Chapter 15 talks about four categories of data gathering: artifacts, surveys, interviews and observation.
I think out of the four techniques interviews provide the most reliable and productive way of data gathering when we are trying to obtain details or opinion about something that is ongoing or current. Even though this is more time consuming, if the process is important this gives personal one on one time with people from whom you would like to gather information and people are more likely to get involved in the discussion and provide more useful information than just going through the motions. Survey's might be effective in some cases as well, but they might not help people express their opinions and tend to be more Q & A (yes/no).
When implementing new systems or process in a company if we send e-mails or surveys to collect the requirements, most likely people end up missing at least some of the requirements. If we conduct meeting with people not necessarily individually but with groups, we can understand the requirements better and this eliminates the need to make changes or modification later.
Streaning Star Trek: Insurrection Full Movie
6 years ago
5 comments:
Although your suggestion that in-person interviews used for gathering data is most reliable and productive, I can see where problems may arise. When conducting an in-person interview you will need to be mindful of other aspects of the process. For instance, the interviewer himself/herself may play a part in how the interviewee may answer a question. The body language of the interviewer may offer some subtle cues to the respondent. The way in which the interviewer presents themselves: professional, casual; attractive; unattractive; happy; serious; etc., had a significant impact on the manner in which the respondent replies. The active listening skills or lack of them by the interviewer will also create a subtle wave of unique responses.
I agree that there are some things to consider when using interviews as a method of data collection. Another issue that comes up when interviewing is that the interviewee may not give a completely honest answer. The answer might be what they think you want to hear or what seems to be the "right" answer. The interviewee also might be too embarassed or shy to say what they really think. One on one interviews also put a lot pressure on the interviewee. So I think that in this way we shouldn't depend solely on interviews for data collection. But interviews can be effective when combined with surveys & observation, etc.
I agree that interviews are more effective and more information can be obtained. I think situations where interviews cannot be taken surveys are taken. I believe surveys are like the substitutes for interviews but yes it does not have the exact same output
I agree that interviews and observation are the best ways to collect accurate information. However, this is a very time consuming process that is highly inefficient. When talking about trying to do research, surveys are the best way to go about this. It is true that many questions on surveys tend to be yes/no, but there are other questions that can provide a variety of responses; some surveys have a range from 1-10, 1 may be “strongly disagree” and ten may be “strongly agree.”
My point is that you can capture people emotions about certain topics, and surveys can provide just as much information about specific topics as interviews do.
Post a Comment