To read this content please select one of the options below:

Nominal grouping sessions vs focus groups

Barry E. Langford (Barry E. Langford is Associate Professor of Marketing at the Florida Gulf Coast University, Fort Myers, Florida, USA.)
Gerald Schoenfeld (Gerald Schoenfeld is Associate Professor of Management, at the Florida Gulf Coast University, Fort Myers, Florida, USA.)
George Izzo (George Izzo is Assistant Professor of Marketing, Department of Marketing, University of Evansville, Evansville, Indiana, USA.)

Qualitative Market Research

ISSN: 1352-2752

Article publication date: 1 March 2002



These empirical results provide new and strong support for Langford’s 1994 quantitative demonstration that the qualitative results of nominal grouping sessions (NGS) are highly reliable and valid. We also show that NGS produces responses in greater depth and breadth than many years of research have demonstrated for focus groups. Since the NGS procedure provides broad, deep, reliable and valid results that are ranked by importance to the subject of interest, we had all the detailed information we needed for effective decision making without subsequently surveying a random sample of the population. The quantitative survey results strongly supports our conclusion that NGS provided all the correct answers in detail. We firmly believe NGS eventually will replace focus groups as the qualitative research method of choice when valid and complete results are important to decision makers, and will render many surveys unnecessary.



Langford, B.E., Schoenfeld, G. and Izzo, G. (2002), "Nominal grouping sessions vs focus groups", Qualitative Market Research, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 58-70.




Copyright © 2002, MCB UP Limited

Related articles