various grass-root tort reform groups for example are not invited to participate. It should be clear from the above, that
we never use colleagues, friends, or fam- ily members in these proceedings. There are a number of both practical and scien- tific reasons for this. Using people with similar cognitive processes or beliefs who think and believe as you do will yield little useful information. On occasion, we will have clients present if this can be done without anyone being able to identify them as the plaintiff. They are permitted to sit with the entire panel as the initial presentations are made as will be discussed below. We often benefit from their com- ments about more effective means of communicating their case. We then per- mit them to sit with us in a central location to watch the live video feed of the deliberations. This can be a particu- larly sobering experience for the “unrealistic” plaintiff as they watch and listen to their “perfect” case being vigor- ously dissected.
LOCATION Site selection is important. First, you need a neutral site that continues to pro- mote neutrality and impartiality. Focus groups need to be conducted in comfort- able surroundings that will promote open and frank discussion. Law offices are not well suited for focus group presentations and your own law office is the least desir- able place for this purpose. Anything in the surroundings which may identify who you are risks skewing the results.
Like-
wise, you do not want the participants to conclude that their payment may be con- tingent on whether they are saying the “right things.” And, you cannot solve this problem by paying them first since fol- lowing the first break you are likely to loose several participants. Second, you need a site where you can
comfortably address 25 people with room for exhibits etc. You then need at least two other rooms so the entire panel can be divided into three “jury panels” for deliberation purposes. These deliberations will be videotaped and the rooms need to be configured so that everyone will ap- pear on the videotape.
This usually is
accomplished by arranging the partici- pants around a small to medium size conference table in a “u” shaped configu- ration with the video camera positioned at the open part of the “u” so all partici- pants can be seen at once. We like the rooms in close proximity to each other so the attorneys can sit in a central location and watch a video feed from each room simultaneously. This permits the attorneys to hear and observe the dynamics of de- liberations as they occur without the participants being aware of it.
Winter 2001 Trial Reporter 23
Hotel meeting rooms, conference cen- ters, and law school moot court rooms are ideal for this purpose. Our experience is that the law school moot court rooms are particularly well suited for presentation purposes and are usually the most eco- nomical.
PRESENTATION
A sample schedule of events is included in the materials provided with this article. We generally begin with check-in at about 8:45 a.m. and conclude by 1:00 p.m. This helps reduce costs since with this sched- ule we avoid the time and expense of serving lunch. A sample agenda has been included in the materials which sets forth the time we allot for each part of the fo- cus group exercise. We use office staff to supervise check in of the participants. Coffee, juice, soft drinks and water are available on arrival of the participants. We use a caterer for this purpose as well as for the bagels and pastries we make available at the sched- uled break during the two presentations. A “Damages Questionnaire” is given
each participant as they check-in along with a confidentiality agreement and con- sent for videotaping. A sample of the “Damages Questionnaire” is included in the materials. It inquires into attitudes about negligence cases, the “litigation”
crisis, and the award of compensatory damages among others. We have debated in the past whether this form should be forwarded to the participants at an earlier stage so that we can make better use of the information before the day of the fo- cus group exercise. However, we decided against this since the form signals that a lawsuit is the subject matter and we do not want to discourage people who might otherwise elect not to participate. At check-in, each participant is as- signed a juror number. At the scheduled start time, the participants are gathered together in one location. The Modera- tor, usually a paralegal, reads some Introductory remarks explaining the pur- pose of the proceedings. The panel is usually informed that a real case will be presented by real attorneys and that their role is to act as real jurors in determining both liability and damages. The panel is given introductory jury instructions. In Maryland cases these are taken directly from the Maryland Pattern Jury Instruc- tion book. These opening remarks along with the other materials mentioned in this paragraph are also included in the packet of materials previously mentioned. Our experience has been that the pre- sentations to the panels require a great deal
(Continued on page 26)
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48