The Delphi Technique in Doctoral Research: Considerations and Rationale Phillip L. Davidson, Ph.D. School of Advanced Studies Intellectbase International Consortium Atlanta, October 17, 2013

2Page© 2012 University of Phoenix, Inc. | All rights reserved Why this Project? General Confusion about research methods and design. Lack of clarity about the Delphi Technique (typically considered qualitative) – Unclear about the characteristics that make the Delphi technique. – Uncertainty about the overall purpose of the Delphi technique.

3Page Historical Perspective Evolved from “Project Delphi,” a study under the auspices of the RAND Corporation and the United States Air Force. “The number of A-bombs required to reduce the munitions output [of the United States] by a prescribed amount” (p. 458) [Students need to prove that they understand the background of the Delphi to be sure they understand its application.] (Dalkey & Helmer, 1963)

4Page© 2012 University of Phoenix, Inc. | All rights reserved Key Aspects of the Delphi Technique Anonymity of Participants Expert Panel [Make students prove the panel members are experts.] A series of Rounds [The problem is being sure your experts stay throughout the entire process.] Panel size can be an issue

5Page© 2012 University of Phoenix, Inc. | All rights reserved Types of Delphi studies Modified Delphi – Face-to-face interviews – Focus Groups Policy Delphi The panel members are typically lobbyists or politicians with the goal of coming to consensus and agree on future policy. “The aim is not consensus; it is a clearer understanding of the plurality of standpoints” (Crisp et al p. 115) e-Delphi Decision Delphi Deals with decisions, whereas the classical Delphi deals with facts and the policy Delphi deals with ideas. Real Time Delphi Technological Delphi Disaggregative Delphi Uses cluster analysis to disaggregate responses of key variables (Crisp, Pelletier, Duffield, Adams, & Nagy, 1997).

6Page© 2012 University of Phoenix, Inc. | All rights reserved Example of an e-Delphi Study Expert Panel: Faculty who had a high rate of success with students in getting first time approvals. Three rounds of questions Anonymity of panel members N=25

7Page© 2012 University of Phoenix, Inc. | All rights reserved Round One Question: (Only one): Please provide three practices you believe helped students achieve their success more quickly. The panel members were asked to provide these answers in 2-3 word phrases, and could provide additional detail afterwards.

8Page© 2012 University of Phoenix, Inc. | All rights reserved Round Two Round one responses were counted, synonyms combined, and a list of best practices obtained. Communicate with student on a regular basis Emphasize importance of problem statement Expect high performance Recommend editors for writing, APA, and statistics Reinforce the value of what they are working to achieve Rigorous, extensive, and timely feedback Students must take the lead Talk with student by phone Time management discussions from the beginning and timeline agreement (contract) with student Work with student in-between classes

9Page© 2012 University of Phoenix, Inc. | All rights reserved Round Two (Continued) Faculty were ed the list of 10 “best practices” as noted on the previous slide and asked to rate them, 1-10, one being the most critical.

10Page© 2012 University of Phoenix, Inc. | All rights reserved Round Three Responses from round one were counted. The “values” for each of the 10 best practices were averaged. The top three best practices were ed back to the faculty and they were asked how to implement these practices within our programs. Best PracticesAverage Rigorous, extensive, and timely feedback3.50 Communicate with student on a regular basis4.00 Emphasize importance of problem statement with student. 4.09

11Page© 2012 University of Phoenix, Inc. | All rights reserved Round Three (Continued)

12Page© 2012 University of Phoenix, Inc. | All rights reserved Discussion/Questions? Purpose: to provide more substantive information to doctoral students choosing the Delphi. Advantages: expert panel defines the problem. The iterative rounds provide a time for reflection and clarification. The anonymity of the expert panel allows participants to avoid issues of peer-pressure or groupthink. The process can be conducted electronically, which allows the expert panel to be located virtually anywhere. Questions?

13Page© 2012 University of Phoenix, Inc. | All rights reserved References Crisp, J., Pelletier, D., Duffield, C., Adams, A., & Nagy, S. (1997). The Delphi method? Nursing Research, 46(2), doi: / Dalkey, N. C., & Helmer, O. (1963). An experimental application of the Delphi Method to the use of experts. Management Science, 9(3),