Nuance and Numbers: Using Mixed Methods to Bring Popular Opinion to Policy-Makers

Introduction: Briefing policy-makers requires careful calibration of information. Briefings must be concise, meet specific information needs and speak to the public good. Executives tend to request “hard data”, i.e. findings that can be projected to the studied population. Yet survey data falls short in supplying two aspects essential for a successful briefing: nuance and emotion. Our approach—honed by two decades as global mixed methods practitioners—demonstrates that enhancing quantitative research with robust qualitative elements can help us deliver critical information that speaks to minds, as well as hearts.
Goals and Methods: We approach a research objective holistically and create seamless handover of qualitative and quantitative research through a study’s lifecycle. We begin by relying on qualitative research—mainly focus group discussions, in-depth interviews and ethnography—during the preparation stage for a survey questionnaire. Following a survey, we again deploy qualitative research to contextualize survey findings. During WCQR2024, we will present 2-4 such case studies from across the globe.
Results: We amalgamate quantitative survey data—such as, for example, the share of a population that considers corruption a top problem for a country—with the nuanced insights into the myriad forms of everyday corruption elaborated in a focus group. Combined with the emotive strength of people’s voices--such as an illustrative quote from an in-depth interviewee having to bribe a doctor to get her ailing mom into an ICU--this mixed methods approach best meets the information needs of busy policy-makers who want brevity and detail all in one.
Conclusions: Qualitative insights complement and clarify quantitative findings. They carry an emotional dimension and evocative detail that contextualize hard numbers and bring the genuine voices of ordinary people into high-stakes decision-making.