Press "Enter" to skip to content

sometimes I think that my training methodology was not as bad

Reading for labour issues a text called the “New Qualitative Research -is there a need?”, it was proposed that require major changes in the qualitative approaches, to overcome the problems of traditional approaches.

For example: ‘Even worse, the process of market research, both quantitative and qualitative, forces respondents to create these reasons on the spot, In spite of our question-and-answer format, most consumers do not have a ready logical viewpoint on cotton balls, detergent or even the car they drive’

And we suggest that, as all the modern (’90) neurobiological research has shown there to overcome that, and the left brain, and vision racionalizante and questions of qualitative research.

What is the solution? ‘It is our belief that a good moderator is one who answers all of the questions of the brief, not the one who asks them all. The overall objectives of a discussion guide must be to direct the interview, not to constitute the entire session’ That the guideline does not, you can design questions ahead of time and that super-new techniques (neuro-linguistic programming, role-play and psycho-drama and many others) would be required.

Now, I recognize that that doesn’t seem so new. In 1992, if badly I do not remember, when I had my first classes of qualitative techniques that was the whole idea. The whole idea is to not be a manager, and precisely to stop talking, that what you do is you probe further to ask as such. It seems that the old comment of Channels on the superiority of the approaches to Spanish (and French, given the provenance of theoretical Ibanez) about americans in qualitative techniques it was all the truth. Because they are announced, with all kinds of words grandiloquent, things that are actually common place, it does indicate a certain delay.