It takes two flints to make a fire. (Louisa May Alcott)
Originally devised as a paper based questionnaire approach the Delphi Technique can also be used for face to face group sessions. It is a technique that encourages a variety of opinions but that through a series of discussion cycles it moves towards a group consensus. If you have a diverse and geographically spread group then the technique is probably easiest done by a series of online or paper based questionnaires.
I’m going to focus on the face to face (in person or online) version but hopefully from this you’ll get a sense of how it can be done purely by questionnaires. There’s no reason why you couldn’t do a mix of the two. Start with an online survey and then bring people together to share their initial responses and do further discussion rounds together.
Face to Face Delphi technique:
- Identify the area of inquiry and set a clear question. It should be specific enough to keep the discussion focused but broad enough to allow for differences of opinion. For example:
- ‘How many people do we need to work on this project?’ is probably too specific as there are likely to be a limited range of realistic responses.
- ‘What is the range of skills and experience we need to take us through the next period of our business plan delivery?’ gives a broad enough range for people to have different opinions, is future focused and requires some sort of consensus to be reached to support action planning. It allows for several rounds of discussion to firstly determine the range, then debate priorities, then consider the implications and finally agree what is feasible to implement
- Identify your participants and gain their commitment to the process
- Create the first round questionnaire (this could be sent in advance or handed out on the day)
- Individual work 1: everyone works on their own to response to the first question
- Small group work 1: people come together in small groups to discuss their individual responses. The information is then ranked in order of importance
- Whole group work 1: all the discussions are combined and the whole group ranks issues raised from most to least important
- Individual work 2: individually the participants then reconsider the whole group discussion, and their own views on the rankings
- Small group work 2: individual thoughts are combined again and compared back to the whole group ranking of issues. Groups can then decide whether they are happy to agree with the earlier rankings or if they wish to bring evidence for making changes. The point of this is not to persuade others to your point of view but to add evidence about things that may have been overlooked
- Whole group work 2: groups report back and share their updated lists. Time is allowed for clarification only (time limits should be strictly enforced). Keeping momentum is important at this stage to ensure everyone stays engaged
- Whole group agreement: keep repeating steps seven to nine until a consensus has been found. Try and ensure this is a genuine agreement and not being done because the group is bored, tired or keen to get on with other things
This may all sound a bit onerous but there is no reason why the different rounds can’t be kept quite short, maybe ten to fifteen minutes. What you don’t want to do is allow the discussion to ramble on and for people to express opinions that may be old ‘hobby horses’ without giving clear evidence to support their views.
Tips:
- Formulate a good inquiry question
- Have an effective facilitator (they may be internal or independent)
- Keep to the format and make sure participants know the purpose of each round of discussion
- Ensure the findings are acted on (otherwise you’ll lose future commitment)
- Capture other issues that emerge but that may not be directly relevant at that point in time
- Ensure everyone’s views are treated equally
- Keep the discussions realistic
- Note areas where more information or research is needed
Pros and cons of the technique:
Pros:
- Allows for the sharing of collective views without people necessarily having to come together physically
- If it is solely via online questionnaire it can be completely anonymous which may prove beneficial from some participants
- Responses are weighted equally so no individual perspective can unduly influence the opinions of the group
- Using a ranking system can help manage divergence and encourage shared understanding
- Builds a rapid consensus
- Expressing individual opinions is encouraged
Cons:
- It can be time consuming for facilitators and participants
- Variation – different panels of participants may come to different conclusions which for some raises a question of reliability
- Coming to consensus does not mean you have found the ‘right’ answer it identifies what one group has determined is important, you need to be mindful of over generalising as a result
- Does not necessarily deal well with very widely differing opinions
- Needs several rounds to ensure differing perspectives are fully investigated
If you have used the technique before, or try it out now do let us know how you get on. It would be great to hear about how you used it and what worked for you.
It is the long history of humankind (and animal kind, too) that those who learned to collaborate and improvise most effectively have prevailed. (Charles Darwin
References and resources:
- Dick, B. (2000) Delphi face to face [online]. Available here
- Sackman H. (1974).Delphi critique; expert opinion, forecasting, and group process. Lexington, Mass: Lexington Books.
- Hasson F, Keeney S, and McKenna H.Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2000 Oct;32(4):1008–1015. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2648.2000.t01-1-01567.x. Available here
- Hsu C & Sandford BA.The Delphi Technique: Making Sense Of Consensus. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation. 2007 Aug;12(10). Available here
- Linstone HA, Turoff M. (1975).The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications. Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., Advanced Book Program