— Obtaining high-quality and competent information from experts in the field under study

Obtaining information from an expert (or group of experts) during marketing research significantly increases its quality/reliability and allows for a comprehensive analysis of the situation. An expert survey in the practice of marketing research can act as an optimal complement to desk research. During desk research, all open sources are used to obtain information, but the reliability of this type of information needs to be verified. One of the mechanisms for establishing the objectivity of data is an expert survey, which allows you to obtain information from competent specialists and opinion leaders in your industry.

— Opportunity to study “closed” markets and highly specialized industries

An expert survey allows you to obtain first-person information from opinion leaders in the areas under study. The method is effective when studying specific markets, reliable information about the functioning of which cannot be obtained from open sources (for example, industry magazines).

— Optimization of marketing research and narrowing the scope of research tasks

Obtaining additional information from experts and using them to identify criteria for assessing the market situation can significantly optimize the conduct of marketing research.

Often, unofficial information from professionals (for example, about the current state of affairs in the suburban real estate market) allows you to avoid searching for a solution to a business problem in a “dead-end” direction. Choosing the right orientation for marketing research at the preparatory stage in some cases seems very difficult without expert recommendations and when using only official information that is in the public domain.

However, this method has a number of limitations:

— Difficulties associated with establishing contacts with experts

Conducting marketing research in “closed” and highly competitive markets raises the problem of access to experts who are sufficiently competent in a certain field and agree to participate in the survey. In addition, scheduling personal meetings between researchers and managers of large companies, high-ranking officials, etc. can be particularly difficult in this aspect.

— Limitations related to compliance with ethical standards when conducting research

The use of the expert survey method in the practice of marketing research cannot be aimed at causing harm to any party. Participation in the study should not negatively affect the professional reputation of the expert, his financial condition, etc.

One of the principles of our company’s work with empirical research data is their confidentiality. All information we received during the survey of experts can only be used in a generalized form, without mentioning the respondent or information that allows him to be accurately identified (for example, positions in a specific company, membership in an association, etc.).

— Risks associated with the possibility of an expert reporting biased information

When conducting an expert survey, there is a possibility of receiving biased or incomplete information from the expert. This may arise both due to the expert’s interest in certain research results, and due to his distrust of the researchers.

Risks associated with these factors are reduced by increasing the number of experts interviewed and organizing expert panels. Specialists included in the expert panel are regularly surveyed to obtain information about the current situation on the market, forecasts regarding its development, etc. Information obtained using an expert panel makes it possible to reduce the influence of subjective factors on the generalized results of the study.

Depending on the number of participants simultaneously participating in the expert survey, there are:

— individual expert survey

An individual interview involves one-on-one communication between a researcher and an expert on specific market issues. This format allows you to establish a trusting relationship and alleviate the expert’s possible concerns regarding his participation in the study (for example, related to confidentiality).

— group survey of experts

A group survey of experts involves a one-time discussion of a problem with several experts. This format allows us to identify both aspects on which experts are unanimous in opinion, as well as those that cause controversy among experts. A group survey allows you to compare the opinions of representatives of different companies, directions, etc., which increases the objectivity of the results of marketing research. A group survey can take place both in the mode of a face-to-face group interview (discussion) and in absentia (using the capabilities of the Internet).

The most popular technique of correspondence expert survey is the Delphi method. The essence of this method is the systematic synthesis of expert opinions to develop an optimal solution to the problem that would be supported by the majority of experts. The implementation of the Delphi method in the practice of marketing research involves questioning experts on clearly formulated questions in several stages. After each stage, the collected empirical information is summarized, and the questionnaire questions are changed depending on the identified controversial issues. The goal of the experts and the researcher is to formulate a solution that is reliable and most effective under the given conditions.

Depending on the objectives of the study and the degree of accessibility of respondents for contact, forms/varieties of expert surveys can be:

— face-to-face expert survey

A face-to-face interview with an expert involves personal contact between the researcher and the specialist. The survey can be carried out according to the scenario of either a formalized or a free interview (the order and wording of the questions are not strictly defined in advance). An in-person interview allows you to establish a more trusting relationship with an expert and is more informative.

— correspondence expert survey

A correspondence survey of an expert is carried out in cases where organizing a face-to-face survey is impossible for a number of reasons (for example, the expert is on a long business trip, etc.) or it is necessary to survey a large number of respondents in a short time, geographically remote (for example, general practitioners in various regions). A correspondence expert survey can be carried out via telephone or the Internet according to the scenario of a free interview or using a formalized questionnaire.

An expert survey is a fairly flexible and universal method. As part of marketing research, it can be used either independently or in combination with other methods: mass surveys, focus groups, the mystery shopping method, desk research, etc.

Focus group method.

The focus group method refers to qualitative methods of collecting information and is based on the use of the effect of group dynamics. The use of this method involves a group discussion under the guidance of a specialist (moderator). The main advantage of this method is the ability to quickly obtain so-called in-depth information in a small group of respondents. The essence of the method is that the attention of the participants is focused on the problem (topic) under study, in order to determine the attitude towards the problem posed, to find out the motivation for certain actions. In addition, this method allows the customer to monitor the progress of the study and draw appropriate conclusions. The cost of focus groups is relatively low (for example, compared to in-depth interviews). Focus group can be used in combination with other methods (both quantitative and qualitative) and as an independent method of collecting information. Distinctive features of focus groups Unlike quantitative research methods (for example, a sociological survey), which provides answers to the questions 'Who..?' and 'How many..?', a focus group provides answers to the questions 'How exactly..?' ' and 'Why..?' The second feature is the method of sampling and methods of collecting information. In sociological (quantitative) research, the basic method is a survey (personal, telephone), in which respondents representing a certain category of consumers are interviewed using a single scheme (questionnaire). Focus group (qualitative research) uses in-depth group interview methods to “pull out” information from the respondent that is not on the surface, showing a wide range of attitudes to the problem. Focus group is a subjective research method (in contrast to sociological research, which is an objective method of collecting and processing information). Most often, focus groups are used to achieve the following goals: generating ideas; hypothesis testing for quantitative research; preparation of tools for quantitative research; interpretation of quantitative research results; studying the behavioral characteristics of individual groups of people. The number of group members is from 8 to 12 people. Gender, age, income level, etc. are used as criteria for selecting participants.

1. Determination of the export valuation method.

The method of expert assessments, also called an expert survey, in general terms is a survey of specialists competent in any field needed by the researcher. A survey of such persons is called an expert survey, and the respondents’ judgments about the properties of the phenomenon under study established during the survey are called expert assessments.

Expert assessment is a competent opinion, the opinion of an expert on any of the problems within his area of ​​competence.

The main differences between an expert survey and a mass survey are as follows:

The number of respondents in the mass survey is significantly larger than in the expert survey;

The expert survey is not anonymous;

An expert survey has more complex tools;

The work of experts, unlike the work of respondents, is always paid.

2. Selection of experts.

When determining the specific composition of experts, one should be guided not only and not so much by the competence of the experts, but by the validity of their conclusions. As experience shows, there are often cases when the competence of an expert does not provide adequate validity. This is explained by many circumstances, depending to varying degrees on the researcher organizing the expert survey and conducting the examination.

A number of these circumstances have a psychological property. An expert with the makings of a leader strives to dominate his assessments, insisting on them even when he internally doubts their truth. A person of a conformist type behaves in exactly the opposite way, while a conflict-generating person is inclined to challenge even those opinions of other people with which he essentially agrees. Most people tend to shift their assessments towards the neutral middle, and some experts may be interested in deliberately distorting information. All this must be taken into account by the researcher. "

The selection of experts, as a rule, is carried out by the method of self-assessment and determination of the competence coefficient. Candidates are given cards with three assessment positions: K1 - high score - 1 point; K2 - average score - 0.5 points; KZ - low score - 0 points.

With their help, candidates assess their level of theoretical knowledge, practical experience and level of predictive competence. After the candidates’ answers, the competence coefficient of each is calculated using the formula The weakness of this method is the possible inadequacy of the assessment.

To reinforce the self-assessment method, the method of collective (mutual) assessment is used. However, it should be noted that this method can only be used if the experts know each other as specialists. When using this method, candidates are presented with a list of their “competitors” and asked the question: “Who would you choose as an expert from the proposed list?” In addition, the question asks for a selection parameter (Specify exactly 25 people).

Based on the data obtained, a table of mutual assessments is constructed. If the results of the first table are not enough to identify experts, it is necessary to construct a refined table of mutual assessments. Based on the self-assessment method and/or the mutual assessment method, the required number of expert respondents is selected and the questionnaires are offered to them.

Usually, the expert survey is aimed at clarifying hypotheses, developing a forecast and replenishing the interpretation of certain social phenomena and processes. In such surveys, open-ended formulations dominate, and closed-ended questions are intended only to assess the level of confidence, the degree of agreement or disagreement with the already expressed positions of other specialists.

Identification of expert assessments is necessary when analyzing the most significant aspects of the problem under study, especially in situations where their interpretations are debatable or there is a virtual lack of certainty in their understanding by science. In such cases, the method of expert assessments acts as the main research method; its program is reflected in the general research program. If this method plays an auxiliary role, adding information to that obtained by other methods, then researchers are required to draw up a special (independent) program for its implementation. Its main components will be formulations that clearly indicate: a) the problematic situation; b) terminology of expert assessments (by operationalizing general concepts); c) hypotheses submitted for examination; d) a set of requirements on the basis of which the selection of experts will be made (criteria for their competence); e) indicators that allow measuring expert judgments; f) instruments for these measurements and primary data processing; g) rules for conducting and scenario of the examination, i.e. procedures for coordination and integration of expert assessments.

17. SWOP analysis.

18. The essence of quantitative research methods.

19. Features of the survey. Questionnaire survey.

20. Time series method.

21. Traditional text analysis.

22. Features of the application of context analysis.

23. Basic principles of game theory.

24. The concept of role-playing games. Features of the role-playing game.

Expert survey- a type of sociological survey in which the respondents are a special type of people - experts. These are competent persons who have in-depth knowledge of the subject or object of study. A representative from any field other than our own can act as an expert for us. A distinctive feature of this method is that it assumes the competent participation of experts in the analysis and solution of research problems. For example, to assess the expected demand for these or other types of products, experts can be sellers or store merchandisers, managers of small businesses, dealers or brokers. In an army unit, experts can be commanders, officers of educational * structures, and senior servicemen (they, as a rule, are knowledgeable on a wide range of issues of service and everyday life).

In this regard, the role function of the expert changes seriously, who in the full sense of the word acts as an active participant in sociological

The material was prepared with the participation of A.A. Gnutova.

research. And an attempt to hide the purpose of the study from him, thus turning him into a passive source of information, is fraught with the loss of his trust in the organizers of the study 2 .

The expert method is distinguished from other forms of sociological survey by several very important features:

♦ number of respondents: there are always fewer of them than during a questionnaire or even an interview;

♦ the qualities of the respondents: their outlook, level of qualifications, knowledge of a special field are several orders of magnitude higher than that of ordinary respondents;

♦ type and volume of information: an expert survey is conducted to obtain knowledge that the sociologist-researcher does not and will never have; in contrast to ordinary knowledge, which is known to the sociologist from his own experience, the knowledge obtained from experts refers to special scientific knowledge;

“typicality of data: in a mass survey, a sociologist is interested in the typicality, repeatability, ordinariness of the information obtained about the value orientations and motives of people’s behavior, and in an expert survey, the researcher values ​​precisely the uniqueness of the expert’s technical or humanitarian knowledge, its depth, uniqueness;

♦ program function: the sociologist uses the primary information obtained in a questionnaire or interview to test scientific hypotheses, and in an expert survey - in order to understand an area that is completely new to him.

The main purpose of the expert survey: identifying the most significant, important aspects of the problem under study, increasing the reliability, reliability, validity of information, conclusions and practical recommendations through the use of expert knowledge and experience.

Scope of expert survey: can be used to study all areas of activity; in diagnostics, in assessing the state of a social object, standardization, design, forecasting, and in decision making. Varieties of expert surveys are used quite effectively at different stages of sociological research: in determining goals and objectives, identifying problem situations, searching for hypotheses, interpreting concepts, justifying the reliability of tools and initial information, substantiating conclusions, and developing recommendations.

Basic regulatory requirements: When interviewing experts, it is necessary to provide a clear justification for the need to use the appropriate expert survey methodology. Careful selection of experts: mandatory assessment of their competence. Taking into account factors influencing expert judgments. Creating conditions for the most productive use of experts during the research. Preservation of information received from experts without distortion at all stages of the study.

There are some restrictions on use conclusions for different methods of expert surveys. Thus, when using some expert assessment techniques, it is useful to remember that the conclusions of their examinations tend to average opinions, and therefore may be unsuitable for assessing non-standard phenomena, for example, innovative products.

2 Fundamentals of applied sociology: Textbook. for universities. M., 1995. P. 156.

knowledge of art. We should also not forget that the data of an expert survey are subjective in nature, and therefore it is desirable to compare them with objective information about an object obtained by other methods (although often the use of an expert survey is caused precisely by the difficulty of obtaining information in another way).

Program application of an expert survey includes the main structural elements of a sociological research program. The leading tasks are: identifying the objectives of the survey, constructing selection criteria, rules for organizing the participation of experts and criteria for evaluating the information they provide. Unlike a mass survey, the expert survey program is not as detailed and is predominantly conceptual in nature. First of all, it clearly formulates the phenomenon to be assessed and provides possible options for its outcome in the form of hypotheses.

Basic tools expert surveys - a questionnaire or interview form developed according to a special program. In accordance with this, the survey procedure can consist of either a questionnaire or interviewing experts.

Background judgments record the factors influencing the state of the object being studied. In the survey procedure, the expert identifies among them the most important, essential for the object, and gives them an assessment.

The use of the expert survey method is associated with compliance with certain rules. When organizing it, much attention is usually paid to three methodological problems: the selection of experts, the procedure for their work, and the processing of expressed opinions 3 .

TYPES OF EXPERT SURVEY

An expert survey is a combination (also called a complex) of various methods, techniques, techniques, and procedures. First of all, the procedure for the work of experts can be joint or separate. Among the collective procedures one can find the “brainstorming” method, regular discussion, and the Delphic technique. Let us highlight two main procedures: ordinary survey and multi-stage survey. The first involves conducting a one-time anonymous survey. It is both organizationally and economically the easiest. In principle, it is not much different from a regular mass survey. The second procedure is associated with the tendency to complicate the task of experts. Multi-stage is introduced so that at each subsequent stage experts solve increasingly complex problems. Typically, experts are asked to use various logical methods of analysis (“goal tree”, “mutual influence” tables, scenarios, etc.). The multi-stage survey itself can be organized in different ways: first, general questions can be asked, then more and more specific ones (the “funnel” method), or, conversely, at the end the experts make some generalizations (the “pyramid” method).

Since survey participants are usually aware of the purpose and objectives of the survey, the meaning of using indirect questions, projective techniques,

Shlyapentokh V. How tomorrow is studied today (modern methods of social forecasting). M.: “Sov. Russia", 1975.

tests and other techniques with the help of which the positions of the respondent are usually revealed without his knowledge. Their use, as well as the use of “trap questions,” can even cause significant damage to the quality of the expert survey. After all, an expert is a participant in scientific research; any attempts to turn him from a subject of research into an object can shake the foundations of mutual trust, which is necessary between the organizers of the research and experts. In order to achieve an active and serious attitude from the expert, to make him feel like a full participant in scientific research, he must be introduced to some extent to the research program. Due to the specific nature of the expert audience, the main survey method is not an interview, but a questionnaire filled out by the expert himself. Moreover, in the questionnaire much more often they resort to open-ended questions, which make it possible to better establish the creative potential of the expert and enable the survey participant to express an original point of view. In addition, refusing cues weakens the influence of stereotypes.

Methodologists also distinguish methods of correspondence and face-to-face expert surveys. The methods of the first of them include: written survey (collection of opinions), questionnaire testing (formalized survey), method of independent characteristics and Delphi technique, the second - interview, meeting, research conversation, brainstorming. The number of experts should not exceed 10-15 people.

The simplest type of correspondence survey of experts is written survey(collection of opinions). It consists in the fact that specially prepared questionnaires are sent (distributed) to experts, in which they must express their opinion on the substance of the questions posed. When compiling an expert questionnaire, from 50 to 90% open-ended questions are used. Collecting opinions is similar to a free interview and differs from it only in the written form of the survey, which makes it possible to attract a large number of experts. True, the correspondence survey is associated with organizational difficulties due to the low rate of return of questionnaires.

Formal survey experts is a regular survey with questions formulated in both open and closed forms. In terms of goals, objectives and content, this method differs significantly from the written collection of opinions. If the latter is carried out to identify heuristic, fundamentally new ideas, views on a problem, unexpected approaches to an old problem, then the survey is aimed at finding out assessments of certain aspects of a ready-made solution. The usual method of data analysis in this case is statistical.

Independent characteristics method allows you to give a generalized assessment of one phenomenon, information about which comes from several independent sources (from different people). At the first stage, different opinions are compared and contrasted, at the second stage they are processed using mathematical and statistical procedures, at the third stage reliable conclusions are formulated. This method is actively used in social psychology to study the business and personal qualities of an individual 4 . There are several

4 Platonov K.K. Method of generalization of independent characteristics in social psychology // Methodology and methods of social psychology / Responsible. ed. E.V. Shorokhova. M., 1977. S. 148-156.

Many people who are well acquainted with the person being studied are asked to characterize him on a single scale, and then the independent assessments are generalized into an integral indicator. In a collective assessment, subjective deviations cancel out each other, which ultimately ensures an objective, scientifically based result.

One of the most common procedures for conducting an expert survey is "Delphic technique". The method involves interviewing experts in several rounds, processing the results of each round, informing them about these results and repeating the same procedure again. In the first round, answers are given without argumentation. After processing, extreme and average judgments are identified and reported to experts. In the second round, respondents return to their assessments. Since they have had enough time to think and learned about the existence of other positions on this matter, they are given the opportunity to reconsider their views or, on the contrary, argue. After the second round, new assessments are processed: extreme and average opinions are summarized, and the results are again reported to the experts. This is repeated 3-4 times. Practice shows that after the third or fourth round, expert opinions do not change. During such a procedure, a consensus assessment is developed, while the researcher should not ignore the opinions of those who, after repeated surveys, remained in their position.

The Delphi method is aimed at improving the process of accepting expert assessments, but with such a goal that the overall assessment is derived not by mathematics and statistics, but by the people themselves, focusing on the opinions of others, if necessary, correcting it, strengthening their argumentation or abandoning it in favor of the best , a more reasonable point of view. This technique makes it possible to reduce the influence of insufficiently competent experts on group assessment, as is observed with a simple questionnaire. This is achieved by obtaining valuable information from more competent experts.

Brainstorming method(“brainstorming”) is considered the most famous method of collective creative decision-making. It is a free, unstructured process of generating your own ideas around a given topic, spontaneously proposed by participants. The philosophy of this method is based on the assumption that with conventional methods of discussion, the emergence of innovative ideas is prevented by the control mechanisms of consciousness, which fetter the flow of these ideas under the pressure of familiar, stereotypical forms of decision-making. The inhibitory influence is the fear of failure, the fear of being funny, etc.

This method was developed and described by the American psychologist A.F. Osborne in 1938. The scientist drew attention to the fact that some people easily put forward new ideas, others are more inclined to critically analyze other people's ideas. In ordinary discussions, both categories of people end up together and, as a rule, interfere with each other. That is why it was decided to separate the stages of generating ideas and their analysis. For this, two groups are created: brainstorming participants - those who must propose new options for solving the desired problem, and commission members who will process the proposed materials. The first group that will generate ideas is first assigned a leader who will staff this group.

vat, including 4-11 people. Members of this group cannot be bound by a “leader-subordinate” relationship due to the threat of destruction of the atmosphere of trust. The survey leader informs the group members of the essence of the problem being solved 2-3 days before the brainstorming session. The problem should be defined as clearly and comprehensively as possible. When conducting a brainstorming session, a relaxed atmosphere is created in the group. This is facilitated by the composition of the group, the behavior of the leader, the choice of premises, lighting, etc. None of the participants should be afraid that what they say is not valuable. Suggestions or ideas cannot be assessed negatively by word, gesture, or intonation (any criticism is prohibited); on the contrary, their support and development is desirable. Participants must express their thoughts openly and freely. This often reduces the stiffness of the group and is the root cause of the birth of original ideas. The proposals received during the discussion are recorded by the secretary. Brainstorming lasts no more than 2-3 hours. Finishing it too quickly is undesirable, since it has been established that new and original ideas often arise when it seems that all possible thoughts and associations have been exhausted.

Rice. 5. Brainstorming method- freely generate your own ideas around

given topic

Two forms of brainstorming are considered common: simple meeting And round-robin meeting.

In a simple meeting, the manager interviews each participant one by one and asks them to make a proposal for solving the problem they are facing. Each decision is listed and numbered, then the list is posted in plain sight. Criticism or evaluation of ideas is not permitted. Particular importance is placed on creating a free and creative environment that allows all experts to freely express their ideas and suggestions. The number of proposals submitted is of great importance. Everyone must participate in their nomination. Impromptu is especially valued, i.e. pre-

provisions that arose immediately and under the influence of the information that the expert heard from others. They are valued above homemade preparations, since they accumulate collective thought, multiplied by knowledge of the situation and the creative imagination of the author of the idea. If the attack on the unknown is too sluggish, the meeting is postponed to another date, allowing the experts to “ripen”.

In a round-robin meeting, experts are divided into small groups of 3 or 4 people, where they generate new ideas and write them down on a piece of paper or cards (2-3 ideas each). Small group members then exchange their cards, resulting in new ideas being added to old ones. After three exchanges, each subgroup compiles a consolidated list of ideas put forward. Then the weight is collected! the team for whose consideration group reports are submitted. This form is advisable to use when there is a decrease in activity or when participants are distracted while waiting for their turn.

The list of ideas put forward as a result of brainstorming is usually quite long (more than 15-20). It can be difficult for the presenter to decide on their priority, and for the participants to wait for their turn to discuss. It is recommended to use the following method. A list of ideas with serial numbers is posted in a visible place. Each expert receives the right to five votes, which he can dispose of at his own discretion: one vote for each of the five ideas, all five for one, two votes for one idea and one vote for each of the other three, etc. This approach allows each expert to express his preference, and the team as a whole to decide on priorities. Another way: at a group meeting, each idea is read out under its own number, and experts vote by show of hands. The number of fingers extended on a raised hand indicates the number of votes cast 5.

Method "reverse brainstorming" is in many ways reminiscent of a regular “brainstorming”, but at the same time it is allowed to express critical comments. More precisely, criticism is specifically encouraged, since the philosophy of this method is built on the fact that all experts identify as many shortcomings as possible in the proposed ideas. The method can give good results if it acts as a preliminary procedure to other examination methods.

Method forecast scenarios- the most popular method of expert assessments in recent decades. The term “scenario” was first used in 1960 by futurist G. Kahn when developing pictures of the future necessary for solving strategic issues in the military field. A scenario is a probabilistic description of a picture of the future, compiled on the basis of competent technical judgment. One forecast includes several scenarios, in most cases three: optimistic, pessimistic and intermediate (most likely, expected). Drawing up a scenario occurs in several stages: 1) structuring and formulating the question: collecting and analyzing initial information, agreeing on the task with all project participants, identifying the structural characteristics of the problem; 2) identification of external influence factors; 3) finding indicators, preferably alternative ones, of the future state; 4) formation and selection of consistent sets of assumptions using computer

See: Mazmanova B.G. Methodological issues of sales forecasting // Marketing in Russia and zg abroad. 2000. No. 1.

yuter programs; 5) development of practical recommendations for the future scenario and determination of the possible consequences of its implementation.

Method collective notepad(“bank” of ideas) is a method based on a combination of independent proposal of ideas by each expert with their subsequent collective assessment.

Method KJ- This is the name of a method of anthropological research in which researchers first collect a collection of facts about the life of a tribe, and then ask the natives to explain their meaning. Japanese business has adapted the method KJ as follows: company employees are asked to jot down on pieces of paper their wishes for improvements in the production process and suggestions for what the company should do. The received wishes and suggestions are analyzed, and based on the sum of opinions, a picture is obtained that depicts the prospects of the company and its divisions in the future. The method is more integrative than analytical in nature.

Method layman lies in the fact that the solution to the problem is offered to people who have never dealt with it, but are specialists in related fields.

(cutting

The Center for the Sociology of Regional and National Relations of the ISPI RAS (headed by Corresponding Member of the Academy of Sciences V.N. Ivanov) studies the problems of interaction between the federal center and the regions based on systematic surveys of expert groups." groups or so-called groups of specialized consciousness included: specialists from regional (republican, regional) and city administrations, heads of enterprises and institutions of various forms of ownership, workers in the media, higher education, as well as representatives of creative organizations; -zov. The method of collecting information was a distribution sheet. The geography of the research was very wide. Using a comparable methodology, the research was carried out in Moscow, Stavropol, Ufa, Yetrozavodsk, Yakutsk, Ulan-Ude, Tyumen, Vosibirsk, Kazan, Astrakhan, Tambov, Saransk. , Ryazan, Rostov-on-Don, Volgodonets, Barnaul, Vladikavkaz, Nalchik, Nazra-i. Data from expert surveys conducted in 2000-2002 indicate that if the collapsed by the end of the 1990s. the situation in the Russian Federation could be characterized as a crisis, and in the early 2000s. it begins to improve; a positive trend in the assessments of experts over time has been discovered). Annual expert surveys conducted by the Department of Social Ecology of the Regions of the ISPI RAS (headed by I.A. Sosunova) make it possible to determine those that are significant for the population

Ivanov V.N. Center for Sociology of Regional and National Relations // http:// www.ispr.ru/10LET/STATII0/statil 1.html

environmental problems that give rise to negative socio-ecological processes. In particular, it has been established that the most painfully perceived by the population are problems that manifest themselves in the field of healthcare and give rise to socio-demographic, socio-economic and other consequences**. As a result of a survey of members of the expert councils on social and human sciences of the Higher Attestation Commission, employees of the Department of Theoretical Problems of Sociology

ISPI RAS (headed by L.N. Moskvichev) received the following data: almost half of the experts note a decrease in the requirements for candidate works and about 40% of experts note a decrease in the requirements for doctoral works. Approximately the same situation arises in relation to dissertations in sociological sciences."

Sosunova I.A. Department of Social Ecology of Regions // http://www.ispr.ru/10LET/STATI10/ statil2.html "" Moskvichev L.N. Department of Theoretical Problems of Sociology // http://www.ispr.ru/10LET/ STATI10/statil6.html

SELECTION OF EXPERTS

In both mass and expert (in contrast to mass, it can be called elitist) polling, almost the main point is the selection of respondents. In the first case, we are talking about the correct compilation of a sample population, which will subsequently ensure representativeness of the data. The level of education and competence, if this is not a survey of the target group, do not play any role - anyway, the questions are standardized for everyone. In the second case, the problem is almost the opposite. Typical experts are not always needed. Often a sociologist needs reference, the best representatives of their profession. And no one will check the data for representativeness. The larger the population of respondents, the higher the reliability of data in a mass survey as some average statistical indicators. As for the expert survey, due to the high competence of the people participating in it, the opinion of even one expert, and even more so a group of experts, may turn out to be quite justified and reliable. Let us also note another fact: some technical and methodological techniques widely used in mass surveys lose their significance when surveying such a specific audience as experts. As a rule, mass surveys are anonymous. In expert surveys, this loses its meaning, because experts must be fully aware of the tasks that are being solved during the study with their help. For example, the expert questionnaire does not use indirect and control questions, tests or any other techniques aimed at identifying the “hidden” positions of the respondent.

The composition of the expert group determines the effectiveness of using this method. The fact is that such characteristics as knowledge and experience on this issue can only be used at the very initial stage of selection. Very often, a researcher includes everyone who works in a given field in the initial list of potential experts, and then selects a narrow circle of people from it.

How to competently form the necessary group of experts? This is what the authors of the well-known book in our country, “Fundamentals of Applied Sociology,” propose, published under the editorship of a prominent methodologist, director of the Center for Social Forecasting and Marketing F.E. Sheregi 6. At the very first stage of selection, it is advisable to use two criteria as criteria: occupation and work experience in the profile we are interested in. If necessary, the level and nature of education, experience in social and political activities, age, etc. are also taken into account. The first list of experts can be very broad, but later it is advisable to “narrow it down”, since not every person is able to act as an expert.

The central criterion for selecting experts is their competence. To determine it, two methods are applicable, with varying degrees of accuracy; self-assessment of experts And collective assessment of the authority of experts.

The simplest and most convenient form of self-assessment of experts is a cumulative index calculated based on the experts’ assessment of their knowledge and experience

Fundamentals of applied sociology: Textbook. for universities. M., 1995. pp. 150-155.

and abilities on a ranking scale with the positions “high”, “medium”, “low”. In this case, the first position is assigned the numerical value “1”, the second - “0.5”, and the third - “0”. In this case, the cumulative index - the coefficient of the expert’s competence level - is calculated using the formula:

where A:, is the numerical value of the expert’s self-assessment of the level of his theoretical knowledge; to 2- numerical value of self-assessment of practical experience; to ъ- numerical value of self-assessment of forecasting ability.

The competence level coefficient can vary from 1 (full competence) to 0 (complete incompetence).

Typically, it is customary to include in a group of experts those with a competence index of at least average (0.5) and higher (up to 1). Obtaining primary numerical values ​​of self-esteem (&, kv& 3) to calculate the expert competence index using a tabular question (Table 1).

4.1. Expert survey methodology Expert survey - a type of sociological survey in which the respondents are a special type of people - experts. These are competent persons who have in-depth knowledge of the subject or object of study. Expert(lat. expertus - experienced) - a specialist who makes a conclusion when considering a question. A representative from any field of activity other than our own can act as an expert for us. A distinctive feature of this method is that it presupposes the competent participation of experts in the analysis and solution of research problems. For example, to assess the expected demand for certain types of products, experts can be salespeople or store merchandisers, managers of small businesses, dealers or brokers. In an army unit, experts can be commanders, officers of educational structures, old-timers (they, as a rule, are knowledgeable on a wide range of issues of service and everyday life). In this regard, the role function of the expert, who in the full sense of the word is an active participant in sociological research, is seriously changing. And an attempt to hide the purpose of the study from him, thus turning him into a passive source of information, is fraught with the loss of his trust in the organizers of the study 2 . The expert method is distinguished from other forms of sociological survey by several very important features: ♦ number of respondents: there are always fewer of them than with questionnaires and even interviews; ■» 488 ♦ qualities of the respondents: their outlook, level of qualifications, knowledge of a special field are several orders of magnitude higher than that of ordinary respondents; ♦ type and volume of information: an expert survey is conducted to obtain knowledge that the sociologist-researcher does not and will never have; in contrast to ordinary knowledge, which is known to a sociologist from his own experience, the knowledge received from experts refers to special scientific knowledge; ♦ typicality of data: in a mass survey, a sociologist is interested in the typicality, repeatability, ordinariness of the information obtained about the value orientations and motives of people’s behavior, and in an expert survey, the researcher values ​​precisely the uniqueness of the expert’s technical or humanitarian knowledge, its depth, uniqueness; ♦ program function: the sociologist uses the primary information obtained in a questionnaire or interview to test scientific hypotheses, and in an expert survey - to understand an area that is completely new to him. Such forms of collecting primary sociological information as questionnaires, interviews, postal surveys, and telephone interviews are intended primarily for mass surveys. Their peculiarity lies in the fact that they are aimed at identifying information that reflects the knowledge, opinions, value orientations and attitudes of respondents, their attitude to events and phenomena of reality. And the fact that this information is based on the individual interests of the respondents and can be very subjective does not at all contradict the scientific nature of its receipt. On the contrary, the goal of a mass survey is to obtain reliable information about the subject and object of research using appropriate tools. For example, to identify groups of readers by the degree of their interest in various sections of the newspaper or to differentiate students by the level of their activity in class, etc. Thus, during a mass survey, the source of sociological information assessing one or another aspect of the object of study is representatives of the same object 3 . The main purpose of the expert survey: identifying the most significant, important aspects of the problem under study, increasing the reliability, reliability, validity of information, conclusions and practical recommendations through the use of knowledge and experience of experts. 489 Scope of expert survey: can be used in the study of all areas of activity; in diagnostics, in assessing the state of a social object, standardization, design, forecasting, and in decision making. Varieties of expert surveys are used quite effectively at different stages of sociological research: in determining goals and objectives, identifying problem situations, searching for hypotheses, interpreting concepts, justifying the reliability of tools and initial information, substantiating conclusions, and developing recommendations. Basic regulatory requirements: When interviewing experts, it is necessary to provide a clear justification for the need to use the appropriate expert interview methodology. Careful selection of experts: mandatory assessment of their competence. Taking into account factors influencing expert judgments. Creating conditions for the most productive use of experts in the course of research. Preservation of information received from experts without distortion at all stages of the study. There are some restrictions on use conclusions for different methods of expert surveys. Thus, when using some expert assessment methods, it is useful to remember that the conclusions of their examinations tend to average opinions, and therefore may be unsuitable for assessing non-standard phenomena, for example, innovative works of art. We should also not forget that the data of an expert survey are subjective in nature, and therefore it is desirable to compare them with objective information about an object obtained by other methods (although often the use of an expert survey is caused precisely by the difficulty of obtaining information in another way). Program application of an expert survey includes the main structural elements of a sociological research program. The leading tasks are: identifying the objectives of the survey, constructing selection criteria, rules for organizing the participation of experts and criteria for evaluating the information they provide. Unlike a mass survey, the expert survey program is not as detailed and is predominantly conceptual in nature. First of all, it unambiguously formulates the phenomenon to be assessed and provides possible options for its outcome in the form of hypotheses. Basic tools expert surveys - a questionnaire or interview form developed according to a special program. In accordance with this, the survey procedure can consist of either a questionnaire or interviewing experts. 490 Undoubtedly, to make informed decisions it is necessary to rely on the experience, knowledge and intuition of specialists. After the Second World War, within the framework of management theory, an independent discipline began to develop - expert assessments. Expert assessments- these are judgments of experts, implying a procedure for comparing objects and their properties according to selected criteria. Expert assessment method- a type of expert survey that involves the use of expert assessments. The main content of the method is the rational organization of the analysis of problems carried out by experts, followed by an assessment of the judgments identified by the researcher and processing of the data obtained. Background judgments record the factors influencing the state of the object being studied. In the survey procedure, the expert selects among them the most important, essential for the object, and gives them an assessment. The use of the expert survey method is associated with compliance with certain rules. When organizing it, much attention is usually paid to three methodological problems: the selection of experts, the procedure for their work, and the processing of expressed opinions 4 . 4.2. Types of expert survey An expert survey is a combination (also called a complex) of various methods, techniques, techniques, and procedures. First of all, the procedure for the work of experts can be joint or separate. Among the collective procedures one can find the “brainstorming” method, a regular discussion, and the Delphic technique. Let us highlight two main procedures: ordinary survey and multistage survey. The first involves conducting a one-time anonymous survey. It is both organizationally and economically the easiest. In principle, it is not much different from a regular mass survey. The second procedure is associated with a tendency to complicate the task of experts. Multi-stage is introduced so that at each subsequent stage experts solve increasingly complex problems. Typically, experts are asked to use various logical methods of analysis (“goal tree”, “mutual influence” tables, scenarios, etc.). The multi-stage survey itself can be organized in different ways: first, general questions can be asked, then more and more specific ones (the “funnel” method), or, conversely, at the end the experts make some generalizations (the “pyramid” method). 491 Since survey participants, as a rule, are aware of the purpose and objectives of the survey, the meaning of using indirect questions, projective techniques, tests and other techniques, with the help of which the positions of the respondent are usually revealed without his knowledge, is lost. Their use, as well as the use of “trap questions,” can even cause significant damage to the quality of the expert survey. After all, an expert is a participant in scientific research; any attempts to transform him from a subject of research into an object can shake the foundations of mutual trust, which is necessary between the organizers of the research and the experts. In order to achieve an active and serious attitude from the expert, to make him feel like a full-fledged participant in scientific research, he must be to some extent introduced to the research program. Due to the specific nature of the expert audience, the main survey method is not an interview, but a questionnaire filled out by the expert himself. Moreover, in the questionnaire they much more often resort to open-ended questions, which make it possible to better establish the creative potential of the expert and enable the survey participant to express an original point of view. In addition, refusing cues weakens the influence of stereotypes. Methodologists also distinguish methods of correspondence and face-to-face expert surveys. The methods of the first of them include: a written survey (collection of opinions), questionnaires (formalized survey), the method of independent characteristics and the Delphi technique, the second - an interview, meeting, research conversation, brainstorming. The number of experts should not exceed 10-15 people. The simplest type of correspondence survey of experts is written survey(collection of opinions). It consists in the fact that specially prepared questionnaires are sent (distributed) to experts, in which they must express their opinion on the substance of the questions posed. When compiling an expert questionnaire, from 50 to 90% open questions are used. Collecting opinions is similar to a free interview and differs from it only in the written form of the survey, which makes it possible to attract a large number of experts. True, the correspondence survey is associated with organizational difficulties due to the low rate of return of questionnaires. Formal survey experts is a regular survey with questions formulated in both open and closed forms. In terms of goals, objectives and content, this method differs significantly from the written collection of opinions. If the latter is carried out to identify heuristic, fundamentally new ideas, views on a problem, unexpected approaches to an old problem, then the survey is aimed at finding out assessments of certain aspects of a ready-made solution. The usual method of data analysis in this case is statistical. Independent characteristics method allows you to give a generalized assessment of one phenomenon, information about which comes from several independent sources (from different people). At the first stage, different opinions are compared and contrasted, at the second stage they are processed using mathematical and statistical procedures, at the third stage reliable conclusions are formulated. This method is actively used in social psychology to study the business and personal qualities of an individual 5 . Here, several people who are well acquainted with the person being studied are asked to characterize him on a single scale, and then the independent assessments are generalized into an integral indicator. In a collective assessment, subjective deviations cancel each other out, which ultimately ensures an objective, scientifically based result. One of the most common procedures for conducting an expert survey is "Delphic technique". The method involves interviewing experts in several rounds, processing the results of each round, informing them about these results and repeating the same procedure again. In the first round, answers are given without argumentation. After processing, extreme and average judgments are identified and reported to experts. In the second round, respondents again turn to their assessments. Since they have had enough time to think and learned about the existence of other positions on this matter, they are given the opportunity to reconsider their views or, on the contrary, argue. After the second round, new assessments are processed: extreme and average opinions are summarized, and the results are again reported to the experts. This is repeated 3-4 times. Practice shows that after the third or fourth round, expert opinions do not change. In the course of such a procedure, an agreed upon assessment is developed, while the researcher should not ignore the opinion of those who, after repeated surveys, remained in their position. The “Delphi” method is aimed at improving the process of accepting expert assessments, but with such a goal that the overall assessment is derived not by mathematics and statistics, but by the people themselves, focusing on the opinions of others, if necessary, correcting it, strengthening their argumentation or refusing in favor of a better, more substantiated point of view. This technique makes it possible to reduce the influence of insufficiently competent experts on group assessment, as is observed with a simple questionnaire. It is achieved through valuable information received from more competent experts. Brainstorming method(“brainstorming”) is considered the most famous method of collective creative decision-making. It is a free, unstructured process of generating your own ideas around a given topic, spontaneously proposed by participants. The philosophy of this method is based on the assumption that with conventional methods of discussion, the emergence of innovative ideas is prevented by the control mechanisms of consciousness, which fetter the flow of these ideas under the pressure of habitual, stereotypical forms of decision-making. The inhibitory influence is exerted by fear of failure, fear of being funny, etc. This method was developed and described by the American psychologist A.F. Osborne in 1938. The scientist drew attention to the fact that some people easily put forward new ideas, others are more inclined to critically analyze other people's ideas. In ordinary discussions, both categories of people end up together and, as a rule, interfere with each other. That is why it was decided to separate the stages of generating ideas and their analysis. For this, two groups are created: participants in the brainstorming session - those who must propose new options for solving the desired problem, and members of the commission who will process the proposed materials. In the first group, which will generate ideas, a leader is first appointed who will staff this group, including 4-11 people. Members of this group cannot be connected by a “manager-subordinate” relationship due to the threat of destroying the atmosphere of trust. The survey leader informs the group members of the essence of the problem being solved 2-3 days before the brainstorming session. The problem should be defined as clearly and comprehensively as possible. When conducting a brainstorming session, a relaxed atmosphere is created in the group. This is facilitated by the composition of the group, the behavior of the leader, the choice of premises, lighting, etc. None of the participants should be afraid that their statements are not valuable. Suggestions or ideas cannot be assessed negatively either by word, gesture, or intonation (any criticism is prohibited); on the contrary, their support and development is desirable. Participants must express their thoughts openly and freely. This often reduces the stiffness of the group and is the root cause of the birth of original ideas. The proposals received during the discussion are recorded by the secretary. Brainstorming lasts no more than 2-3 hours. Too quick completion is not desirable, since it has been established that new and original ideas often arise when it seems that all possible thoughts and associations have been exhausted. I Two forms of brainstorming are considered common: simple meeting And round-robin meeting. In a simple meeting, the manager interviews each participant one by one and asks them to make a proposal for solving the problem they are facing. Each decision is listed and numbered, then this list is posted in plain sight. Criticism or evaluation of ideas is not permitted. Particular importance is placed on creating a free and creative environment that allows all experts to freely express their ideas and proposals. The number of proposals submitted is of great importance. Everyone must participate in their nomination. Impromptu is especially valued, i.e. proposals that arose immediately and under the influence of the information that the expert heard from others. They are valued above homemade preparations, since they accumulate collective thought, multiplied by knowledge of the situation and the creative imagination of the author of the idea. If the attack on the unknown is too sluggish, the meeting is postponed to another date, allowing the experts to “ripen”. In the system, experts are divided into small groups consisting of 3 or 4 people, where they produce new ideas and write them down on a piece of paper or on cards (2-3 ideas on each). Then the members of the small group exchange their cards. , as a result of which new ideas are added to the old ones. After three times of exchange, each subgroup makes a consolidated list of the ideas put forward. Then the whole team gathers, for whose consideration group reports are presented. This form is advisable to use when activity decreases or when participants are distracted. while waiting for their turn. The list of ideas put forward as a result of a brainstorming session is usually quite long (more than 15-20). It can be difficult for the presenter to determine their priority, and for the participants to wait their turn for discussion. To help, it is recommended to use the following method. A list of ideas with serial numbers is posted in a visible place. Each expert receives the right to five votes, which he can use at his own discretion: one vote for each of five ideas, all five for one, two votes for one idea and one for each of the other three, etc. . This approach allows each expert to express his preference, and the team as a whole to decide on priorities. Another way: at the 495th meeting of the group, each idea is read out under its own number, and experts vote by show of hands. The number of extended fingers on a raised hand indicates the number of votes cast 6 . Method "reverse brainstorming" is in many ways reminiscent of a regular brainstorming session, but at the same time it is allowed to express critical remarks. More precisely, criticism is specifically encouraged, since the philosophy of this method is built on the fact that all experts identify as many shortcomings as possible in the proposed ideas. The method can give good results if it acts as a preliminary procedure to other examination methods. Method forecast scenarios- the most popular method of expert assessments in recent decades. The term “scenario” was first used in 1960 by futurist G. Kahn when developing pictures of the future necessary for solving strategic issues in the military field. A scenario is a probabilistic description of a picture of the future, compiled on the basis of competent technical judgments. One forecast includes several scenarios, in most cases three: optimistic, pessimistic and intermediate (most likely, expected). Drawing up a scenario occurs in several stages: 1) structuring and formulating the question: collecting and analyzing initial information, agreeing on the task with all project participants, identifying the structural characteristics of the problem; 2) identification of external influence factors; 3) finding indicators, preferably alternative ones, of the future state; 4) formation and selection of consistent sets of assumptions using computer programs; 5) development of practical recommendations for the future scenario and determination of the possible consequences of its implementation. Method collective notepad(“bank” of ideas) is a method based on a combination of independent proposal of ideas by each expert with their subsequent collective assessment. Method KJ- This is the name of the method of anthropological research, when researchers first collect a collection of facts about the life of a tribe, and then ask the natives to explain their meaning. Japanese business has adapted the method KJ as follows: company employees are asked to sketch out on pieces of paper their wishes for improvements in the production process and suggestions for what the company should do. The received wishes and proposals are analyzed, and based on the sum of opinions, a picture is obtained that depicts the prospects of the company and its divisions in the future. The method is more of an integrating rather than analytical nature. Method layman lies in the fact that the solution to the problem is offered to people who have never dealt with it, but are specialists in related fields. Example. At the Center for the Sociology of Regional and National Relations of the ISPI RAS (headed by Corresponding Member of the RAS V.N. Ivanov), the study of problems of interaction between the federal center and regions is based on systematic surveys of expert groups 7 . The expert groups or so-called groups of specialized consciousness included: specialists from regional (republican, regional) and city administrations, heads of enterprises and institutions of various forms of ownership, workers in the media, higher education, as well as representatives of creative unions . The method of collecting information is a handout questionnaire. The geography of research was very wide. Using a Comparable methodology, studies were carried out in Moscow, Stavropol, Ufa, Petrozavodsk, Yakutsk, Ulan-Ude, Tyumen, Novosibirsk, Kazan, Astrakhan, Tambov, Saransk, Ryazan, Rostov-on-Don, Volgodonsk, Barnaul, Vladikavkaz, Nalchik, Nazran. Data from expert surveys conducted in 2000-2002 indicate that if the prevailing situation by the end of the 1990s. the situation in the Russian Federation could be characterized as a crisis, and in the early 2000s. it begins to improve (a positive trend in expert assessments over time was discovered). Annual expert surveys conducted by the Department of Social Ecology of Regions of the ISPI RAS (headed by I. A. Sosunova) make it possible to identify environmental problems that are significant for the population and give rise to negative socio-ecological processes. In particular, it has been established that the problems perceived most painfully by the population are those pro- appearing in the healthcare sector and generating socio-demographic, socio-economic and other consequences. As a result of a survey of members of the expert councils on social and human sciences of the Higher Attestation Commission, employees of the Department of Theoretical Problems of Sociology of the ISPI RAS (headed by L.N. Moskvichev) received the following data: almost half of the experts note a decrease in the requirements for candidate works and about 40 % of experts note a decrease in requirements for doctoral work. Approximately the same situation arises in relation to dissertations in the sociological sciences. 497 4.3. Selection of experts In both mass and expert (in contrast to mass, it can be called elitist) polling, almost the main point is the selection of respondents. In the first case, we are talking about the correct compilation of a sample population, which will subsequently ensure representativeness of the data. The level of education and competence, if this is not a survey of the target group, do not play any role - anyway, the questions are standardized for everyone. In the second case, the problem is almost the opposite. Typical experts are not always needed. Often a sociologist needs references, the best representatives of their profession. And no one will check the data for rep-representativeness. The larger the population of respondents, the higher the reliability of data in a mass survey as some average statistical indicators. As for the expert survey, due to the high competence of the persons participating in it, the opinion of even one expert, and even more so a group of experts, may turn out to be quite justified and reliable. Let us also note another fact: some technical and methodological techniques widely used in mass surveys lose their significance when surveying such a specific audience as experts. As a rule, mass surveys are anonymous. In expert surveys, this loses its meaning, because experts must be fully aware of the tasks that are being solved during the study with their help. For example, an expert questionnaire does not use indirect and control questions, tests or any other techniques aimed at identifying the “hidden” positions of the respondent.

We've released a new book, Social Media Content Marketing: How to Get Inside Your Followers' Heads and Make Them Fall in Love with Your Brand.

An expert survey is a type of survey where the people surveyed are experts in a particular field.
An expert is a person who can make a conclusion on the issue under consideration, assess a phenomenon or event.

More videos on our channel - learn internet marketing with SEMANTICA

Typically, expert surveys are conducted:

• For forecasting. They predict how a specific situation may change over time and what consequences the changes will have.
• To provide expert assessments. Establish the degree of reliability of any information and the results achieved.
• During preparatory work. Obtain opinions regarding the subject of research.
• To obtain reliable information. They conduct a survey of experts in situations where a survey of ordinary respondents is impossible or ineffective.

The main difference between an expert survey and a mass survey is that the expert is not the object of the study, but a person taking part in it.

You are conducting research on the target audience of your website, you need to create a buyer persona. For this purpose, a questionnaire is prepared, and each respondent answers questions, for example:

• Age
• Location
• Education
• Interests, hobbies

Based on the data received, you create a profile of the target audience. This is an example of a mass survey. Each person interviewed is an object of research - he is the one who is interesting as a potential buyer.

You need to figure out how eliminating the PageRank parameter will affect your SEO process. To do this, you find employees of well-known studios involved in promotion, and ask each of them several questions, for example:

• Why did you decide to stop using this option?
• What indicators should we now focus on when promoting?
• How will this situation affect the process of website optimization in the future?

This is an example of an expert survey. The interviewee expresses his opinion. He is a professional in his field, so his experience and opinion are highly valued. The purpose of conducting such a survey is to find out the opinions of different people on one issue.

Advantages and disadvantages of expert survey

Advantages:

• The ability to obtain reliable and comprehensive information on the problem.
• The results will help not just describe a phenomenon or process, but also explain it.
• Ability to control the survey process.
• The opportunity to develop new solutions, obtain extraordinary information and unconventional opinions.

Flaws:

• Risks of unjustified overestimation of the value of the data obtained.
• Risk of receiving intentionally distorted information.
• Increased influence on the result of the opinion of each expert.
• The risk of making mistakes when experts evaluate complex phenomena.

How to conduct an expert survey

An expert survey can be carried out in two ways:

• In person - personal conversation with an expert. The main advantage of face-to-face communication is that, depending on the person’s awareness and answers, you can adjust the questions and the flow of the interview on the fly.
• In absentia - the expert is given prepared questions in writing.

Also, depending on the number of respondents, surveys can be:

• Group. A striking example is brainstorming. A group of experts is discussing a problem. Experts participate in the discussion. They may agree with each other, or have opposing points of view. The advantage is that this type of survey provides a broad view of the problem. You can get an idea of ​​what points of view exist.
• Individual. One expert participates in the survey. This type allows you to present the point of view of one expert as fully as possible.
• Individual-group. This method is also called the Delphi method. First, the opinions of all experts are collected. They are averaged and then reported to each respondent. Questions are asked again, and the experts give answers to them, taking into account the general opinion. This procedure can be repeated until the opinions of different experts become more or less the same.

What is needed to conduct an expert survey

To conduct a quality survey, decide why you are conducting the research. Formulate your objectives and emphasize the value of each expert’s opinion. Clearly define the topic.

Tip: Keep your questions open-ended. Closed statements are better suited for assessing the expert's agreement with the opinions of other respondents. Following this rule will help you get detailed answers to the questions asked.

Stages of conducting a survey

1. Formulation of research objectives. Setting tasks for experts.
2. Choosing a survey method.
3. Development of materials for conducting a survey. This implies a list of questions that are asked to experts. Also research materials - an expert needs to study something in order to express his opinion.
4. Experts' choice.
5. Working with experts - issuing necessary materials to respondents, conducting surveys.
6. Registration of survey results, coordination with experts - approval.

How to find experts to interview

Conducting an expert survey is a situation where both quality and quantity influence the result. The number of experts must be no less than the number of processes being assessed.

Advice: decide on the required level of expert competence. Sometimes you don’t need to grab stars from the sky and go out of your way to reach a highly qualified specialist. But the expert’s competence should not be neglected.

When selecting experts for the working group, you can be guided by the following qualities of respondents:

• level of competence in the area under consideration;
• level of awareness of related areas;
• academic degree, work experience, title;
• the expert’s work experience, positions he has ever held;
• objectivity of judgment;
• ability for creative thinking.

Ideal expert to survey:

• Creative. Can solve non-standard problems or use little-known solution methods.
• Has intuition. Often, the purpose of conducting an expert survey is to simulate the further development of the situation. If an expert cannot intuitively predict how the situation will change, he is unlikely to be competent in his field.
• Independent of other people's opinions. An expert should be a beacon in the night. His opinion should be listened to and trusted. And not vice versa.
• Has a broad outlook. It is important that the expert can consider the problem from different positions. This will allow you to get a detailed and informed opinion from him.

How you can use the results of an expert survey

To make an informed, informed decision, it is useful to rely on the experience and knowledge of a professional.
Expert assessments are often used. This is not just an expert’s opinion about a problem, but an assessment of it on the basis of which a decision can be made.

In our studio we regularly publish various expert surveys. Preparing the material is complex and time consuming. But statistics show that the preparation of such material is justified. They are popular and often quoted.

Sofia Ibragimova

Content Marketer

Let's say you have prepared an interview with one person. The material came out great, you sent the link to the respondent. He posted it on his blog. You have prepared an expert survey of five experts. Each of them published a link on their resource. Five times more shares - the effectiveness is obvious. Experts may have different opinions, but readers like to get to know everyone and form their own.
When you prepare such material for publication, your circle of contacts expands. Just a bunch of useful contacts!
Not long ago I prepared an expert survey “How to monetize a hobby” for the Semantics blog. I learned how to write messages that people will read to the end. At first, I wrote canvases of text, describing why I turned to this particular expert. People simply did not read such messages to the end. Through trial and error, I came up with a formula that should be followed when establishing contact. I enjoyed talking with each respondent.

If you want to interview one person, there is a risk of failure. He may not answer, he may jump off at the last moment. With an expert survey, such risks are minimal. After all, in parallel with one respondent you communicate with several more - there will always be material.