Fieldwork & Focus Groups
Two of the most common research methods in innovation are fieldwork (going to where people live and work) and focus groups (bringing people together to discuss). Both are valuable - but they have very different strengths, and one is far more misused than the other.
Fieldwork: go to the real context
Fieldwork - contextual inquiry, ethnographic observation, home and site visits - is the gold standard for generative research. Watching people in their actual environment reveals the workarounds, frustrations, and realities they would never think to mention in an interview. What people do often differs sharply from what they say, and only fieldwork catches the gap.
Fieldwork done well
- • Observe in the real context, doing the real task
- • Watch behaviour first; ask "why" second
- • Look for workarounds - they mark unmet needs
- • Capture the environment, not just the person
Focus groups: useful, but handle with care
Focus groups gather a handful of people to react to ideas together. They can surface language, reactions, and a range of views quickly. But they carry real hazards for innovation research.
The rule of thumb: for discovering real needs, prefer fieldwork and one-on-one interviews where the individual cannot hide behind the group. Reserve focus groups for exploring reactions, vocabulary, and range - and never mistake "the group liked it" for proof that a novel innovation will succeed.
When your organization does research, does it go to the field and watch real behaviour, or mostly rely on rooms, surveys, and what people say? What might that be hiding?
Sources
- Beyer, H. & Holtzblatt, K., Contextual Design, 1998 (contextual inquiry).
- Portigal, S., Interviewing Users, 2013.
- Global Innovation Institute (GInI), Foundations of Innovation body of knowledge.