Table 3 Strengths and limitations of each method
Innovation Tournament | Observations/Qualitative Interviews | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Strengths | Limitations | Strengths | Limitations | |
Preparation phase | • Only need to create a single prompt | • Limited to a single prompt to elicit information about potentially complex problems | • Have option to ask a range of questions to inform implementation strategy design | • Time and resource intensive (both with creating materials and training and supervising research staff) |
Data collection and synthesis phase | • Limited time burden placed on stakeholders (stakeholder participation time is low, can participate when and where they choose) • Data analysis less time intensive than traditional qualitative interviews • Stakeholder voice is involved in analysis through voting/vetting of ideas | • Cannot iteratively refine prompts based on initial responses from stakeholders • “Stopping” the tournament not traditionally linked to reaching thematic saturation | • Can continue to refine questions over time as new information is gathered • Can determine “stopping” point based on achieving thematic saturation | • Time and resource intensive (both with regards to data collection and training and supervising of research staff) |
Community engagement | • Iterative “voting” process during the data collection phase intended to create community and buy-in among stakeholders • Unlimited number of participants can share ideas • Low incremental cost to adding more participants | • Difficult to engage individuals who may be less likely to be engaged via electronic medium | • Participants can identify other core stakeholders to be included • Can identify key individuals to serve on an advisory board | • Engagement is with a subset of stakeholders only • High incremental cost of adding more stakeholders to process |
Overall | • Ideal for a specific question with potentially straightforward solutions • Requires fewer person hours • Lower stakeholder burden • Results can be analyzed quickly with low person power | • Less detailed information about context, leading to less targeted implementation strategy suggestions • Electronic platform can be costly | • Provides greater detailed insight into context, informing more targeted implementation strategy suggestions | • Greater burden placed on stakeholders • More time and person power required to complete all phases |