Group Analysis and Joint Application Development (JAD)

Group meetings do offer a go between for interviews and questionnaires that are often used based solely on the number of users giving feedback. Because they are not as limited, group meetings do offer some distinct advantages. Questionnaires can be a very limited form of feedback. Questions are brief and require brief answers. Users are given little opportunity for elaboration or clarification. Group meetings allow for this by heaving person to person contact. An analyst may give a needed explanation or a user may clarify. Additionally, because meetings are more in depth than a brief survey, an analyst may not need a very large quantity of feedback. Questionnaires tend to need generous feedback for perspective. These meetings also pose some advantages over interviews. Some people prefer questionnaires over interviews because of they offer a level of anonymity. While group meetings do not allow the user to be completely anonymous, they offer a compromise of a large group. People are often more confident in giving feedback when there are others around them, particularly some who share the same views. Group meetings allow the analyst to gain more face to face feedback than an interview would allow. Interviews can be time consuming and often lead a limited number of different perspectives that can be obtained. Ultimately, these meetings offer a little from both questionnaires and interviews.

Despite the seemingly advantageous nature of group meetings there are some disadvantages. It is, as mentioned earlier, a compromise and is perhaps not as effective at either specific end of the spectrum as interviews and questionnaires. While a group meeting allows for a larger group than interviews, its feedback range is still limited. Only so many could attend a meeting for it be able to maintain organization and efficiency. Additionally, face to face discussion is possible, but in a different form as a personal one on one interview. Some users may be more willing to discuss certain ideas in such a personal interview. Finally, anytime a large group of differing opinions are gathered in one arena, organization may be difficult. Making sure the meeting is productive and the analyst gets what he/she came for, may be easier said than done. A strong level or order is required to avoid the chaotic nature of open forums.

The interpersonal skills involved with JAD analysts draw parallels to skills needed for conducting interviews. JAD involves users in a high level of interaction that requires analysts to be able to communicate efficiently as would also be needed in a one-on-one interview. In both scenarios, analysts must be knowledgeable and confident in their field as it is necessary to be able to clarify certain information to users. When conducting and interview or working with JAD, engaged listening is important so that as users interact with analysts, the feedback is recorded accurately. Avoiding biases and evaluating fact finding are important to these to processes. If either side interprets what is communicated with bias, facts can become corrupted or inaccurate. The only significant difference in JAD and interview interpersonal skills is that a one-on-one interview may often provide unknown interviewees. It is more likely the analysts in JAD would be familiar with the users they must react with. Ultimately, in both scenarios, analysts must be able to send and receive information in an unbiased manner. This ensures the most positive fact finding experience.