Recently, as part of a sizeable project, I have had to create 4 questionnaires for a range of people in a particular profession. The 4 questionnaires applied to a set of 3 people. Person A answered 2 questionnaires, person B one questionnaire and person C also one questionnaire. In this instance, I introduced persons A & B to their questionnaires which they completed in their own time and person A introduced person C to their questionnaire and also facilitated the completion of the questionnaire with person C. The data gathered from the questionnaires are to form part of a research project.
I created the first number of drafts of each questionnaire in conjunction with a subject matter expert (SME). I also had access to an analysis expert for guidance. When creating the first drafts, the majority of questions were yes/no answers with a box for further information. The reason for this was, the questionnaires would be completed in a short space of time which I had no control over. Could range from 30 seconds to 5 minutes. I also considered literacy, cultural background, social background and tone of the questions.
Once the initial drafts were completed I engaged with the SME and analysis expert. I realised the benefit of this approach very quickly. Firstly, the SME’s broadened the range of the questions to areas that I had not considered for the research, in particular, gathering data on the social and educational aspects of the research. Secondly, the structure of the questions were mostly changed. We removed about 80% of the yes/no questions and replaced them with a question and a range of options to choose from as an answer. This was a terrific learning. By creating yes/no type questions with a box for more information I was assuming the individual completing the questionnaire had a wide knowledge of the subject matter and could formulate a number of sentences in reply and all under time pressure. Creating options engaged the individual immediately and removed some of the thinking work involved. Great care was taken to ensure the options were not generating a specific outcome to influence the research.
Once the questionnaires were completed I created a checklist for the individuals (person A) to assist them facilitate the questionnaire with person C. This I found challenging, however the feedback I received was that the checklist was useful and helped the individual facilitating the questionnaire to have a similar approach to all interviewees.
Overall, I found the process really interesting and had multiple learnings, some already mentioned. Another learning was working with the SME’s around word selection to ensure a technical term could be understood in layman’s terms.