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
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.
© 2012 University of Phoenix, Inc. | All rights reserved
Page
2
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)
Page
3
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
© 2012 University of Phoenix, Inc. | All rights reserved
Page
4
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. 1997. 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).
© 2012 University of Phoenix, Inc. | All rights reserved
Page
5
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
© 2012 University of Phoenix, Inc. | All rights reserved
Page
6
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.
© 2012 University of Phoenix, Inc. | All rights reserved
Page
7
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
© 2012 University of Phoenix, Inc. | All rights reserved
Page
8
Round Two (Continued)
Faculty were emailed the list of 10 “best
practices” as noted on the previous slide
and asked to rate them, 1-10, one being the
most critical.
© 2012 University of Phoenix, Inc. | All rights reserved
Page
9
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 emailed back to the faculty
and they were asked how to implement
these practices within our programs.
Best Practices
Rigorous, extensive, and timely feedback
Communicate with student on a regular basis
Emphasize importance of problem statement
with student.
Average
3.50
4.00
4.09
© 2012 University of Phoenix, Inc. | All rights reserved
Page
10
Round Three (Continued)
© 2012 University of Phoenix, Inc. | All rights reserved
Page
11
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?
© 2012 University of Phoenix, Inc. | All rights reserved
Page
12
References
• Crisp, J., Pelletier, D., Duffield, C., Adams, A., &
Nagy, S. (1997). The Delphi method? Nursing
Research, 46(2), 116-118.
doi:10.1097/00006199-199703000-00010
• Dalkey, N. C., & Helmer, O. (1963). An
experimental application of the Delphi Method to
the use of experts. Management Science, 9(3),
458-467.
© 2012 University of Phoenix, Inc. | All rights reserved
Page
13