1

USER REQUIREMENTS GATHERING METHOD: FOCUS

GROUPS
INTRODUCTION
As part of the development lifecycle of an information system, a strategically planned
and well-executed user requirements gathering method is essential to ensure that the
end product successfully fulfils the expectations of users and provides the greatest value
to all of its stakeholders. Focus groups are a popular qualitative method for requirements
elicitation involving a relatively small group of stakeholders with varying backgrounds
that undertake a discussion where spontaneous reactions and ideas are fostered and
managed by a moderator. As a result of the discussion, user needs and opinions
regarding the features of a system can be identified which support a shared articulation
of a vision, design proposal and product concept that will address the target market
(Paetsch, Eberlein & Maurer, 2003, p. 2).

USEFULNESS OF FOCUS GROUPS

Focus groups are particularly effective at rapidly gathering design-oriented information
early on in the analysis and design phases where differing perspectives from a number of
respondents are simultaneously discussed under the guidance of a moderator (Fern,
1983, p. 121). Performing focus groups allows for user-driven insights to facilitate
decision making. By systematically combining a cross-section of stakeholders in a
conversational-type environment, this method is useful for requirements elicitation as it
supports the stimulation of ideas in the other participants present, and through a process
of discussion, a collective view can be established which is of greater value than the
individual contradictory ideas (Maguire & Bevan, 2002, p. 11). It is general practice to
perform approximately six to eight focus group sessions with up to ten contributors at
once in order to recognise trends and patterns across the various consumer groups
(Kuhn, 2000, pp. 310). By effectively assessing user needs, ideas and reactions across
focus groups, this qualitative technique provides useful insights into the requirements of
users, context of use and attitudes towards the new system (Maguire & Bevan, 2002, p.
10).
The interactive nature of the group setting entails several benefits as it influences
respondents to consider and build on each others thoughts with the aim of obtaining
new insights which would otherwise not be available from conducting other user
requirements gathering methods such as surveys or interviews (Kontio, Lehtola &
Bragge, 2004). The social gathering encourages participants to draw upon the feelings,
experiences and reactions of other users which can be particularly valuable when varying
degrees of authority are prevalent amongst the participants and decision-makers, when
language and culture is of importance, and when a measurement of the extent of
consensus is desired (Morgan & Kreuger, 1993). Furthermore, focus groups tend to be a
cost-efficient method of obtaining information from participants that have a great
amount of value to contribute particularly in the workforce such as practitioners or
experienced professionals, as numerous subjects can be interviewed collectively at
once (Kontio, Lehtola & Bragge, 2004). Hence, focus groups initiate a creative process
through a thorough discussion of ideas, perceptions, and experiences between group
members producing an integrative outcome of representative opinions that is much more
valuable than numerous conflicting individual perspectives (Kuhn, 2000, pp. 324).
Essentially, if the focus group discussion follows a structured agenda and is properly
guided by a skilful moderator, this qualitative technique can be quite effective in aiding
the elicitation of comprehensive user requirements via the purposeful use of social
interaction.

LIMITATIONS IN COMPARISON TO OTHER METHODS

Despite the various advantages of focus groups regarding to its ability to elicit rich data
that is more cumulative and elaborative than individual responses, they have a number
of limitations which must be considered to ensure an effective user requirements
gathering process (Lim & Tan, 2001).
Particularly in comparison to questionnaires or surveys, as focus groups often follow a
conversational arrangement, the data that is collected from this method in the form of
group dialogue transcriptions and recordings will involve a more complex analysis
process to identify key requirements concerning the functionality of the system (Then,
Rankin & All, 2014). In addition, focus groups are unable to obtain information from a
sufficiently large population to ensure that the assembled requirements can be
generalised across the wider target market. By using a combination of both 'closed'
questions with fixed answers and 'open' questions which enable the users to provide a
more comprehensive response based on their own ideas, surveys are more effective
method of rapidly acquiring a large volume of both quantitative and qualitative data for
greater insights into the demands of the broader market through a process of statistical
analysis (Maguire & Bevan, 2002).
A reluctance of participants to express their true thoughts and perspectives can also
arise if there are trust issues amongst the group that create an uncomfortable
atmosphere. This discouraging setting can cause groups to be lethargic and uninspired to
contribute to the discussion, as well as result in dominant and aggressive members
overtaking the group dynamics (Then, Rankin & All, 2014, p. 17). The concept of
groupthink can also arise where a desire for agreement and minimal conflict can result in
individual not disclosing their true perspectives or assessing other alternatives and hence
the collected data may reflect an inaccurate representation of user needs (Boateng,
2012, p. 55). These issues that arise within a social interaction are not prevalent in other
requirements gathering methods such as surveys and interviews that enable the
respondent to more freely put forth their own individual ideas. Therefore, the style and
skill of the facilitator is critical to the success of the focus group where the correct
controls must be implemented on a situational basis to diffuse political issues that may
limit the disclosure of opinions and avoid the discussion leading to irrelevant issues
(Kontio, Lehtola & Bragge, 2004). The recruitment effort to assemble groups can also be
challenging due to location and time constraints, where poor organisation and
moderation can waste valuable time and resources (Then, Rankin & All, 2014).

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
The project scenario involves the development of a social media system that creates
value for UNSW student communities. Based on the limited time and resources, focus
groups will be an effective user requirements gathering method as it allows a broad
range of user perspectives to be rapidly obtained and combined to reach a consensus
early on in the project lifecycle. The focus groups sessions should be performed across
the planning, analysis and design phases to ensure that the end result successfully
meets user expectations.

SAMPLING AND RECRUITMENT OF PARTICIPANTS

It is essential to systematically sample the segments of the target market that will
provide in-depth contributions towards creating an understanding of the context of use
and complement the technical specifications with information regarding the workflow
(Kuhn, 2000, p. 310). In this case, it would be effective to select participants across the
various UNSW faculties to obtain sufficient breadth of ideas. Establishing groups of
between six to ten participants will ensure that the group will be manageable whilst
reducing the risk of limited discussion occurring (Steward, Treasure & Chadwick, 2008,
pp. 291).
Ensuring the cooperation and commitment of contributors throughout the recruitment
process is also essential to produce a successful focus group session. Therefore, investing
time and effort into making personal contact with participants can help build group
rapport and improve the overall success of the discussion which may involve handing out
flyers to better engage potential participants (Millward, 2012, p. 423). Furthermore,
providing an alternative avenue for individuals to self-select themselves, such as
advertising an online survey on popular social media platforms (e.g. UNSW-specific
Facebook page) will reduce the constraints of time and geographical dependence as well
as allow the project team to reach a broader user base who are motivated to contribute
their own ideas.

LOCATION, SETTING AND LENGTH OF SESSIONS

Conducting the focus groups within booked rooms at UNSW will provide convenience and
comfort to participants for the face-to-face discussion. A relatively informal setting with
an appropriate seating arrangement such as a circular formation is also important to
create an atmosphere that is conducive to discussion (Millward, 2012, p. 426). Although
the length of the discussion can vary, up to two hours should be allocated for each
session to allow sufficient time to build rapport with participants, adequately explain the
agenda, achieve in-depth information exchange and summarise the outcomes of the
session (Then, Rankin & All, 2014). By performing approximately six to eight sessions
throughout the planning, analysis and design phases of the project will allow trends in
user requirements to be identified across the various groups and iteratively improved.
Although this will involve extensive preparation, it is feasible as the project team will
comprise of 4 to 6 members and hence the roles and responsibilities can be easily
distributed.

FACILITATOR STYLE AND SKILLS

It is critical to the effectiveness of a focus group that the facilitator is well-prepared and
has good people skills to actively engage all members in the discussion and minimise the
limitations of groupthink and status dynamics (Millward, 2012, pp.426). The facilitator
should utilise non-intrusive moderation techniques whilst making sure not to let their own
bias influence the session (Kontio, Lehtola & Bragge, 2004). By firstly building a rapport
with focus group members, this will promote a permissive and non-intimidating
environment that will allow participants to speak openly about their views. Hence, in the

context of the group project, it would be ideal for the project manager or business
analyst to moderate the focus group sessions to guide it in such a way that generates the
desired information about user demands and requirements. Essentially, by taking a
pragmatic approach built on a strong understanding of the objectives of the project and
the promotion of an encouraging setting that is conducive to information exchange will
allow the facilitator to perform effective focus group discussions (Morgan, Fellows &
Guevara, 2008, pp. 191).

ANALYSIS OF FOCUS GROUP DATA

The qualitative data that is gathered from the focus group sessions in the form of
transcripts, audio recordings and observational notes will undergo a continuous process
of analysis that occurs synchronously with the data collection, involving the five key
stages of familiarisation, identifying a thematic framework, indexing, charting, and
interpretation (Rabiee, 2004).
Once the data is collected, thoroughly reading through the transcripts, observational and
summary notes will allow an overall familiarisation of the data to be achieved. The main
issues, concepts and themes articulated by the contributors will then allow a thematic
framework to be identified to filter and classify the data (Srivastava & Thomson, 2009,
pp. 75). The data should then be indexed involving the sieving, highlighting and sorting
of quotes and assessing the comparisons both within and across cases (Rabiee, 2004).
Subsequently, charting should be used to reduce the data by comparing and contrasting
data and grouping similar quotes together (Srivastava & Thomson, 2009, pp. 75). As a
result, a user-oriented interpretation of the data can be obtained and translated into
functional and non-functional requirements for the project.
However, following this framework will predominantly involve text analysis, and therefore
risk not carefully considering the reactions and inherent responses of the participants
within the face-to-face setting. This can be mitigated by meticulously examining which
members respond to each question, the sequence in which each member contributes,
the characteristics of their responses and the non-verbal communication used (Castel et
al., 2008). This will increase the rigor of the focus group analysis for a more complete
assessment of user needs. However, as this will risk further extending the project
timeline, a trade-off must be made between the depth of analysis and the available time
and resources.

E-FOCUS GROUP: ONLINE FORUMS

A number of disadvantages such as groupthink and the influence of dominant members
of face-to-face focus groups can be mitigated by also leveraging online forums to
conduct focus group discussions. The development of Group Support Systems (GSS) have
allowed focus groups to be conducted in an online forum environment, alleviating the
issues associated with face-to-face group communication whilst enabling anonymous and
simultaneous contribution, a well organised agenda, real-time voting and multi-criteria
analysis prospects, as well as a comprehensive electronic record of the discussions
alleviating much of the need to manually produce transcripts for further investigation
(Kontio, Lehtola & Bragge, 2004). The problem of groupthink where the desire for
agreement and minimal conflict within the group overshadows a pragmatic evaluation of
alternatives thereby limiting individual creativity and independent thinking is also
reduced (Boateng, 2012, p. 55). Moreover, the electronic focus group will also decrease
the geographic dependence of participants and allow for a larger sample size whilst
avoiding further complicating the session.

CONCLUSION
5

Although focus groups yield a number of benefits in regards to rapidly gathering in-depth
user requirements with the objective of obtaining a shared product concept that will
address the target market, the issues of groupthink and dominant contributors can skew
the collected data. Conducting electronic focus groups using online forums can mitigate
these risks, however, there is still the limitation of the requirements not effectively
addressing the wider market. Hence, ideally in order to produce a comprehensive list of
requirements that accurately reflects user need, focus groups should be used in
conjunction with other methods such as surveys and that will enable a large volume of
users to be reached and better identification of key requirements of the broader market
via statistical analysis, as well as interviews that will avoid the influences of groupthink
and status dynamics.

REFERENCES
Castel, L., Williams, K., Bosworth, H., Eisen, S., Hahn, E., Irwin, D., Kelly, M., Morse, J.,
Stover, A., DeWalt, D. and DeVellis, R., 2008. Content validity in the PROMIS social-health
domain: a qualitative analysis of focus-group data. Qual Life Res, 17(5), pp.737-749.
Cher Ping, L. and Seng Chee, T., 2001. Online discussion boards for focus group
interviews: an exploratory study. Journal of Educational Enquiry, 2(1), pp.50-60.
Maguire, M. and Bevan, N., 2002. User requirements analysis. Proceedings of IFIP 17th
World Computer Congress, pp.133-148.
Fern, E. F. 1983, Focus Groups: A Review of Some Contradictory Evidence, Implications,
And Suggestions for Future Research, Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 10(1), pp.
121-126.
Gill, P., Stewart, K., Treasure, E. and Chadwick, B., 2008. Methods of data collection in
qualitative research: interviews and focus groups. BDJ, 204(6), pp.291-295.
Kuhn, K., 2000. Problems and Benefits of Requirements Gathering With Focus Groups: A
Case Study. Int. J. of Human-Comp. Interaction, 12(3), pp.309-325.
Morgan, D., Fellows, C. and Guevara, H., 2008. Emergent approaches to focus group
research. Handbook of emergent methods, pp.189-205.
Morgan D.L. and Kreuger R.A. 1993. When to use focus groups and why. Morgan D.L. (Ed.)
Successful Focus Groups. London: Sage.
Paetsch, F., Eberlein, A., and Maurer, F., 2003. Requirements engineering and agile
software
development,
ENABLING
TECHNOLOGIES:
INFRASTRUCTURE
FOR
COLLABORATIVE ENTERPRISES, 2003. WET ICE 2003. PROCEEDINGS. TWELFTH IEEE
INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOPS ON, pp. 308-313.
Then, K.L., Rankin, J.A. & All, R. 2014. Focus Group Reserch: What Is It and How Can It Be
Used? Canadian Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, Vol.24 (1), pp.16-22