It’s easy to lose sight of your objective.

When I did focus group moderator training in the early 90s, the trainer made a point I’ve never forgotten. In qualitative research, everything you do must be driven by the research objectives. This is a lesson I pass on whenever I mentor new qualitative researchers – the research objectives are your North Star. They inform every aspect of the research: the research specifications, the screening questionnaire, the discussion guide, the stimuli, the analysis, everything.

This idea seems so basic that you’d think it doesn’t even need to be said. But it does. As the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche once wrote, “to forget one’s purpose is the commonest form of stupidity.” It’s easy to lose track of why you’re doing what you’re doing and get distracted by considerations unrelated to your goal.

Remember Kodak? It used to be one of the world’s great brands. The company invented the digital camera in the mid 1970s. However, it failed to develop this technology, despite its potential to revolutionize photography. Rather than staying true to its objective of remaining dominant in photography, the company instead chose to protect its film business. We all know how this story ends: Kodak declared bankruptcy in 2012.

When I start a qualitative study, my first order of business is to ask about the research objectives. Have they been fully articulated and agreed to by all stakeholders? Are they actionable and specific? If detailed objectives don’t exist, that’s job one.

Even with solid objectives, it’s easy to get sidetracked by transient, sometimes urgent complications. As the saying goes, “when you’re up to your ass in alligators, it’s difficult to remember that your initial objective was to drain the swamp.”

It’s common, once qualitative research is underway, to see unrelated questions added to the research because ‘we’re here anyway.’ A few years ago, I was conducting shop-along interviews. Our objective was to evaluate the visibility and strategic appropriateness of on-shelf signage.

Midway through the project, the brand team decided to test new package designs. Before we knew it, this took over the study, leaving no room for the original objectives. Fortunately, the research director restored order before things went completely off the rails.

This principle has implications beyond the qualitative research or business worlds. It’s easy to get diverted by external factors. Social pressures can undermine your focus. People who don’t understand your goals or share your passions can push you off your path. Nietzsche believed succumbing to such pressures to be a betrayal of one’s individuality and true purpose, and that only by committing fully to our purpose can we truly flourish.

So, as best you can, ignore the alligators and pay attention to Herr Nietzsche. Don’t lose sight of your purpose – it’s how you achieve success.

Thanks for all the emails and comments on my last newsletter on fear. Those led to interesting conversations, some of which focused on hope.

This isn’t surprising; hope and fear are two sides of the same coin. As a qualitative researcher, I pay close attention to hopes and fears. They are the two key attributes of an anticipation mindset – looking to the future with either anxiety or optimism. Anytime a research participant says something that sounds like one of those, I immediately dig into it. I’ve learned that, at the core of hopes and fears, lie beliefs. Beliefs are key – they drive everything we think and do. As philosopher and neuroscientist Sam Harris has written:

“A belief is a lever that, once pulled, moves almost everything in a person’s life.”

Sam is right – beliefs drive perceptions, decisions, and behaviors. I once conducted research among individuals who – despite having high blood pressure – weren’t taking the drugs they’d been prescribed. A number of factors drove this noncompliance, but a big one was fear. Some had specific fears: “my aunt fell and got a concussion because her meds made her blood pressure too low.” Others had non-specific fears: “I just worry about side effects.”

Both of these fears were rooted in a belief. The first participant believed – with good reason – that too high a dose can lead to hypotension, which increases the risk of fainting and falling. The second had a vague belief that “they don’t test these medicines enough.” He couldn’t cite any facts to support this belief, but that didn’t matter – it was real to him.

Sometimes we forgo things that would clearly benefit us due to irrational fears: enriching travel, leaving a bad job or a dysfunctional relationship, or avoiding an important medical therapy. And sometimes we get into patterns of self-destructive behaviors because we’re hoping that … ‘this time it’ll be different.’

That common wisdom about the definition of insanity – doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result – rings true. At the core of this sort of behavior generally lies an irrational hope … ‘maybe this time around Lucy won’t pull the football away.’

Hopes and fears can serve as a way of coping with uncertainty or adversity, and are valuable if kept in their place. But we need to be aware of them, lest they lead to bad decisions. It’s a good practice to interrogate our hopes and fears, particularly when they seem to be influencing our behavior. Where do they come from? Are they rational? Upon what beliefs are they based? Should we allow them to drive our behavior in this situation? The answers to those hard questions can help guide us to better decisions.

It’s easy. Just add fear.

There is no problem that’s so bad that you can’t make it even worse. I’ve found that fear is a great way to do that.

Don’t get me wrong; fear is a normal and healthy thing. It’s an evolved trait – the fight-or-flight response – and it wouldn’t have emerged and stuck around over 800 million years of animal evolution if it weren’t useful. But today we live in a different environment than the one in which our species evolved, and sometimes modern environmental factors don’t mesh with ancient instincts.

When fear gets out of control, bad things happen – panic, reckless decisions, freezing up, people exploiting those fears. The list goes on. People become angry, and look to place blame. This phenomenon was fully on display during the Covid pandemic. Irrational fears clearly made some aspects of this situation worse, and unscrupulous people exploited those fears.

I certainly see this as a qualitative researcher. When I interview research participants about emotionally loaded topics, such as healthcare, children, politics, or their financial situations, they sometimes seem overwhelmed with fear.

Often this fear seems to be triggered and stoked by information they get from cable news and social media – two of those modern environmental factors. I usually make a point of digging into those fears, as that can lead to important insights, but that’s a topic for a future newsletter.

Another example: I’m always a bit of a nervous wreck before I start a qualitative study. Always. This might be due to a legitimate reason – it’s a new topic for me or a new client, or maybe there’s dysfunction among the research team. In other words, there are real risks at play. In that case, I’ll think about how to prepare, and devise strategies for dealing with the risks.

But, if there’s no identifiable reason for being nervous, I just remind myself that I’m always anxious before starting a project, and not to worry about that too much. It’s normal, and natural, and it’s my friend – it keeps me sharp.

FDR got it right in 1933 – “we have nothing to fear but fear itself.” I frequently remind myself not to be afraid of being afraid. I also try to remember not to confuse fear with anxiety. They’re closely related, but definitely not the same thing. Fear is a natural, human response. Respect it and use it, but keep it in its place.

Once upon a time, you and I might have had a conversation like this:

     You: “Well, obviously, the world is flat.”

     Me: “Of course it is. Just look around you!”

     You: “I mean, it’s just common sense!”

To us, this conversation would have sounded rational, with your use of ‘common sense’ seeming entirely appropriate. Nowadays, it just looks silly.

I was once interviewing dieticians for a qualitative research study on children’s health. When a participant said, “a good breakfast is essential to a child’s health,” I asked her how she knew that. After some back-and-forth, during which she was unable to cite evidence, she snapped, “for God’s sake, it’s common sense! Everybody knows this!”

And that’s the problem with ‘common sense.’ It’s a term that can make something seem rational and correct, even when it might be neither.

I once wrote a post on being skeptical of intuition, and those principles apply here. Common sense can be useful, but can also lead you astray. Here’s why you should be skeptical of common sense, whether it’s your own or somebody else’s.

The term has a broad range of meanings:

Practical wisdom. Knowledge of how the world works gained through everyday experiences, leading to better problem-solving and decision-making. In other words, street-smarts.

Intuitive understanding. A grasp of basic truths without the need for topic-specific knowledge or education.

Sound judgement. An ability to assess situations based on critical thinking and sensible reasoning.

Cultural norms. Shared values and beliefs within a specific society, creating unwritten rules and expectations governing behavior.

And, its meaning can be difficult to pin down because:

It’s heavily influenced by culture. Members of an ethnic or religious community might see certain moral principles as common sense, while outsiders might consider them bizarre.

It’s subjective. My common sense could be your nonsense. Common sense is informed by pre-existing biases and assumptions. Also, if you hear something frequently enough, it could start to make sense, no matter how crazy it might be.

It’s less reliable in complex or highly technical situations. If you’re fixing a screen door, common sense can help, particularly if you’ve done it before. But, in the control room of a nuclear plant, common sense alone isn’t going to be enough.

This is not to say that common sense is of no value. It can be reliable, particularly with familiar and straightforward matters. However, in complicated and unfamiliar situations, common sense could lead to errors or misconceptions. Common sense might tell you that you’re healthy, as you look and feel okay. But lab results might say otherwise.

Common sense can be where your assessment of a situation begins, but probably shouldn’t be where it ends. It’s important to seek reliable evidence to support our conclusions. Ultimately facts – not gut feeling – must carry the day.

“Show me the incentive, I’ll show you the outcome.”

I was speaking with a qualitative research recruiter at the recent QRCA conference in Denver about the role monetary incentives play in qualitative recruiting. She said, “Look, you have to pay participants so they feel that their time is being valued – they won’t participate otherwise. But that’s not the main reason most of them do it.” She went on to say that people are primarily motivated to participate in qualitative because they think it sounds fun and interesting, and because they genuinely want to help.

This conversation made me think of Charlie Munger – the longtime investor and vice-chairman of Berkshire Hathaway quoted above – who passed away recently at the tender age of 99. He was a savvy businessman who had a way with words. His famous remark that I quote above about incentives and outcomes is a foundational principle: if you see something as being in your interest, you’re likely to do it, even if it conflicts with your own moral compass.

When I worked in brand management, I marveled at the ability of our salespeople to play the company’s bonus program like a piano. They found no end of ingenious schemes to maximize their bonuses, even if they weren’t actually good for the business. The problem – the company’s performance incentives weren’t aligned with the ultimate desired outcome (bottom line profitability) but with an interim metric (unit volume).

Incentives strongly influence our decisions and actions. They’re one of those powerful tools I was thinking about when I wrote a recent and popular post. They can be instrumental in achieving goals. But, if you’re not careful, they can have disastrous, unintended consequences – like salespeople selling product at a loss to make their bonus target.

One of the reasons we conduct qualitative research is to understand how incentives drive consumer motivations and influence decision-making. It’s important to realize that incentives create biases. So, using qualitative tools to identify and understand incentives and biases can help us to understand opinions and behaviors.

This principle applies to qualitative in another important way. How we interact with research participants – specifically, how we provide affirmation during conversation – can lead to honesty and respectful participation. In other words, if we make participants feel good about themselves for being candid, we’ll incentivize that behavior. If, on the other hand, through body language, tone of voice and facial expressions, we encourage them to tell us what they think we want to hear, that’s probably what they’re going to do.

So, whether you’re a qualitative researcher or not, it pays to be aware of incentives. They can often be the hidden factor driving decisions and actions.