Defining Qualitative Research

When I mention I work in qualitative research, I often get puzzled looks. Not everyone is familiar with it. But qual has a distinct enough value and purpose alongside quantitative methods that it deserves a moment in the spotlight — so let’s define it together!

What is qualitative research?

In our recent blog post “Qualitative vs Quantitative Research: Better Together,” we talked about how both types of research are a great means to better understand people, and use that understanding to make business decisions. As Simon Sinek says “If you don’t understand people, you don’t understand business.” Each plays its own role in the picture of understanding people, and provides a unique type of insight into their world. 

Through qualitative research, we’re able to ask, re-ask, probe, and also observe — to hear stories and get at a depth of emotion that can have incomparable value in knowing how your brand and products have the potential to improve someone’s life. 

Qualitative analysis is interpretive; we look at people from the ground up. We start by listening to one person’s stories, then another’s, then another’s… until we have enough data points to analyze for themes, and ladder up to insights.

 

Advantages and disadvantages of qualitative research methods

So, what are the advantages of qualitative methods that make them worthwhile? They:

• • Are flexible and adaptable: questions and probes can be tweaked, updated, evolved as new insights emerge.
  • Add a human touch: they put face-to-face communication at the forefront; whether in someone’s home, an office, or outdoors.

• Make things more real: they allow us to observe how something really happens in a person’s world, in combination with what people tell us. 

• Are evocative and inspiring: they give you an insider view into how pain points or need gaps are experienced, which can inspire varied ideas and solutions for real problems.

There are also certain hurdles with qualitative research that should be considered. They:

• Can be unpredictable: despite screening and confirmations, life’s unpredictability can disrupt even the best laid fieldwork plans.
• Are subjective: researchers aim for objectivity, but interpretation is inherently subjective and the risk of bias has to be considered at each juncture.
• Involve small numbers: qualitative research’s smaller samples may not fully represent the total population, leading to potentially skewed conclusions.
• Can be a lot: The opportunity to get up close and personal in qualitative sessions can make it an emotionally charged form of exploration.

 

How should you conduct qualitative research

There are a wide range of different “ways” to conduct qualitative research that each have their pros and cons:

Ethnography

Immersing in people’s daily lives for a comprehensive understanding of their culture, behaviors, and interactions, e.g.:

• In-Homes: Interviews (often lengthy) in a person’s home
• Rove-Alongs: Going with someone to engage in a specific out-of-home behavior or occasion

Pros:

• Deep immersion: gain an in-depth understanding of the context and culture of the participants
• Rich, detailed data: being in their world offers insights that can be missed in more structured research methods or reveal helpful contradictions
• Flexibility: Researchers can adapt their focus based on emerging trends and observations

Cons:

• Time/cost: requires a significant time investment as well as travel time, expense and unpredictability
• Researcher bias: researcher’s presence and perspective can influence the behavior of participants, potentially skewing results
• Analysis complexity: the vast amount of qualitative data collected can be overwhelming and complex to analyze

Interviews 

One-on-one questioning, whether face-to-face or via video calls, E.g.:

• IDIs: individual, one-on-one interview
• Dyads: Two-on-one interviews with one moderator and two respondents
• Triads: Three-on-one interviews with one moderator and three respondents

Pros:

• Personal connection: Creating an intimate and trusting environment for people to feel vulnerable and open
• Probing flexibility: Ability to delve deeper and pivot to chase insights as they emerge
• In-depth insights: Greater focus allows fewer individuals to delve into the heart of why they do things

Cons:

• Time-intensive: May have to conduct a large number of interviews to reach ideal sample size 
• Participant variability: Puts more pressure on the ability of each individual recruit to express their thoughts/feelings
• Interview fatigue: Can be taxing on moderators and observers given the time-intensiveness to field

Focus groups

Facilitating group discussions by asking questions, either face-to-face or via video calls. (usually 4-6 people at most)

Pros:

• Diverse perspectives: Can get a greater array of people’s perspectives without the need to do so many interviews
• Dynamic interactions: Interaction among participants can generate new insights and ideas.
• Facilitates open discussion: Creates a safe environment where people see that others are going through the same things

Cons:

• Risk of groupthink: People can be influenced by the feelings and experiences of others
• Group dynamics: People who are more talkative and/or opinionated can unintentionally dominate discussion
• Less individual depth:  There’s less room to delve into a single person’s experience or perspective (without alienating others)

Digital Diaries

Utilizing a digital platform to collect insights and thoughts from people, either as its own methodology or as a precursor to in-person or digital conversations.

Pros:

• Get the wheels turning: can be a great way to get people into the mindset of the topic before actually chatting with them
• Gather artifacts: you can get imagery, audio and video captured directly from the person
• Breadth before depth: great ways to get a broader, baseline understanding before digging deeper via other methods

Cons:

• Time-consuming: works best when people have time and space to process questions and form answers
• Can’t ask as many questions: participant fatigue is real in digital environments and there has to be thoughtfulness about the number of questions 
• Can’t dive deeper: it can be harder to probe to get a deeper understanding of a person’s response

Secondary Research

Desktop research to gather existing information in various forms like texts, images, audio, or video recordings.

Pros

• Broad overview: Provides a broad perspective on the research topic
• Supports primary research: Allows for the contextualizing of insights gathered from other research
• Cost and time efficient: Utilizes readily available data, saving time and resources

Cons

• Relevancy: Information may be outdated or not entirely relevant to the specific research question.
• Quality and bias issues: The accuracy and bias of the original data sources can be a concern.

Each project demands a unique approach; what worked for one may not work for another. That’s why starting with a good understanding of the brief and business challenge is so important to crafting the right approach.  

 

In closing…

If you crave insight into the human experience—all the contextual factors and contradictions that people might not otherwise think to share—qualitative research can be an incomparable way to understand the people you want to connect with. And at the very least, allow you to put real human faces to the people you serve. 

We promise you’ll walk away with renewed empathy and inspiration. And what better foundation is there to solve any challenge in a business with people at its core?

 

---

 

If you can’t tell, we love this kind of stuff at The Sound. It’s a huge part of how brands connect with people – so it’s only natural that qualitative research and people are a part of the process, and understanding people is how we get to possibilities. 

Ready to get started? Have questions?

We’re here to help.