. Although
opinions differ on optimal sizes, focus groups are generally not large. Some sug-
gest between eight and 12 people (Robson, 2002), while others argue that smaller
groups of five to seven participants might be more appropriate for an in-depth
conversation (Krueger, 1994). A series of as many as five focus groups (Brown,
1999) could be used to engage up to 60 people in a few hours. Relying on a single
focus group session is discouraged, as any single group could be unresponsive
or unrepresentative. Two or more groups will increase your chances of success
(Krueger, 1994).
The participation of several individuals in a focus group provides the possibil-
ity of a broad range of viewpoints and insights. Discussions can reveal similarities
and differences between opinions. Limited doses of disagreement and debate can
be very informative, as varying viewpoints can lead to a broader understanding
than you would gain from a number of people who were in complete agreement.
These conflicting perspectives might also lead you to new areas for further study
(Brown, 1999). Perhaps you can develop a model or system that will handle all
perspectives well.
The conversations that can arise in a focus group can help overcome many of the
shortcomings of interviews. In a one-to-one setting the interviewer and interviewee
are left to fend for themselves. If the interviewee is not talkative, or if an awkward
dynamic stifles the discussion, the interview may fail. Group discussions support in-
teractivity, with participants ideally balancing each other. Participants can encourage
each other to speak up, either in support of or opposition to earlier statements. This
highly dynamic situation can stimulate participants to raise issues that they might not
have identified in one-to-one interviews.
As the rigidity of a fully structured interview is ill suited for group settings, focus
groups are generally semistructured or unstructured. A fully structured focus group
would require asking each question to each individual in order, without any room for
interaction between participants. A fully structured focus group would essentially be
equivalent to multiple individual interviews conducted simultaneously.