In professional market research, combining qualitative and quantitative methods is often recommended for various scenarios. For example, conducting focus groups or ethnographic research as Phase 1 before a survey research Phase 2 is a common combination. Experienced researchers know this type of combination significantly informs our understanding of customer attitudes and behaviors related to the topic. This in turn helps the researcher generate a broader set of hypotheses before designing the questionnaire, reducing bias and improving overall research quality.
Less commonly, there are cases where qualitative methods follow survey research. This can help us explore the deeper context or "why" behind important or surprising responses. Surprising results from self-reported attitudes or behaviors are great (they often point to competitive opportunities or have other revenue-impacting implications), but validation is the appropriate next step. And this is also a proactive step to support questions from any likely skeptics who may resist findings that challenge the status quo. In many such cases, follow-up IDIs or online focus groups are conducted to get a deeper context and understanding of the research’s target population, which may validate or refute the surprising results.
Newer researchers may be surprised to see how much we learn from even just 5-7 follow-up IDIs. I’ve had cases where follow-up interviews found very important (and leverageable!) explanations that validated the results and inspired new business opportunities.
Although rare, qualitative research intended to explore surprising results might also yield feedback on the survey itself. Was the surprising result bad data? Was there widespread misinterpretation of a key question’s wording that caused the (false) result? While efforts are made to prevent such issues, objectively acknowledging the possibility is important.
Whether qualitative precedes quantitative or vice versa, the combination has been a powerful and common pattern in professional market research for decades.
Here’s an example of a research report that blends reporting of qualitative and quantitative data, from Ikea.
