As an NLP Master Practitioner and kids specialist I have been using NLP techniques in my focus groups for many years. I want to share these ideas with you and urge you to employ them too.

A key NLP pillar is that how the world looks to us is not the same as it is for our focus group respondents. Whilst we appear at the venue armed with briefcase, armfuls of stimulus material that has been painstakingly prepared and our ubiquitous laptop, our respondents live a very different life. They have usually had to make arrangements for childcare that they hope will be sufficient and they have possibly had to leave notes for various family members, text messages and even a meal. Their heads are full of the things they have to juggle and they are (if they are virgin respondents) probably worried that they look OK and will be able to answer the questions. They don’t know anyone there and wonder what the other respondents will be like and hope it isn’t someone they avoid at the school gate.

Imagine you are that person sitting in the group. How could you put their mind at rest and reassure them that whatever they say will be of value. We usually have a set patter covering this and the things we need to tell them to comply with the MRS Code of Conduct but next time you go through it just take it slower because respondents are hearing it for the first time and are unfamiliar with the process (we hope!).

We show them material, DVDs, pilot episodes, commercials, NPD concepts and although we explain that these are unfinished and elements can be changed and will be, as a result of what they suggest, for them this is all new and unfamiliar territory. You could show them a pack of some household product and get them talking about what they would change, talk about colours, style, font, strap line and so on just to demonstrate what you are looking for before showing them your research materials.

 

They are not used to being filmed and I have yet to find a viewing facility that really does look like a normal respondent’s home, principally because there is a huge one way mirror and the room is completely sterile. They will behave differently and say things they wouldn’t normally say. This is not a normal situation, let’s face it. They want to please you and if they like you, give you the feedback they think you are looking for. The only way to encourage them to be really honest and genuinely helpful to the project is to observe whether they are speaking from their own experience or their imagined experience. You can do this by watching their eyes.

If their eyes look to your left they are constructing images rather than recalling them from their own experience.

The VAK on the diagram refers to whether they focus on what they see (visual), what they hear (auditory) or what they feel (kinaesthetic). Ideally you’ll have a mix of all three in the group so to strengthen rapport, reflect their choice of words back to the group and then translate them into the other preferences. Here’s an example,

Respondent (visual) “I love the way the mother is looking at the baby on the front of the pack, she really looks as if she loves her baby”

Moderator “You love the way she is looking at her baby? How do the rest of you feel? (kinaesthetic) what would you say (auditory) what do you think of the image (repeat visual because that is the focus of the question)

Visual respondents will be particularly good at working with visual material and enjoy being creative in the group, making collages and drawing. 

Auditory respondents will enjoy the discussion, exchanging views. 

Kinaesthetic respondents will enjoy the ambiance and doing set tasks – they’ll be the first to jump out of their chair to group brands on the floor or sticking pictures on a board.

Work to their strengths by having a good selection of tasks or if the project specifically requires a visual strength, recruit on that basis.

Be aware too of your own VAK. Do you say, “I can see what you’re saying” (V), “I hear what you’re saying” (A) or “I can grasp what you’re saying”(K)? Use a variety of VAK in your topic guide to engage with the entire group.

As Qualitative researchers we are expected to ‘perform’ in front of clients by running a smooth and professional focus group comprising 8 respondents who don’t know each other , convened somewhere unfamiliar and using language and concepts that are mostly unfamiliar. Therefore it is extremely important to establish rapport quickly at the beginning and build it during the session so that by the end of two hours, respondents feel they can share their feelings about the project and you will meet your brief. NLP gives us some great techniques for building rapport.

The first is matching and mirroring. We can match respondents’ appearance by dressing much like them rather than arriving straight from a meeting in a business suit. We can match their language patterns as already described and we can match body language by sitting like them. If they are sitting back, you sit back.

Secondly, we can match their tone of voice. Visual people speak very quickly and with a higher pitch compared to the slower and slightly lower toned auditory respondent so match respondent pace and tone for increased rapport.

Thirdly we can observe their Meta programmes which is the way information is processed. Some respondents will be big chunk and find detail harder to grasp just as small chunk find concepts rather alien. Others might want to match and agree with everyone, others want to disagree (mismatch). Some are ‘away from’ and focus on what they don’t want whereas others are ‘towards’ and talk about what they do want. Some like options and can cope with several different concepts but others are ‘procedure’ and want to choose one and get the job done. Being aware of the difference will help you understand the group dynamics and you can alter the way you ask the questions to suit the way your respondents process it.

We can obtain richer feedback from our groups by challenging deletions, distortions and generalisations. Deletions are when someone uses a comparative adjective but deletes the context such as ‘that’s much better’ or ‘I like that one more’; we need to challenge the deletion by asking ‘better than what, in what way better?

Distortion is caused when we assume what respondents mean when they say something. It can be tempting to make assumptions when we’ve already done 6 groups of an 8 group project and heard similar phrases yet it is more respectful to reflect your summary back to them first before presenting it to the group as a whole for discussion. Respondents sometimes do this to each other as well, so step in and do a comprehension check.

Generalisations are when respondents claim that they ‘always do……’ or ‘never buy……’ challenge this by reflecting the generalisation back to them emphasising the generalisation. For example, ‘you never use Tesco’s own brand?’ You might well find that the exceptions are more revealing, for example “well, I do if they are on offer 2 for 1 or if it’s for the kids”.

Using Clean Language is when we show respect for our respondents by reflecting their own words back to them rather than using the words printed in our topic or discussion guides that have been agreed with clients. When we present a topic, listen for how respondents refer to it and the language they use as described earlier in the VAK and rapport sections. You can dig deeper however by using clean language like this.

Respondent - “I really like the way the way the cooking instructions on the pack are laid out”

Moderator – “You really like the way the cooking instructions on the pack are laid out?”

Respondent – “Yes they make it look quite easy”

Moderator – “They make it look quite easy? Easy like what?”

Respondent – “Easy like I could really imagine myself cooking that for the kids. Maybe they could even do it themselves, yes that would be good.”

Moderator – “You say that would be good, good like what?”

Respondent – “Good like learning to cook so they can look after themselves when they leave home. Perhaps they could have other products in the range that teenagers would like such as…………”

Asking respondents to liken their feelings about a product, pack, concept or service to something else that is part of their everyday experience enables them to engage more deeply with the research and imagine how it will fit into their own life.

To summarise, although we have a huge amount to cover in a short time, our respondents are our data source on which clients will ultimately, albeit via our interpretation and analysis, make very important decisions. We owe it to our clients to apply whatever tools and techniques we have in our armoury to create a trusting and effective group experience in which to develop and explore our brief.  

 

Judy Bartkowiak

(MA Int. Marketing, Post Grad Dip. Market Research, NLP Master Practitioner)

Judy Bartkowiak was trained in Qualitative Research by Bill Schlackman and Wendy Gordon of Q-Search and then set up Plastow Research and more recently Kids Brands Europe specialising in working with children and parents for clients in the Toy and TV Industry. She has worked clientside for Mars, J & J Medical, Kodak and Numico as Consumer Insight Manager on Baby Food (Cow &Gate) in Amsterdam.

Judy now works as an NLP Life Coach and writer doing occasional Research Projects in the children’s’ market. She is the author of Teach Yourself: Be a happier parent with NLP published by Hodder Education and a number of books on NLP for parents, children, pregnancy and birth, workplace and teachers. These are available on her website www.nlpkids.com