The value of rambling

Picture this: you’re moderating a focus group and you ask a question that’s very important to your client, in fact it is THE question; the one they most want to understand.

But your first participant is responding with some long rambling answer. You’re thinking, “Where is this guy going? He’s using up too much time. This stuff isn’t relevant. Arrgghhh…hurry up and finish, I’ve got 5 more people to go!”
 
As a former agency planner who’s moderated many groups, I had that series of thoughts in just about every group I oversaw. I was frankly dismissing that participant in my mind, waiting to talk to someone who could give me the “right” answer or a more interesting idea much sooner. I wanted everyone in the group to be quick thinkers and well-spoken.
 
Of course to be fair to anyone who’s ever moderated, the cause for this impatience and desire for amazingly focused communicators is a factor of time. Focus groups come with one to two hour time limits. We’ve all had the little clock in front of our discussion guide to glance at along the way. It’s sort of a ticking time bomb, especially when you have a packed discussion guide. So it’s natural when you’re under pressure to want people to get to the point quickly and move on. But no matter how well you recruit, not everyone can play by your schedule.
 
Now, there are many different schools of thought on how people communicate but I think it’s safe to say that at one time or another we’ve all experienced the value of a stream of consciousness. You start out with one thought and wind your way around to something very different, experience an “ah-ha” moment and end up in a far more interesting place, simply by letting your mind wander. Even if you don’t find that interesting idea you’ve probably revealed a lot more about your thought process with whatever question or issue you were considering. The key is that you had the time and the space to do a little exploring in your own mind and let things develop. While we all can benefit from this, I believe some people really need this kind of open space to give thoughtful answers to questions and, frankly, I think most people need some time and space to come up with ideas, especially interesting ones.
 
Years ago I read David Galenson’s book, Old Master and Young Geniuses, where he explores two ways in which artists are able to tap into their creativity. There are the “old masters” like Cézanne who work through trial and error to arrive at their major breakthrough work, who he calls “experimental innovators”. Then there are the “young geniuses” like Picasso who hit on breakthrough ideas quickly and very early in their artistic careers, who he calls “conceptual innovators.” In many ways, I think every research project is filled with “experimental innovators” who need some space to think and develop and “conceptual innovators” who can grasp something quickly and respond with interesting answers and ideas on the spot.
 
In my current work with BrainJuicer, I focus on qualitative research in an online community setting and see lots of rich responses to questions, responses far more insightful than my experience in focus groups. The difference, I believe, is that the clock isn’t ticking as loudly for me or the participants. Responses are posted asynchronously within a five-day period and someone can respond with as much detail as they like. I do see lots of rambling but I also see where these ramblings resolve, because I didn’t have to interrupt and move on. I see how consumers think and learn more about them as people, simply because we get to share more time together. And communities are equally welcoming to the “conceptual innovators” who grasp ideas more quickly and offer up the shorter, focused answers.
 
All types of people can flourish in online communities – moderators, experimental innovators, conceptual innovators, and everything inbetween. Sure, not every post is brilliant and not every ramble really does go somewhere, but many are and many do. The key is that online communities give every participant the chance to respond in a way that works for them and in doing so helps the moderator, researcher, client, and yes, maybe even the participants learn more along the way.

Read more from BrainJuicer.