1

USER REQUIREMENTS GATHERING METHOD: FOCU S 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 crosssection 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 nonintimidating 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 multicriteria 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
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 the demand 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