I. Interview and Focus Group details
Beyond internal interviews at the Commission, the following organisations participated in interviews and focus groups.
- Ministry of Social Development
- Social Wellbeing Agency
- Auckland Council
- Victoria University
- Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment
- Haemata
- Inland Revenue
- Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet
- Ministry of Pacific Peoples
- Waikato Wellbeing Project
- NZ Council of Christian Social Services
- Wellbeing Economy Alliance
- Inspiring Communities
- South Auckland Social Wellbeing Board
- The Treasury
The primary questions that respondents were asked are detailed below, which those in italics asked as both the focus groups and interviews, while those in plain text were used only in the interviews.
As with any qualitative data collection, additional, probing questions are often asked during the course of an interview. The questions captured here are the basic skeleton and do not include specific probing questions.
| Measurement area |
Questions |
| Introductory, demographics |
- What was your role in the inquiry?
- How did you engage with the inquiry?
|
| Right focus |
- Did you agree with the area the Inquiry focused on? Why or why not? (Prompts for how the view applies to the range of Inquiry reports, with a focus on the Terms of Reference and the Final Report)
- How well did the Commission communicate the rationale for this focus?
|
| High quality work |
- How did you find the overall quality of research, analysis and frames in the Final Report? (Prompts for breadth, depth, gaps in thinking, and other specifics)
- How well did the Commission link the research and analysis to the recommendations and findings of the Final Report? What worked well? What could have been improved?
|
| Good process management |
- What were the strengths of the Inquiry process? What worked well?
- Where were there challenges? What worked less well?
- How well did the planning process work? How were risks identified and mitigated? What went well? What could have gone better?
- How flexible were ways of working to support the work?
|
|
Effective engagement
|
- How did you find the overall level of engagement across the Inquiry? (Prompts for depth, breadth, frequency)
- What were the direct impacts from engagement onto the work?
- Where there any gaps or missed opportunities for engagement? Where there any stakeholders or sectors that were over-engaged?
|
| Clear message delivery |
- Comment on how Inquiry findings and summaries told the overall story - did you find the report coherent as a single narrative? If so, why? If not, why not?
- For which stakeholders/sectors are messages most relevant and/or clearest?
- For which stakeholders/sectors are messages less relevant or less clear?
|
| Overall quality |
- End to end, what were the strongest components of the Inquiry process and products?
- End to end, what were the weakest components of the Inquiry process and product?
- How well did the inquiry generate new insights?
- To what degree did the inquiry raise public awareness and discussion of the topic?
|
| Feedback on new initiatives |
There were a range of new initiatives used on this inquiry (prompts as needed)
- Can you comment on which ones you found particularly beneficial?
- What level/type of impact did they generate for the inquiry?
- Were there any that created drawbacks?
|
| Conclusion |
- Anything I haven't asked that you'd like to share about the inquiry process or outcome?
|
